Ph.D. In Education

Overview of Program

Download the complete Program Policy Statement

The Doctor of Philosophy degree represents the highest level of achievement in formal education. As such, this degree signifies the attainment of an advanced level of scholarship and the possession of scholarly dispositions and habits. Individuals awarded the Ph.D. in Education by the School of Education at the University of Delaware are prepared to make significant contributions to the field of education, and they do this, first and foremost, by conducting research that answers important questions about the nature of education.

The Ph.D. program includes core coursework in two Proseminars that introduce first year students to the breadth of educational topics and inquiry, and three courses that introduce students to quantitative, qualitative, and epistemological approaches to educational research. Intensive coursework from a specialized area of knowledge provides the student with a depth of understanding that is situated in a series of research projects and studies. Through the Colloquium course and lecture series, distinguished visiting scholars provide students with the opportunity to discuss current topics and research.

Students may earn an M.A. in Education degree by successfully completing the doctoral core coursework, twelve credit hours of specialization coursework, three credits of Colloquium and passing the Proseminar Assessment.

Admission Requirements

Applications for admission must be received by February 1 to be considered for acceptance for the following fall semester. The specialization area to be pursued must be indicated at the time of admission as the faculty within each specialization area collectively make a recommendation regarding admission. Full-time study is strongly recommended.

Although there is not a minimum GRE requirement, it is expected that applicants will attain a 1050 or above on the combined verbal and quantitative sections of the exam. In addition, it is expected that applicants will have a minimum undergraduate GPA of 3.0 (and, if applicable, a graduate GPA of 3.5). Applicants are urged to submit additional material that attests to their ability to carry out and benefit from graduate work. Those materials may include term papers, laboratory reports, publications, theses, or other examples of academic work.

Program Requirements

Students must also complete a minimum of 21 credit hours of specialization area coursework from one of the following areas: Cognition, Development and Instruction (CDI); Curriculum Inquiry; Literacy, Language and Schooling; Mathematics Education; Research Methodology and Evaluation (RME); School Psychology; Science Education; Social Studies Education; Special Education.

The research colloquia expose students to some of the foremost thinkers and researchers in the field of education. Guest scholars are invited to share their research findings with doctoral students and faculty in a setting that encourages collegiality and familiarizes students with a number of scholarly presentation styles and content areas. A one-credit course (EDUC 840) is offered each semester in conjunction with the colloquium series and students must complete a minimum of 4 credits of colloquium.

Nine hours of dissertation credit (EDUC 969) are required of all Ph.D. students, and additional coursework may be specified by a student’s advisory committee as part of the student’s Individual Program Plan. A minimum of 51 credit hours is required to complete the Ph.D. program.

Description of Specializations within the Ph.D.

• How do children acquire reading and mathematics skills?
• How does the language children speak and the culture they grow up in affect the ways they view the world and process information?
• How can children's natural search for understanding be utilized in classroom learning?
• What instructional interventions will improve 8th-grade pupils' understanding of gravity?
• How is the culture of race/ethnicity and gender played out in adolescents' lives and in their social worlds?

These and related questions motivate the research of the CDI faculty and their instructional programs. Within this specialization, a student can become expert on such topics as thinking, problem-solving, language development, argumentation, instruction, moral development, mathematical and scientific reasoning, social-emotional development, and the development of adolescent social cognition. Students draw from a wide range of faculty expertise and capitalize on the University's interdisciplinary cognitive science offerings.

This specialization is designed to create researchers and university-level teachers who can contribute to our knowledge about human development, learning, and instruction. Full-time study is required as students must be immersed in research experiences and collegial discussion and debate to become successful. This specialization, like the rest of our PhD specializations, is research based; although courses are required, the goal of a student's Ph.D. study is to become an expert in his or her area of interest. Upon entry, students are expected to become involved in faculty research and eventually to conduct their own research under faculty supervision.

Courses required of all students in this specialization in addition to the Doctoral Core Courses:
EDUC 821 Cognition and Instruction
EDUC 823 Learning and Development
EDUC 820 Contexts for Learning

Policy on Specialization Area Exam:   To be determined.

Faculty affiliated with this specialization area:

Dr. George G. Bear
Dr. Al Cavalier
Dr. Ralph P. Ferretti
Dr. Roberta Golinkoff
Dr. Gabriella Hermon
Dr. Nancy C. Jordan
Dr. Nancy Lavigne
Dr. Charles A. MacArthur
Dr. Eugene Matusov
Dr. Frank B. Murray
Dr. James Raths
Dr. Carol Wong

Overview of this specialization:
This specialization offers students the theoretical and methodological preparation for curriculum inquiry that is responsive to matters of curriculum policy, design, evaluation, and classroom practice, understood in terms of the multiple intersecting dimensions (e.g., technical, social, and political) of problems and issues in curriculum.

While the School of Education is especially concerned with curriculum in educational institutions, such as P-12 and post-secondary schools, curriculum inquiry is concerned, as well, with the course of formative experience over the lifespan, within and outside of such institutions (including the adult workplace as well as other formal and informal social situations), and with due attention to how formative experience in any of these particular contexts (e.g., formal schooling) is conditioned by the multiplicity of other contexts (family, peer groups, etc.) within which the course of life experience is also taking place.

Courses required of all students in this specialization in addition to the Doctoral Core Courses:
EDUC 860 Curriculum Theory
EDUC 861 Curriculum Development and Evaluation
EDUC 897 Curriculum Inquiry

Policy on Specialization Area Exam: This specialization area does not require a specialization area examination.

Faculty affiliated with this specialization area:
Dr. Tony Whitson
Dr. Nancy Brickhouse
Dr. James Raths
Dr. Robert Hampel
Dr. Douglas Archbald
Dr. Barbara Curry
Dr. Eugene Matusov
Dr. Danielle Ford
Dr. Shuaib Meacham

Overview of this specialization:
The graduate program in Literacy Education is an inter-disciplinary program stressing the relationship between child language, reading and writing processes, and school learning. The program is based upon the assumption that literacy is influenced by many overlapping facets of development both in and outside the classroom: cognitive, sociocultural, and linguistic. The purpose of the program is to develop a high degree of expertise in the field.

Courses required of all students in this specialization in addition to the Doctoral Core Courses

All students take the following four doctoral seminars in Literacy:
EDUC 802 Seminar: Reading
EDUC 807 Writing Processes in Educational Settings
EDUC 816 Literacy Problems
EDUC 822 Literacy and Educational Policy

Additional Coursework:
3 hours of additional elective coursework at the doctoral level
6 hours of supervised research
6 hours of advanced coursework in methodology
9 hours of dissertation study

Policy on Specialization Area Exam:  There are currently two SAE options for PhD students to consider. The option chosen should correlate to the semester the student was admitted to the PhD program. Specialization Area Exams are typically taken at the completion of the doctoral seminars.

Option 1: (This option is for students admitted to the PhD program prior to Fall 2004)
Successful completion of exam question(s) constructed by the student and approved by the faculty.

Process:

1. The student constructs at least two possible exam questions the semester prior to completing the SAE. The questions must be submitted to the advisor no later than December 1 for a spring exam or May 1 for a fall exam.

2. The Literacy Faculty reviews and approves or revises the submitted questions. The student’s advisor returns the approved question to the student on the second Friday of the semester the exam is to be completed.

3. The student’s written responses are due two weeks later via email to the student’s advisor who forwards it to the faculty reviewers. The PhD coordinator is responsible for collecting and forwarding the completed response if the advisor is not a member of the Literacy Faculty.

4. At least two faculty members assess the exam. Students will be notified of the Literacy Faculty’s response no later than one month from the receipt of the exam. Students either pass, make minor revisions, or fail.

5. A student whose written responses receive a PASS will advance to the next phase of the program.

6. A student whose written responses receive MINOR REVISIONS REQUIRED must make those revisions within one month of receiving the faculty’s feedback. If revisions are not completed within the timeframe or do not address the faculty’s concerns as outlined in the feedback, the student will fail the exam and will need to take a new exam the following fall or spring semester.

7. A student whose written responses receive a FAIL may respond to a new comp exam the following fall or spring semester following the same procedure outlined above. If the student fails the second attempt, the student will be dismissed from the program.

Option 2: (This option is for students admitted to PhD program beginning Fall 2004)
Successful completion of exam question(s) constructed by the Literacy Faculty.

Process:

1. The Literacy Faculty constructs the PhD exam question(s).

2. The student’s advisor gives the question(s) to the student on the second Friday of the semester the comprehensive exam is to be completed. The PhD coordinator is responsible for giving the student the question(s) if the advisor is not a member of the Literacy Faculty.

3. The student’s written responses are due two weeks later via email to the student’s advisor who forwards it to the faculty reviewers. The PhD coordinator is responsible for collecting and forwarding the completed response if the advisor is not a member of the Literacy Faculty.

4. At least two faculty members assess the exam. Students will be notified of the Literacy Faculty’s response no later than one month from the receipt of the exam. Students either pass, make minor revisions, or fail.

5. A student whose written responses receive a PASS will advance to the next phase of the program.

6. A student whose written responses receive MINOR REVISIONS REQUIRED must make those revisions within one month of receiving the faculty’s feedback. If revisions are not completed within the timeframe or do not address the faculty’s concerns as outlined in the feedback, the student will fail the exam and will need to take a new comp exam the following fall or spring semester.

7. A student whose written responses receive a FAIL may respond to a new comp exam the following fall or spring semester following the same procedure outlined above. If the student fails the second attempt, the student will be dismissed from the program.

NOTE: Specialization Area Exams will be administered in the fall and spring semesters only

Faculty affiliated with this specialization area:
Dr. David Coker
Dr. Rachel Karchmer Klein
Dr. Charles MacArthur
Dr. Carol Vukelich
Dr. Sharon Walpole

Overview of this specialization:
Mathematics education is concerned with the learning and teaching of mathematics. The program aims to educate national leaders in the field. The program emphasizes the development of expertise in conducting high-quality research of significant issues in mathematics education. Visit the mathematics education website at http://www.udel.edu/soe/mathed/

Courses required of all students in this specialization in addition to the Doctoral Core Courses:

1. Mathematics Education courses (15 credit hours)
	a. Three-credit seminars :
		EDUC 833 - Research and Theory of Mathematics Learning EDUC 834 - Research and Theory of Mathematics Teaching EDUC 835 - Research and Theory of Mathematics Curriculum EDUC 836 - Research and Theory of Mathematics Teacher Education and School Improvement
	b. One-credit seminar (first 3 semesters for credit, remaining semesters as listener):
		EDUC 838 - Research Issues in Mathematics Education
2. Supporting courses (9 credit hours)
	a. At least 6 graduate credit hours in mathematics (600 or 800 courses at UD) must be earned before entering the program or during the program. A portion of the 9 credit hours may be needed to complete this requirement.
	b. If the student enters the program with 6 or more graduate credits in mathematics, all 9 hours of supporting coursework can be earned in courses other than mathematics.
3. Alterations in the program require approval of the full faculty in mathematics education.

Policy on Specialization Area Exam:
Doctoral students must demonstrate that they have acquired a comprehensive grasp of the field of mathematics education through a specialization area examination before they are admitted to formal candidacy. The specialization area exam is taken prior to the dissertation proposal defense. It fulfills one of the requirements for doctoral candidacy. (The stipulations for admission to doctoral candidacy at the University of Delaware are that the student has (1) had a program of study approved, (2) completed one academic year of full-time graduate study in residence at the University, (3) passed the program’s specialization area examination, (4) shown the ability to do research, and (5) had a research project accepted by the advisory committee with human subjects approval (if appropriate for the research).)

Ordinarily, the exam is taken upon completion of the four mathematics education seminars. This usually occurs at the end of the second year of full-time coursework.

The specialization area exam has two purposes: (1) it is an opportunity for students to reflect on the readings required in the scheduled courses in mathematics education and to express their breadth of knowledge in their chosen area, and (2) it is an opportunity for the faculty in mathematics education to assess the student's grasp of major issues in mathematics education as well as the student's preparation in their area of research interest. Students are allowed two chances to pass the specialization area exam.

The specialization area examination is given, upon request, during the winter session and the summer session. Students who wish to take the exam during the same session should agree on the same seven-day period and should request this time in writing by December 1 (for the winter session) or May 1 (for the summer session). The time for the exam will be approved by the mathematics education faculty. By December 1 (for the winter exam) or May 1 (for the summer exam), students should submit to their advisor a one-page description of their area of interest and a reading list in this area; ordinarily, a reading list has 15-25 entries. The fourth question on the exam will be related to this area of research.

The student’s advisor will determine the members of the specialization area exam committee, based on the student’s coursework and area of interest. The committee will consist of three mathematics education faculty members.

The exam is composed of two parts, a written exam and an oral defense of the written exam. The written exam consists of four questions. Three of the questions are general questions in the areas of learning, instruction, curriculum, and policy in mathematics education. The emphasis in these questions is on integrating the material covered in the scheduled mathematics education courses. The fourth question is directly related to the student's area of interest. The response to each question is limited to four double-spaced typewritten pages (excluding references). The written exam is completed within seven days. An oral defense of the written exam is scheduled after the committee members have read the student's responses. Students should not share exam questions with others until after receiving official notification of the committee’s pass/fail decision.

The written exam and oral defense will result in one of three ratings for each of the four examination responses.

1. Pass
   In this event, the response has been accepted. If all four responses are accepted, this is deemed “Passing the Specialization Area Examination,” and the student may proceed with proposal work leading to candidacy.
2. Fail
   Responses that are rated fail cannot be revised. If any response receives this rating, the result is “Failing the Specialization Area Examination.” In this situation, the committee will identify a set of structured activities for the student to address the concerns that were raised by the faculty. After completing the activities, the student may take a second exam consisting of questions that address the area(s) of concern. The same committee will review the written response(s) and, at the committee’s discretion, schedule an oral defense. A second failure means that the student has failed the specialization area examination and cannot advance to candidacy.
3. Revise and resubmit
   For responses that are rated revise and resubmit, students have six weeks to revise the response(s), addressing the concerns that were raised by the faculty. A revision will result in a pass or fail decision by the committee based on the written response(s) (no oral defense).

Students will be informed of the results within one week of the completion of the exam.

Admission requirements:

In addition to the requirements of all applicants to Ph.D. programs in the School of Education, applicants to the program in Mathematics Education are expected to hold a B.A. or equivalent in mathematics and a Masters degree in mathematics, mathematics education, or a related field. School teaching experience is preferred.

Advisors:

1. Upon entering the program, students are assigned an Administrative Advisor. When students have defined a research area of interest, they solicit agreement from a faculty member working in the area to serve as their dissertation advisor.
   
2. Faculty Advisors: Tonya Bartell, Dawn Berk, Jinfa Cai, Brad Glass, Laura Glass, James Hiebert, Amanda Jansen Hoffmann, Mary Ann Huntley, Anne Morris.

Position Offers to Recent Graduates:

1. National: University of Georgia, University of Iowa, Michigan State University, University of Pittsburgh, Purdue University, University of Texas, Texas Tech University, Vanderbilt University, Washington State University, Western Michigan University, California State University at San Jose, California State University at Chico.
   
2. Regional: Pennsylvania State University-Harrisburg, Millersville University, Rowan University.

Faculty affiliated with this specialization area:

Dr. Tonya Bartell
Dr. Dawn Berk
Dr. Jinfa Cai (Dept of Mathematical Sciences)
Dr. Brad Glass
Dr. Laura Glass
Dr. James Hiebert
Dr. Amanda Jansen
Dr. Mary Ann Huntley (Dept of Mathematical Sciences)
Dr. Jon Manon (Mathematics and Science Education Resource Center)
Dr. Anne Morris

Overview of this specialization:
The specialization in Research Methodology and Evaluation (RME) offers a comprehensive range of courses designed to prepare students to develop, critically evaluate, and properly use quantitative and qualitative methodologies to advance educational research. The RME faculty believe that fundamental contributions to educational methodology can be accomplished through study of a wide variety of areas in research methods. These areas include advanced topics in theoretical and applied methodology. For example, students are taught to

1. Understand recent developments in psychometric theory, as well as technical issues underlying construction and use of tests for selection, placement, and instruction.
   
   
2. Study advanced statistical modeling, yet have an opportunity to examine how these models are applied to school effectiveness, economic and social stratification, the structure of human abilities, and achievement growth.
   
   
3. Develop competencies in qualitative methodology including understanding the range of theoretical perspectives and capacity to generate appropriate research problems, collect data through various strategies, and analyze data with computerized programs Students interact and publish with our internationally renowned scholars in the study of four fundamental areas:
   
   
1. Statistical methods, including basic statistics, regression, multivariate analysis, structural equation modeling, and multilevel modeling;
2. Psychometric theory, including classical test theory and item response theory; and
3. Qualitative methodology, including case study methodology, ethnography, and narrative analysis.
4. Evaluation methodology, combining elements of qualitative and quantitative methodologies as well as quasi-experimental and experimental designs.

Courses required of all students in this specialization in addition to the Doctoral Core Courses:
EDUC 812 Regression Models in Education
EDUC 851 Practicum: Qualitative Research
EDUC 863 Principles of Educational Evaluation
EDUC 865 Educational Measurement Theory
EDUC 872 Advanced Educational Measurement
EDUC 873 Multilevel Models in Education
EDUC 874 Multivariate Data Analysis in Education
EDUC 876 Structural Models in Education

Policy on Specialization Area Exam:
The Specialization Area Exam in RME is designed to assess a student’s proficiency in integrating various aspects of research methodology to address substantive issues in education. The exam is to be taken at the beginning of the fourth year of study and is organized as a take home exam spanning no more than three days. Students will be given a set of problems requiring the integration of a variety of research methodologies around the topic of their dissertations. The exam will be evaluated by a sub-committee of RME faculty consisting of the student’s advisor and others familiar the student’s dissertation area. Students will be notified of their results within three weeks of submitting their exam. Should a student not demonstrate satisfactory performance on the exam, he/she will have one attempt to retake the exam, scheduled at the end of the semester in which the exam was taken. Failure to demonstrate satisfactory performance on the retake of the exam will result in termination from the program.

Faculty affiliated with this specialization area:
Dr. Leslie Cooksy
Dr. Joseph Glutting
Dr. Robert Hampel
Dr. Ratna Nandakumar
Dr. Audrey Noble
Dr. James Raths

Overview of this specialization:
Grounded in the scientist/practitioner model, the school psychology program provides students with a strong foundation in psychological theory and research. Students are trained to use a collaborative, data-based problem solving approach when applying this foundation to help solve social, emotional, and academic problems faced by children, schools, and families. In addition to gaining theoretical and empirical knowledge, students acquire competencies in multiple skill areas and are expected to contribute to theory and research in areas of school psychology. Particular areas of research interest to the faculty are: children’s social, moral, and emotional development; family-school relations, and; peer- and parent-mediated prevention and intervention programs in the schools.

Courses required of all students in this specialization in addition to the Doctoral Core Courses:
EDUC 618 Special Services in the Schools
EDUC 681 Techniques for Behavior Change
EDUC 817 Individual Intelligence Testing
EDUC 663 Counseling Skills Laboratory
EDUC 680 Educational Diagnosis
EDUC 814 Psychological Assessment of Children
EDUC 831 Advanced Counseling Techniques
EDUC 651 School-Based Family Issues and Intervention
EDUC 679 Instructing Elementary/Middle Schoolers with Mild Disabilities
EDUC 813 Childhood Psychopathology
EDUC 823 Learning and Development
EDUC 830 Consultation and Intervention
EDUC 867 Child Neuropsychology
EDUC 812 Regression Methods in Education
EDUC 874 Multivariate Data Analysis in Education or EDUC 865 (Educational
Measurement Theory)
EDUC 968 Supervised Research or Elective
EDUC 8xx Proseminar in School Psychology or Special Education (or elective if a proseminar is not offered)
EDUC 671 Practicum in School Psychology (4 semesters)
EDUC 968 Supervised Research (3 semesters, or approved elective)
EDUC 8xx Internship in School Psychology (full year)

Policy on Specialization Area Exam: A doctoral-level specialization area exam is not required. However, candidates must pass the Masters-level exam in school psychology.

Faculty Affiliated with this Specialization Area:
Dr. George Bear
Dr. Marika Ginsburg-Block
Dr. Kathleen Minke

Courses required of all students in this specialization in addition to the Doctoral Core Courses:
EDUC 843 Proseminar in Science Education (9 credit hours). This variable topics course will cover critical issues in curriculum, research on learning, or research on teaching. Students should enroll in a seminar in each of the three areas.

Methodology course (3 credit hours). In addition to the methodological requirements of the Ph.D. Core Courses, students in Science Education must take one additional methodology course, to be determined in consultation with the student’s advisor.

Focus area (9 credit hours). Candidates must take 9 credit hours as a focus area, to be determined in consultation with the student’s advisor. The following guidelines apply:

1. If the candidate enters the program with less than nine graduate hours in a science discipline, the focus area should be in a science discipline and will consist of courses at the graduate level.
2. If the candidate enters the program with nine graduate hours in a science discipline, the focus area will be chosen by the student with the advisor’s approval. Recommended specializations include: multiculturalism, educational policy, curriculum theory, assessment, philosophy and history of science, literacy education, mathematics education, and technology.

Policy on Specialization Area Exam:
The purpose of the Science Education specialization area exam is to assess the student’s knowledge of the major issues, literature, and research in the broad areas of science education. Passing this exam is required in order to advance to proposing, research, and writing the dissertation. When the student has completed all three offerings of the science education Proseminar (for full time students, generally in the 5th or 6th semester), s/he is eligible to take the exam.

The exam is take-home in nature. The exam is administered by the Science Education Ph.D. Coordinator, though the questions are developed by all Science Education faculty. Students are required to interpret and synthesize major conceptual ideas from within the science education literature. Responses to the questions are due to the Coordinator one week after the exam is given to the student.

When the exam responses are received by the Coordinator, they are distributed to all Science Education faculty for evaluation. Exams are rated as Pass/Revise/Fail. Within one month, results of the exam will be returned to the student. If a student receives a rating of “Pass” s/he is eligible to advance to preparation of the dissertation. If a student receives a rating of “Fail” s/he is terminated from the program. In the case of the “Revise” rating, the student must complete additional tasks to be determined by the Science Education faculty (e.g., written revisions that take into account faculty comments, oral exam, etc.). The Science Education faculty will then re-evaluate student performance on the exam and additional tasks, and assign either a Pass or Fail rating, with consequences as outlined above. Only one revision round is permitted.

Faculty affiliated with this specialization area:
Dr. Nancy Brickhouse
Dr. Zoubeida Dagher
Dr. Eric Eslinger
Dr. Danielle Ford

Sociocultural and Communal Approaches to Reasearch and Education (SCA)

Overview of this specialization:

Sociocultural and Community-based Approaches to Research and Education (SCA)

The SCA specialization views education as contextual, dialogic, and relational. We recognize that learning is shaped by institutions, cultures, communities (including on-line communities), practices, technology, and histories. We are interested in how teachers, students, families, community members, and the society at large "make sense" of the principles and practices of education in complex and sometimes contradictory ways. We seek to investigate the purposes of education and to create models of equitable quality education.

Our perspective includes, but is not limited to, research done in the area of situated cognition, critical pedagogy, feminist theory, disabilities studies, and so on. It also encompasses humanities-based approaches, such as philosophy and history; sociocultural approaches, and social science approaches grounded in sociology, psychology, and anthropology.

The SCA specialization emphasizes the development of expertise in conducting high-quality research on significant issues in sociocultural and community-centered approaches to education. We also strive to prepare teacher educators who will engage preservice and in-service teachers, educational leaders and policy makers, and families and students in the work of examining and developing educational communities.

Courses required of all students in this specialization in addition to the Doctoral Core Courses:
EDUC 853 - Topics in Culturally Relevant Pedagogies (3 credits)
EDUC 854 - Topics in Equity in Education (3 credits)
EDUC 855 - Topics in Sociocultural Theories of Education (3 credits)
One additional course in methodology that is consistent with the research approaches of this specialization, approved by the student’s advisor.  (3 credits)
EDUC 968 – Supervised Research (6 credits)
EDUC 732 – Community Based Practicum (6 credits)

Policy on Specialization Area Exam:
The Specialization Area Exam in SCA is designed to prepare doctoral students for their dissertation research by developing the specialized area of expertise around the students’ research interests. The exam will also help to assess if students are ready for the dissertation research. . Although the exam has both formative and summative functions, we view this assessment more as formative, preparing for dissertation research, rather than summative, considering whether the student should stay in the program or not after spending three years in it.

The student’s advisor and the student will determine the members of the specialization area exam committee, based on the student’s area of interest. The committee will consist of three SCA education faculty members: the student’s advisor, one faculty member from the SCA specialization area, and the other committee member can be a faculty member from another specialization (although it is not necessary).

The exam is composed of two parts, a written exam and an oral question-response discussion of the written exam. The format of the written part of the exam includes three components: 

1)   Writing a personal research statement articulating what the student’s research interests are, why they are important for the student and how they are grounded in the student’s personal background, history, and deeply felt concerns. Sometimes students have difficulty connecting their primary issues and concerns to the language of research and the prevailing literature in their field of interest. The statement will enable the committee to more effectively assist students in making the connections between their primary issues and concerns to the language of research and the prevailing literature in their field of interest. Additionally, the research statement will help the committee develop the assessing criteria based on the student’s research focus developed in this personal research statement. The purpose of this statement is to assist the faculty committee in guiding the student into something that the student really wants to do in his/her dissertation rather than a topic that might be interesting only to the committee and/or only to the field. This statement should guide the student to stay with his/her own “roots”, so to speak, during the whole dissertation endeavor. We want the student to discover his/her OWN voice as a researcher.

2)   Developing a critical literature review focused on the student’s emerging main research interests as outlined in the personal research statement. The main goal of the review is to develop familiarity and expertise both broadly and critically defined around the student’s dissertation (including the dissertation pre-proposal, see below) as the student’s career focus for his/her proximal professional future. This literature review should be a collaborative endeavor involving a negotiation between the student and the SAE committee.  Following are several steps to guide the development of the review.

Step one: Developing a Topic Paper. In this paper, the student will outline three topics in which the student wants to claim professional expertise broadly and deeply in the field of educational research and one topic on issues of methodology related to doing research about the three topics. The SAE committee can help the student develop these topics. These topics should emerge from the student’s personal research statement, be connected to the student’s dissertation, and should define how the student wants to position him/herself in the area. The student will discuss the issues, nuances, and controversies relevant to their research topics in theory, research findings, and practice within all three topics. We expect that the student will write one-two paragraphs for each of the three topics the student will define. The student will use key references without trying to be exhaustive in the paper. This topic paper will help the SAE committee to develop questions for the student’s literature review (the second step).

Step two: Developing a reading list in each of the four topics (with faculty help and guidance).

Step three: Writing up the critical literature review in which the student will discuss the state of the field with regard to the important and salient issues defining the topics and methodological issues of doing research (about 40-page double-spaced paper, excluding the references, using APA or other professional styles used in education research).  It is expected that this critical literature review will be authored solely by the student with no assistance by the faculty advisor or committee.

3)   Dissertation research pre-proposal based on the student’s personal research statement and literature review. The pre-proposal should involve the emerging main research question, its importance for the academic and educational fields, and ideas of how the student is going to approach it in a research design.  The purpose of the dissertation research pre-proposal is three-fold:  1) to help the student think of the next steps in working on the dissertation; 2) to make the literature review authentic and thus more scholarly; and 3) to help the committee to assess if the student is ready for the next step – writing a dissertation proposal.  The length of the pre-proposal can vary but should not exceed five double-spaced pages. 

The oral part of the exam will involve committee members reading the written part and developing 2-3 questions based on it.  During the oral part of the exam, the student responds to the committee’s questions and can ask the committee his or her own questions on the subject of interest or for clarification.  The oral part is concluded when the committee exhausts their questions.  However, the oral part of the exam should not be longer than 2.5 hours.

The evaluation of the exam is based on the students’ successful completion of the written and oral parts. The successful exam satisfies the following criteria that reflect the student’s readiness to start working on his/her dissertation:

a)  The student has a clear research focus that is grounded in the students’ background, importance for the academic field, and importance for educational practice;
b)  The student has developed broad and critical expertise in research and practice issues relevant to his/her research focus;
c)  The student is knowledgeable about diverse methodologies that are necessary for his/her dissertation research;
d)  The student has a clear idea of how to start working on the dissertation proposal;
e)  The student demonstrates scholarly writing and oral skills.

Timeline and Administrative Procedures

The timeline and assessment of the SAE are as follows:

Summer between second and third year in the program:

• Students develop their SAE committee at the beginning of the summer.
• Students begin working on their personal statement at the beginning of the summer, and submit their personal statement to their committee by the end of the summer.

Fall of third year in the program:

• By October 1 of the third year in the program, students begin working on the Critical Literature Review and the Dissertation Research Pre-Proposal.  It is expected that students will use the knowledge gained from reviewing other researcher’s work and writing the literature review to shape their ideas and form the basis for the Pre-Proposal.
• By December 15 of the third year in the program, students must submit the Literature Review and Pre-proposal to their SAE committee.

Winter Session of third year in the program:

• The SAE committee will review students’ Literature Reviews and Pre-Proposals during January, and Oral Defenses will be scheduled for the end of January.  No written feedback will be provided to the student at this point in the process.

Based on students’ written and oral work, the SAE Exam will result in one of two ratings:

1. Pass
   For students to pass the SAE, 2 of the 3 faculty members must agree that students have met all five of the criteria listed above. This is deemed “Passing the Specialization Area Examination,” and students will not receive any written feedback, but a congratulatory letter is sent to students with a copy sent to the Director’s Office.  Students may proceed with working on the dissertation research proposal.
2. Revise and resubmit
   If two of three faculty members do not agree that the student has met all five criteria, the SAE Exam is graded as “Revise and Resubmit”.  In this case, students are verbally informed of the decision within two days of the oral defense, and the SAE committee members will provide written feedback to students within 10 days of the oral defense. Students then have four weeks to address the concerns that were raised by the faculty. The feedback provided by the faculty will specify which section(s) of the written exam must resubmitted, and whether the oral defense must be repeated. A letter confirming the status of the student’s exam outcome is sent to the student with a copy sent to the Director’s Office.

When students resubmit their written exam and/or repeat the oral defense, the SAE committee will have 10 days to make a determination of the outcome.  Two ratings are possible:

1. Pass
   If two out of three faculty members agree that the student has successfully satisfied 4 out of 5 of the criteria listed above, this is deemed “Passing the Specialization Area Examination”, and students and the Director’s Office will be notified by letter from the student’s faculty advisor.
2. Fail
   If the above criteria are not met, the student is judged to have “Failed the Specialization Area Examination.” A failure means that the student has failed the specialization area examination and will be withdrawn from the PhD program

Faculty affiliated with this specialization area:

Dr. Eugene Matusov, Coordinator: dialogic pedagogy, Bakhtin’s approach, cultural diversity, innovative schools, schools without failure. Eugene Matusov is currently working on a book with a tentative title "Journey into Dialogic Pedagogy." Based on the work of the Russian philosopher Mikhail Bakhtin, I try to develop a radical dialogic approach to education, according to which knowledge, meaning, and learning exist only in dialogue. My research and educational interest is studying how to design safe learning environments for all students. I want to learn from informal settings and innovative educational institutions how to design for learning without failure and to provide sensitive guidance. Following Dr. Jean Lave, I believe that learning is an aspect of any activity. Since everybody learns all the time, the question for educators is not whether a student learns form a lesson or not but what exactly people learn from their engagement in the activities. I argue that learning can be holistically understood as people becoming members of their communities of practice. In this sociocultural approach, learning is viewed as transformation of participation in a sociocultural practice. Sometimes due to political, economic, historical, social, and cultural reasons, person's access to meaningful participation in practices is blocked and desirable learning is arrested. I am interested in the process of how the access to participation in valuable practices meaningful for a learner is systematically denied and of how people learn to become "disabled" in institutional settings (especially, in schools) as a result of this.

Matusov, E. & St. Julien, J. (2004). Print literacy as oppression: Cases of bureaucratic, colonial, totalitarian literacies and their implications for schooling. TEXT International Journal, 24(2), 197-244.

 Matusov, E., Pleasants, H., & Smith, M. (2003). Dialogic framework for cultural psychology: Culture-in-action and culturally sensitive guidance. Review Interdisciplinary Journal on Human Development, Culture and Education, 4(1), Available online: http://cepaosreview.tripod.com/Matusov.html

Dr. Barbara Curry: Educational leadership, adult identity development, the construction of the public persona.

Dr. Sarah Jewett: Anthropology and education, educational equity, & social studies education.

Dr. Shuaib Meacham: Hip-hop literacy and education, Vygotsky blues, multicultural education.

Dr. Rosalie Rolon-Dow: Latino/a students in U.S. schools, anthropology of education, immigrant oral histories, social studies education. Rosalie Rolón-Dow, an ethnographer of education, studies how past and present race, ethnicity, gender and social class dynamics shape the educational opportunities and experiences of urban families. In particular, her work pays special attention to the experiences of Latino/a youth.

Drawing on sociocultural frameworks of education including critical race theory and cultural production theory, her teaching and research endeavors aim to address issues of educational (in)equity and seek to promote socially just educational practices and policies. Recent research and writing projects have focused on the schooling experiences of middle school Puerto Rican girls, and on the use of digital stories to document race-centered counterstories told by urban youth. Currently, she is conducting research that addresses the intersections of race, place, and cultural citizenship in shaping opportunities for Puerto Ricans living in ethnically integrated neighborhoods in Philadelphia. Rolón-Dow previously taught elementary grades in a bilingual school in Pennsylvania.

Publications:

Rolón-Dow, R. (2005). Critical Care: A Color(full) analysis of care narratives in the schooling experiences of Puerto Rican girls. American Educational Research Journal, (42)1: 77-111.

Rolón-Dow, R. (2004). Seduced by images: Identity and schooling in the lives of Puerto Rican girls. Anthropology and Education Quarterly, 35(1), 8-29. Theme Issue: Race, Power, and the Ethnography of Urban Schools.

Dr. Gail Rys: Moral development and peer-directed social behavior.

Dr. Tonya Bartell: Mathematics education, equity, and social justice in mathematics education. Dr. Bartell's current research agenda involves developing and understanding effective teacher professional development that integrates issues of equity and issues of mathematics teaching and learning. Her current projects focus on investigating secondary teachers learning to teach mathematics for social justice, the demonstration of teacher expectations in words and actions and its effect on teachers' practice and student achievement, and exploring personal stories in relation to a commitment to equity in mathematics education and the potential implications for teacher professional development.

Dr. Tony Whitson: Semiotics, situated cognition, social studies education, curriculum theories, controversy of teaching evolution.

Dr. Deborah Bieler: Socially and culturally responsive teacher education, teaching English for social justice, the role of dialogue in student-teacher mentoring.

Dr. Chrystalla Mouza: Technology and teacher learning, design of learning environments, computer supported collaborative learning.

Dr. Laura Eisenman: Transitions from school to adult life for youth with disabilities; disabilities studies in education. Laura Eisenman is engaged in research about the experiences of students and teachers in a new career-technical high school. The school uses a consultative-collaborative inclusion model to support students’ learning and has a professional development partnership with the University. She is interested in the disability identity of adolescents within school and community -- especially as they negotiate transitions from school to adult life.

Eisenman, L.T. (in press). Social networks and careers of young adults with intellectual disabilities. Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities.

Eisenman, L.T. (2007). Self-determination interventions: Building a foundation for school completion. Remedial and Special Education, 28(1), 2-8.

Eisenman, L.T., Chamberlin, M., & McGahee-Kovac, M. (2005). A teacher inquiry group on student-led IEPs: Starting small to make a difference. Teacher Education & Special Education, 28 (3/4), 195-206.

Dr. Robert Hampel: History of Education, especially American high schools and colleges, 1920 - 1980. Bob Hampel is working on a book of essays on what he calls "shortcuts to learning," various ways Americans in the 19th and 20th century tried to make education (or at least the acquisition of credentials) both FASTER and EASIER.  He is especially interested in the thin line between shortcuts that are legitimate and those that are fraudulent.  How does a student-as-consumer grasp the difference between a worthwhile and a bogus shortcut? Furthermore, under what conditions is the marketplace regulated, and in whose interests?

Reference: "The Academic Work Ethic at Yale College, 1939-1982" in Perspectives on the History of Higher Education (2006).

Special Education

Overview of this specialization:
The Ph.D. specialization in Special Education is dedicated to the generation and application of knowledge about the development and education of children and adolescents with learning problems. This specialization views these problems within the contexts of school, family, and community and draws on knowledge from multiple disciplines as a base to understand such problems and to enhance opportunities for children and adolescents to improve their learning and enhance their overall quality of life. This advanced training program is designed to prepare individuals to conduct scholarly research on the development and education of children in schools and support the development and implementation of effective programs in schools.

Courses required of all students in this specialization in addition to the Doctoral Core Courses:
Specialization Courses (2):

• Issues and Research in Exceptionality
• Proseminar in Special Education

Methods Courses (2):

• 2 additional courses in research methods, measurement or statistics; selected with consultation from academic advisor

General Course Requirements (varies):

• Students are expected to acquire broad knowledge of the field of special education. In addition to the specialization exam and supervised research, a student will demonstrate this knowledge through courses taken in the School of Education as part of this Ph.D. program, through courses taken previously as part of a degree program, or through both. In order to fulfill the objective of a broad knowledge base in the field of special education, a student may be required to take selected courses. During the first academic semester, a student's academic advisor will review her/his credentials and make such determinations. Knowledge in the following content areas is required:
• characteristics of exceptional children/youth
• educational assessment
• behavior analysis and classroom management
• at least 3 of the following areas:
  • instructional methods in reading
  • instructional methods in mathematics
  • instructional methods in mild disabilities
  • instructional methods in severe disabilities
• In addition to coursework in the above areas, a student will take courses in a specialized area of interest in the field of special education or related disciplines. These courses will be selected in concert with the student’s academic advisor from regularly scheduled courses, seminars, and independent study. The student's program of study must be approved by her/his Advisory Committee.

Policy on Specialization Area Exam:
This specialization area does not require a specialization area examination.

Faculty affiliated with this specialization area:
Dr. Gary Allison
Dr. Al Cavalier
Dr. Laura Eisenman
Dr. Ralph Ferretti
Dr. Nancy Jordan
Dr. Charles MacArthur
Dr. Kristen Ritchey