Teaching Improvement Science in Online Ed.D. Programs: Reducing Geographic Inequities in Leadership Preparation

• In Event: Advancing The Teaching and Learning of Collaborative Continuous Improvement in Education

Abstract

Objectives: The objective of this paper is to explore the teaching of collaborative continuous improvement, specifically Improvement Science (IS) (Bryk et al., 2015; Hinnant-Crawford, 2025), as a component of online Ed.D. programs in educational leadership. Online programs increase equitable access to high-quality leadership preparation, particularly for educators in rural schools, where many administrators begin their careers (Kowlaski et al., 2011).

Theoretical framework: The theoretical framework draws on effective leadership preparation programs, effective online education, and improvement science.
Effective leadership preparation programs are coherently designed around shared ideas about leadership, with a focus on leadership for learning; provide challenging and reflective course content; use active, student-centered instruction and intentional scaffolding; facilitate positive relationships between students and faculty; utilize a cohort structure; and engage students in a substantive internship (Orr, 2020; Orr & Orphanos, 2011).
Effective online education includes clear learning objectives, opportunities for social interactions among and between faculty and students and utilizes technology to support engagement. Much like continuous improvement processes, online education requires significant attention to developing a theory of action to reach shared aims, asking the following questions: Where do we want to go? How will we know if we have arrived? What will we need to help us get there? (Darby & Lang, 2019).
These questions echo those posed by Discussant (2025): What is the problem I am trying to solve/ What am I trying to accomplish? How will I know that change is an improvement? What change might I introduce to solve it (and why)? At its core, IS is a framework for solving problems embedded in specific contexts, making it particularly appealing for rural educational leaders who work in unique settings that require significant attention to context (Authors, 2025; McHenry-Sorber & Budge, 2018).

Method: This paper is primarily conceptual, drawing from previous literature. It also draws from the authors’ experiences teaching in online Ed.D. programs that use IS as their signature pedagogy and serve a significant number of rural educators and leaders.

Substantiated conclusions: Using brief case descriptions of online Ed.D. programs at two land-grant, R1 universities, we identify two key components: advising and the dissertation in practice (DIP). Moving away from the apprentice model of doctoral advising towards group advising practices and scaffolded opportunities for writing provides necessary social support and increases completion. The DiP offers Ed.D. students opportunities to engage in change leadership with the support of an advisor and dissertation committee, grounded in local contexts and working collaboratively with teachers, students, and community members.

Significance: This paper provides insights into the preparation of rural education leaders through online Ed.D. programs that utilize IS. As half of the schools in the US are in rural areas (Showalter et al., 2023), attending to the preparation of their leaders is a significant, but understudied need. We argue that the components of effective leadership preparation, effective online learning, and IS form a mutually reinforcing triad to increase access to high-quality preparation for rural educational leaders.

Authors

• Sarah J Zuckerman, University of Nebraska - Lincoln

• Daniella Hall Sutherland, University of Vermont