A Tale of Two Ed.D. Programs: A Case Study of Intersectionality between Program Structure and Advising Model

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to explore the intersectionality of program structure and advising models in Doctor of Education (EdD) programs. This study examines two EdD programs, one that is traditional in its structure and advising approach and one that has intentionally modified its design/structure and advising model, to be attuned to the practical and developmental needs of practitioners. This study takes a collective case study approach, examining the issue through the perspectives of faculty and students who are or have been involved in the two programs. The researcher discusses themes that emerged from the perspectives of the participants through an exploration of faculty perceptions of the EdD, students' choices to pursue the EdD, key strategies for advising EdD students that faculty in each program identified, the general advising experiences of students in both programs, and how faculty and students believe their respective programs' structure and advising model influence and impact one another. The findings reveal that a core faculty leadership structure is a key factor in the ultimate success of a program. The traditionally structured program lacks this core leadership, which has led to a consensus among students in the NEP that their EdD program is treated like a stepchild to the PhD and that the faculty recognizes the lack of differentiation between the PhD and EdD in the NEP specializations, particularly in the dissertation or culminating project requirement. Because of this and other major program structure issues, students in the program have an overall neutral satisfaction level and many creative suggestions for how to improve the program structure and advising model. EP faculty have worked continually throughout the history of the program to improve the structure, understanding that this will impact the advising model. In turn, EP students appreciate the cohort model and built-in advising structures of the program and overall have a very high level of satisfaction. Recommendations are offered in the final chapter for best practices in both programs based on data from the faculty and students, the existing literature, and the researcher's insights.