The Correlation between Self-Efficacy and Time to Degree Completion of Educational Leadership Doctoral Students

Abstract

Aim/Purpose: This study examined an Ed.D. program redesign to address time to degree completion. The aim was to emphasize the need to improve students’ academic writing and embody a scholarly practitioner approach to research. Background: Doctoral programs have the highest attrition of graduate programs, with almost half of the students taking six to seven years to complete. Methodology: An ex-post-facto correlational research design examined self-efficacy and educational leadership doctoral students perceived versus actual program progression. This was statistically determined through Pearson’s correlation coefficients and a t-test analysis. Contribution: This study provides other doctoral programs who are struggling with time to degree completion a model to consider as they contemplate a program redesign. Findings: Ed.D. students in the 2014 and 2015 cohorts reported high self-efficacy (3.62 and 3.57 respectively, out of 4.00). There was a statistically significant difference in the number of defenses completed per semester based on the program redesign. Recommendations for Practitioners: Ed.D. programs should consider using a scholarly practitioner approach. This focus may lead to faster rates of degree completion and better prepare students to solve problems of practice in their practitioner setting. Recommendation for Researchers: While the results are promising as to expediting time to degree completion, like most doctoral programs it does not seem to impact overall completion rates of the program as a whole, thus, warranting further research. Impact on Society: Expediting time-to-completion enables students to graduate sooner. This will yield cost savings to the student, free up faculty resources, and most importantly prepare students to sooner serve as scholarly practitioners. Future Research: Future research should continue to examine time to degree completion, as well as students’ lived experiences and examine how those shape doctoral students’ efforts and abilities in their Ed.D. work from start to program completion.

Examining Educational Leadership Doctoral Students’ Self-Efficacy as Related to Their Role as a Scholarly Practitioner Researcher

“…Multon et al (1991), through seminal work, investigated the relationship of self-efficacy to academic performance and persistence through a metanalysis on self-efficacy and the results revealed positive and statistically significant relationships among self-efficacy beliefs and academic performance and persistence outcomes. On the contrary, McBrayer et al (2018) found high self-efficacy scores among doctoral students, but did not find a correlation between self-efficacy and time to degree completion warranting further research. Thus, it is important to note, current research has shown a potential explanation of high self-efficacy scores may be indicative of overconfidence as leaders by nature may exhibit confidence in their capabilities due to their chosen leadership field (Matheka et al, 2020).…”

“…In an effort to combat the challenges of time to degree completion, doctoral programs need to be centered around academic writing and scholarly practitioner research (McBrayer et al, 2018). Experiences conducting research have been shown to result in higher degrees of research self-efficacy in doctoral students (Petko et al, 2020).…”

“…Doctoral preparation programs of all disciplines have a 43% dropout rate and only 41% of students complete their doctoral degrees within six to seven years (Ampaw & Jaeger, 2012;National Science Foundation [NSF], 2017). Educational leadership faculty have been challenged to reevaluate educational leadership doctoral programs by focusing on doctoral students as scholarly practitioners charged with ensuring school improvement (CPED, 2021;McBrayer et al, 2018). Schools of Education, specifically doctoral programs in educational leadership, have been criticized for lack of sufficient academic rigor and have received recommendations calling for redesign and reform (Maranto et al, 2010;Porfilio & Strom, 2019;Zirkel, 2012).…”

“…CPED describes the education doctorate as "the professional doctor in education prepares educators for the application of appropriate and specific practices, the generation of new knowledge, and for the stewardship of the profession" (2021, p. 1). As consumers of knowledge, our students are scholarly practitioner researchers as they apply a theory to practice approach to their scholarship, merging practical application and professional skills with research in an effort to solve problems of practice and achieve educational reform (McBrayer et al, 2018). Prior to conducting our study, we predicted our students would have high self-efficacy at the start of the program, potentially take a decline at the midpoint (at the point in the program in which active compilation and analysis of research is occurring coupled with extensive academic writing), and return to the initial high levels of self-efficacy as they completed their coursework, if they were indeed successfully progressing through the program.…”

A Four Stage Framework for the Development of a Research Problem Statement in Doctoral Dissertations

“…These include student's belief, the teacher's belief, and the faculty's belief in the self-efficacy of the students. McBrayer et al (2018) conducted a study about the relationship between self-efficacy and time to degree completion of doctoral study. The study concluded that students with higher self-efficacy end up completing the writing of their dissertation in a shorter time.…”