在以正义为导向的教育项目中定义严谨性:为颠覆和改造学校的领导者做好准备

IF 2.4 2区 教育学 Q1 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH Educational Administration Quarterly Pub Date : 2021-10-29 DOI:10.1177/0013161X211050926
Jess R. Weiler, Kofi Lomotey
{"title":"在以正义为导向的教育项目中定义严谨性:为颠覆和改造学校的领导者做好准备","authors":"Jess R. Weiler, Kofi Lomotey","doi":"10.1177/0013161X211050926","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Faculty in practitioner-oriented EdD programs must continually defend the presence of rigor in their programs. The existence of rigor determines the preparedness of our educational leaders to disrupt and transform educational organizations to bring about equitable and socially just outcomes; however, perceptions of rigor by the larger community impact the overall success of these programs and their students. In this conceptual article, we discuss the ways in which the literature defines rigor within and beyond practitioner-oriented EdD programs. We integrate that the literature with the critical need for social justice leadership, and leadership preparation toward that end, to offer a conceptual framework for designing, assessing, improving, communicating, and defending the rigor of EdD programs centered upon social justice. We posit: EdD programs can claim to be rigorous and centered upon social justice if their faculty: (1) collectively envision and construct rigorous student learning outcomes (rigor as a challenge) connected to the learning of critical theory and the demonstration of critical praxis to improve the lives of marginalized/underserved students; and (2) use backward-design to develop and align curriculum and pedagogy with those outcomes, including scholarly learning experiences (rigor in research) and the elicitation of students’ critical thinking (rigor as complexity).","PeriodicalId":48091,"journal":{"name":"Educational Administration Quarterly","volume":"58 1","pages":"110 - 140"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2021-10-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Defining Rigor in Justice-Oriented EdD Programs: Preparing Leaders to Disrupt and Transform Schools\",\"authors\":\"Jess R. Weiler, Kofi Lomotey\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/0013161X211050926\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Faculty in practitioner-oriented EdD programs must continually defend the presence of rigor in their programs. The existence of rigor determines the preparedness of our educational leaders to disrupt and transform educational organizations to bring about equitable and socially just outcomes; however, perceptions of rigor by the larger community impact the overall success of these programs and their students. In this conceptual article, we discuss the ways in which the literature defines rigor within and beyond practitioner-oriented EdD programs. We integrate that the literature with the critical need for social justice leadership, and leadership preparation toward that end, to offer a conceptual framework for designing, assessing, improving, communicating, and defending the rigor of EdD programs centered upon social justice. We posit: EdD programs can claim to be rigorous and centered upon social justice if their faculty: (1) collectively envision and construct rigorous student learning outcomes (rigor as a challenge) connected to the learning of critical theory and the demonstration of critical praxis to improve the lives of marginalized/underserved students; and (2) use backward-design to develop and align curriculum and pedagogy with those outcomes, including scholarly learning experiences (rigor in research) and the elicitation of students’ critical thinking (rigor as complexity).\",\"PeriodicalId\":48091,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Educational Administration Quarterly\",\"volume\":\"58 1\",\"pages\":\"110 - 140\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-10-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Educational Administration Quarterly\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"95\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161X211050926\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"教育学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Educational Administration Quarterly","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161X211050926","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

以从业者为导向的EdD课程的教师必须不断地捍卫课程的严谨性。严谨性的存在决定了我们的教育领导者是否准备好破坏和改造教育组织,以实现公平和社会公正的结果;然而,更大的社区对严谨性的看法会影响这些项目及其学生的整体成功。在这篇概念性的文章中,我们讨论了文献在面向从业者的EdD程序内外定义严谨性的方式。我们将这些文献与社会正义领导力的关键需求以及为此目的进行的领导力准备相结合,为设计、评估、改进、沟通和捍卫以社会正义为中心的教育发展计划的严谨性提供了一个概念框架。我们假设:EdD项目可以声称是严格的,并以社会正义为中心,前提是他们的教师:(1)共同设想和构建与批判性理论学习和批判性实践展示相关的严格的学生学习成果(严谨是一项挑战),以改善边缘化/服务不足学生的生活;以及(2)使用逆向设计来开发课程和教学法,并使其与这些结果相一致,包括学术学习经验(研究的严谨性)和激发学生的批判性思维(严谨性与复杂性)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Defining Rigor in Justice-Oriented EdD Programs: Preparing Leaders to Disrupt and Transform Schools
Faculty in practitioner-oriented EdD programs must continually defend the presence of rigor in their programs. The existence of rigor determines the preparedness of our educational leaders to disrupt and transform educational organizations to bring about equitable and socially just outcomes; however, perceptions of rigor by the larger community impact the overall success of these programs and their students. In this conceptual article, we discuss the ways in which the literature defines rigor within and beyond practitioner-oriented EdD programs. We integrate that the literature with the critical need for social justice leadership, and leadership preparation toward that end, to offer a conceptual framework for designing, assessing, improving, communicating, and defending the rigor of EdD programs centered upon social justice. We posit: EdD programs can claim to be rigorous and centered upon social justice if their faculty: (1) collectively envision and construct rigorous student learning outcomes (rigor as a challenge) connected to the learning of critical theory and the demonstration of critical praxis to improve the lives of marginalized/underserved students; and (2) use backward-design to develop and align curriculum and pedagogy with those outcomes, including scholarly learning experiences (rigor in research) and the elicitation of students’ critical thinking (rigor as complexity).
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Educational Administration Quarterly
Educational Administration Quarterly EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
6.90
自引率
3.00%
发文量
9
期刊介绍: Educational Administration Quarterly presents prominent empirical and conceptual articles focused on timely and critical leadership and policy issues of educational organizations. As an editorial team, we embrace traditional and emergent research paradigms, methods, and issues. We particularly promote the publication of rigorous and relevant scholarly work that enhances linkages among and utility for educational policy, practice, and research arenas.
期刊最新文献
“Fighting an Uphill Battle”: The Pursuit of Equity Through the Every Student Succeeds Act in North Carolina Preparing Early Education Leaders: An Analysis of UCEA Principal Preparation Programs Assessing the Psychometric Qualities of the Data-Informed School Leadership Survey Conflict, Competition, and Collaboration in Co-Located Schools: School Leaders Navigating Structural Distrust Responding to Crisis: A Multiple Case Study of District Approaches for Supporting Student Learning in the COVID-19 Pandemic
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1