The Modified Manuscript Model
At University of Louisville
By Craig Hochbein
Leaders interested in differentiating between the EdD and PhD doctorates at institutions
of higher learning have attempted to design an alternative to the traditional dissertation for EdD
students. Often, these alternative capstone projects attempt to capitalize on student teams and
develop studies with the potential to directly and quickly impact school, district, or state policies.
The objectives of practitioner focused- and team oriented- work, align well with the mission of
EdD programs and should be the hallmarks of student capstone projects. Unfortunately, many
attempts at the design of the capstone often retrofit the traditional PhD dissertation with elements
of teamwork and action research. Teams of practitioners producing authentic reports become
lost among the parceling-out of student contributions, scheduling meeting times, editing work
into a single voice, and other such logistics. In addition, forcing the work of professional
doctorates into a traditional dissertation format invites critiques of the work as “PhD-lite”.
To meet the perceived needs of the students, faculty, and program, as well as address a
variety of weaknesses from similar capstone models, Dr. Molly Sullivan, the former director of
the University of Louisville EdD program and I developed the Modified Manuscript Model
(MMM). In our model, teams of students collaborate to address an educational problem of
practice from multiple angles. Under MMM, students formed capstone teams. Within a MMM
team, each student produced one “journal worthy” manuscript, and assisted with the
development of a common introduction for and summary of the series of studies. Thus, a team of
two students wrote four papers, with a team of three producing five. Each paper attended to the
same overarching educational problem, but addressed the issue from a unique research
perspective.
For example, Drs. Glenn Baete, Joe Burks, and Mary Pollio, two central office
administrators and one principal, systematically evaluated the effectiveness of a district-wide
reform intended to turn around high schools identified as persistently low-achieving by the state
department of education. Their introductory paper reviewed literature related to school reform,
specifically addressed the paucity of work on high school reform, and then discussed issues
related to taking reform to scale. Dr. Baete utilized hierarchical linear modeling and quasi
experimental design to assess impacts of the reform at the classroom level. Dr. Pollio conducted
various group comparisons within a quasi experimental design to assess the influence of the
reform on the association between student grades and state administered test scores. Dr. Burks
examined the reach of the district reform by analyzing the academic performance of samples of
students at-risk of dropping out of school. Together they determined that the district reform
increased the mean math performance and reduced the standard deviation of classrooms,
strengthened the association between grades and math performance, and improved the math
performance of students at-risk of dropping out.
In another example a high school counselor and a central office college access specialist,
Drs. Amber Jaggers and Pam Royster, utilized a report published by ACT as a launching point to
study college readiness. The ACT report suggested that 8th grade students failing to meet college
readiness benchmarks on the EXPLORE test were unlikely to become college ready by the end
of their high school career. To analyze this assertion, Dr. Royster conducted an event history
analysis using longitudinal student data to examine the characteristics of students who succeed or
fail to become college ready, as well as when they become college ready in their educational
careers. In contrast, Dr. Jaggers attempted to develop an early warning indicator system by
conducting a logistic regression of students’ elementary school factors to determine which
characteristics predict EXPLORE performance. Together, these studies identified factors
associated with future high school performance, as well as elementary school factors to monitor
prior to taking the test.
The model can also work for teams with more disparate interests. For instance, another
team examined the concepts of social capital and school climate as a lever of school reform from
three distinct viewpoints. Dr. Scott Hooper analyzed the school level associations between the
constructs of an extensive climate survey administered by the state department of education and
academic performance on state administered tests. Dr. Shannon Conlon compared results from
social network analyses of elementary school teachers from four schools with disparate academic
and climate metrics. Dr. Trisha Gallagher also utilized social network analysis to examine
differences between the networks of parents of students with autism in schools with disparate
academic and climate metrics. Together these students were able to assess how measures of
climate and social capital differ in schools with varying performance, and at the school, teacher,
and student levels.
From our work with the MMM, we assert that the format maintains several advantages
over more traditional and commonly used formats, including:




Clarifies students expectations and responsibilities
o Eliminates compartmentalizing of student efforts
o Creates specific and understandable expectations for amount and rigor of work
o Encourages and facilitates collaboration, but discourages “large teams”
Promotes and utilizes teamwork on the more challenging and unwieldy aspects of a research
study (literature review, data collection, and data assessment), yet enables individuals to
produce their own product
o Teams can parcel the literature into more manageable and relevant sections
o Collection of data can be and should be shared across manuscripts
o Students are not overburdened with the duties for the entire team
Eliminates logistical issues involved with full-time practitioners conducting research in
teams
o Facilitates the ability to make a single data or IRB request of an organization
o Permits students to work on their research during their available time
o Provides format of which students should be familiar
Increases dissemination potential
o 30-40 page products are more likely to be read by state and district officials over
the traditional dissertation
o The format facilitates submission for publication
o The combination of rigor and format provides incentive for faculty participation
Some preliminary evidence supports our assertions. Since the successful defense of the
eight students whom I co-chaired, their work has earned popular and scholarly attention. Three
manuscripts are currently under submission in peer reviewed journals, with one in revise and
resubmit. Dr. Gallagher presented her work at the Ohio Center for Autism and Low Incidence
Conference in November 2012. Also in November 2012, Drs. Jaggers and Royster presented
their research at the Kentucky ACT State Organization Education Summit and were
subsequently encouraged to submit their work to a national convening focusing on ACT
performance. Dr. Pollio’s work has been accepted for the annual American Educational Research
Association conference in April 2013. In addition, the collective works of Dr. Pollio, Baete, and
Burks were featured on a three part series aired on the local National Public Radio affiliate. The
earned doctorates, quality of the work, and continued attention for their findings suggests that
MMM meets the needs of students, faculty, and universities, maintains an expectation of
rigorous research, enables sophisticated examination of complex problems of practice,
distinguishes the work from traditional dissertations, encourages faculty participation in the
professional doctorate, and promotes popular and scholarly dissemination of the work.
Note:
The three examples of the MMM co-chaired by Dr. Craig Hochbein can be accessed on the
CPED website. The three part WFPL series featuring students’ works can be accessed here:
http://wfpl.org/term/project-proficiency. As Hochbein transitions to a new appointment at Lehigh
University, you can contact him about the MMM via email at craighochbein@gmail.com.