Great Schools of Education

[ZeChocMoose]

I have been thinking about this a lot lately as I solidify my plans to enroll in an education PhD next year: What makes for a great school or a college of education?

Let's be honest our field has its critics and some of it is not unfounded. We have some issues that we need to solve and perhaps a reputation that we need to improve in some areas of the academy. So I ask you potentially new and current education graduate students, what makes for a great college or school of education? How can or should these institutions educate and develop the future education leaders of our society?

My suggestion would be to have a stronger connection between research and practice. How to do this is the tricky part. I think initially creating pilot programs where education researchers and practitioners work together to implement system change and evaluate the outcomes of these changes could be a good start.

Edited February 11, 2011 by ZeChocMoose

[Ed_Doc]

I have been thinking about this a lot lately as I solidify my plans to enroll in an education PhD next year: What makes for a great school or a college of education?

Let's be honest our field has its critics and some of it is not unfounded. We have some issues that we need to solve and perhaps a reputation that we need to improve in some areas of the academy. So I ask you potentially new and current education graduate students, what makes for a great college or school of education? How can or should these institutions educate and develop the future education leaders of our society?

My suggestion would be to have a stronger connection between research and practice. How to do this is the tricky part. I think initially creating pilot programs where education researchers and practitioners work together to implement system change and evaluate the outcomes of these changes could be a good start.

Great idea for a thread!

Practically all GSEs have a stated mission of addressing the research/practice or research/policy action gaps. To the best of my knowledge, none (including my own alma mater: HGSE) do it exceptionally well. PM me if you'd like a more directed critique.

That being said, the gap between academic research and practice exists in virtually every field. For example, highly technical actuarial theories and models hardly ever have a direct effect on the day-to-day financial dealings of most companies because they're too specific and complex to use on the fly. In short-we aren't alone in this problem.

[erbrown]

I am also applying to graduate programs in education for entry in Fall 2012. While doing some formal and informal informational interviewing, many of my colleagues who have PhDs from various disciplines, education included, expressed a slight degree of contempt for the rigor of methods in these programs in comparison to say, economics, public policy or sociology. I do not know how true those statements are but I do believe the field provides a unique opportunity for the "rubber to meet the road" so to speak. I know of efforts across the country that are under way to replicate the Harlem Children's Zone given the success of this model (not without its critics or controversy surrounding its success). I have also heard the term "public scholarship" pop up more frequently in relation to the development and success of cradle-to-college programs and initiatives. I think the field is going in a direction that will create a demand for research and practice becoming more cooperative and hopefully, schools of education will respond by supporting research and encouraging scholarship that addresses this need. The incentive structure within academia might also have to be modified but that is probably a discussion for another topic.

[ZeChocMoose]

I am also applying to graduate programs in education for entry in Fall 2012. While doing some formal and informal informational interviewing, many of my colleagues who have PhDs from various disciplines, education included, expressed a slight degree of contempt for the rigor of methods in these programs in comparison to say, economics, public policy or sociology. I do not know how true those statements are but I do believe the field provides a unique opportunity for the "rubber to meet the road" so to speak. I know of efforts across the country that are under way to replicate the Harlem Children's Zone given the success of this model (not without its critics or controversy surrounding its success). I have also heard the term "public scholarship" pop up more frequently in relation to the development and success of cradle-to-college programs and initiatives. I think the field is going in a direction that will create a demand for research and practice becoming more cooperative and hopefully, schools of education will respond by supporting research and encouraging scholarship that addresses this need. The incentive structure within academia might also have to be modified but that is probably a discussion for another topic.

I agree. There is some concern that Education PhDs are not taught rigorous methods and/or the number of required statistics/research methods courses is less than other social science programs. I think that is changing though. There are some great schools of Education that have really focused on these issues and are graduating competent education researchers. (As a side note: I would look into those type of schools to apply to since you are applying next year.) Also I think it is helpful for Schools of Education to collaborate with other social science programs (sociology, psychology, public policy, etc) on how to address education problems. Taking an interdisciplinary approach to work on complex problems seems to be a good solution that I hope more Schools of Education move towards.

[t_ruth]

The methods and stats training at my Ed school includes many more classes than in the psychology programs...

but we do have a lot of quant-heavy faculty.

[erbrown]

I agree. There is some concern that Education PhDs are not taught rigorous methods and/or the number of required statistics/research methods courses is less than other social science programs. I think that is changing though. There are some great schools of Education that have really focused on these issues and are graduating competent education researchers. (As a side note: I would look into those type of schools to apply to since you are applying next year.) Also I think it is helpful for Schools of Education to collaborate with other social science programs (sociology, psychology, public policy, etc) on how to address education problems. Taking an interdisciplinary approach to work on complex problems seems to be a good solution that I hope more Schools of Education move towards.

Ditto on the interdisciplinary approach! My sense of this (based on very limited work experience in education research) is things are best kept "territorial." I have yet to meet a public policy researcher or economist in the field of education who does qualitative research for example. I have also seen some "mixed methods" studies where the analysis of qualitative data is constrained to supporting findings from quantitative data (I have not seen the reverse case but I am sure instances exist). I agree that collaboration across disciplines would be beneficial but the terrain has to change as well so that different disciplinary lenses and methodological approaches are given equal consideration.