English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Producing change in higher education is not always easy or quick (Kennedy, et al., 2018; Perry, 2014a; Schuster & Finkelstein, 2006; Tierney, 1998). Conferences provide faculty with exposure to new ideas, but that exposure is often not enough to produce programmatic and structural change. In addition to new ideas, faculty must also have the tools they need to navigate change and institutional resistance when introducing and implementing new ideas. Over the last decade or so, school of education faculty, guided by the Carnegie Project on the Education Doctorate (CPED) have worked to redesign the Education Doctorate and make it a professional practice degree.  As a leader in educational change, CPED aims to reframe the EdD through both the cultivation of innovative ideas and the promulgation of those ideas across existing institutions and structures. CPED found faculty leaders to be necessary in creating institutional change, but also that the role of leader is a challenging one. Building upon earlier inquiries of faculty from CPED member institutions, this current study sought to discover more about the needs, challenges, and means for successful innovation implementation by EdD programmatic change leaders.

Faculty Leaders Challenges and Strategies in Redesigning EdD Programs