Abstract: As a contribution to the lively debate that has been recently spawned among scholars about leadership preparation embedded in doctoral studies, this chapter explores the relationship between the current conception of the quality practitioner of educational leadership and the usefulness of learning how to conduct action research. The rst section describes the quality practitioner and shows how various theories lend themselves to this concept. Building on the theoretical underpinnings for the very practical work of educational leadership, the second section o ers a brief discussion of the background and development of action research. In the third section, we consider the appropriateness and relevance of educational leaders undertaking action research projects as the capstone of their doctoral studies. We explore the arguments for the Ed.D. as a more appropriate doctoral degree for the quality practitioner insofar as the Ed.D. is a professional doctorate unlike its research counterpart. And nally, the last section explores a way to weave action research throughout an innovative Ed.D. program so that students of educational leadership experience the application of action research methods to change some aspect of their own organizations as they learn how theory inter-relates with practice. This model is most suitable for part-time doctoral students who have remained employed in some leadership capacity. Note: This module has been peer-reviewed, accepted, and sanctioned by the National Council of the Professors of Educational Administration (NCPEA) as a scholarly contribution to the knowledge base in educational administration. The Quality Practitioner of Educational Leadership ∗http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/ http://cnx.org/content/m14529/1.2/ Connexions module: m14529 2 During the last decade there has been an ideological shift in de ning and characterizing the notion of a quality practitioner of educational leadership. As a result of many critical conversations, some of which may or may not have involved educational practitioners themselves, there appears to be some agreement on the characteristics which are believed to best describe expertise in the practice of educational leadership at the beginning of the 21st century. E]ducational leadership [has] be[gun] to embrace more organizational content: . . . not just running organizations but molding them for success (Levin, 2006, p. 38). Contrary to past descriptions that emphasized sta supervision, management and discipline, current descriptions of leadership include the leader's capacity to in uence and promote equity, equality and excellence in educational organizations. Most important is the leader's willingness to interrupt the status quo for the purpose of maximizing learning opportunities for all those involved the organization. Educational leaders need to be able to re ect upon how the policies and practices embedded in the organization support or detract from every student's educational experience (Starratt, 1994). For instance, the argument is made that if leadership practitioners know how to listen to their constituents and gather relevant organizational data, they will be able to collaborate with their educational partners in the organization and community to in uence change that results in better educational outcomes for all students (Furman, 2002). More than ever before, educational leadership is being associated with student academic achievement. Firestone and Riehl, (2005) have recently published an edited book that resulted from an American Educational Research Association (AERA) and University Council of Educational Administration (UCEA) taskforce charged with developing a research agenda on educational leadership. The main research questions addressed in this volume are: How can educational leaders increase student learning, and how can they foster equity in educational outcomes? (p. 1). However, Brown (2006a) argues that our current leadership preparation programs pay little, if any attention to the necessity of preparing educational leaders to engage in social justice or equity work. Quality educational leadership practitioners, in collaboration with parents, teachers, students and other stakeholders, are challenged to seek the necessary skills to accomplish the tasks and responsibilities required of them. Leadership is a much more complex undertaking today than it was in the past. Leaders now need expertise in policy formation and implementation, deep knowledge of pedagogy and curriculum issues, expertise in fostering collaboration and teamwork and a sophisticated understanding of data collection and analysis. Each [expectation] is complex and requires conceptual understanding as well as the ability to put knowledge into action in educational settings `practical intelligence,' in the words of psychologist Robert Sternberg (1977) (Levin, 2006, p. 38). Much has been written that suggests leaders who become re ective practitioners advance in their practices and in building local and community capacity. Kowalski (2005) suggests that in true professions, practitioners are expected to possess a theoretical base for practice, technical skills required to apply theory, and the ability to engage in re ective practice (p. 2). He goes on to de ne re ective practice as the process by which the practitioner bene ts from experience by integrating knowledge, skills, and experience (p. 2). One can deduce that leaders who use critical re ection to take action in pursuit of knowledge and social change demonstrate the essence of what Paulo Freire (1970) de ned as praxis. Practice is a reaction to the conditions existing in the outside world; it is experiential. . . . Praxis, on the other hand, is the combination of the external environment and the internal consciousness of the principal (Wenglinsky, 2004, p. 33). Thus, when an educational leadership practitioner acquires the skill of critical re ection, she has reached a major milestone in arriving at that cyclical, multifaceted, multilateral sphere of leadership. This description acknowledges the inherent understanding that true critical re ections involve aligning re ections to theory, forming critical inquiries about policy and practice, and taking informed action. Kowalski (2005) warns that this is not a simple task because re ection does not occur naturally (p. 3). Since e ective (sustainable) re ective practice is in uenced by adult experiences, adult learning theories, transformative theory, and emancipatory theory help us understand the process. Mezirow (1991) argues that adult learning emphasizes contextual understanding, critical re ection on assumptions, and validating meaning by assessing reasons (p. 3). Embedded beneath the contexts of biographical, historical and cultural experiences are the justi cations for what we know, think, believe, and feel, and our methods of making meaning of and about the environment that surrounds us. Since http://cnx.org/content/m14529/1.2/ Connexions module: m14529 3 learning is predicated upon one's prior interpretations which form taken-for-granted assumptions and frames of references, changing and/or uncertain social interactions and/or experiences which present new meanings prompt adults to seek justi able truths. In the absence of justi able truths, adults seek agreement of reliable information sources before forming decisions about these new or challenging insights. Within this thinking process, or process of making meaning, adult learning takes place. According to transformation theory, adults can change their points of view. Speci cally, Mezirow (1991) explains that transformation theory is the process of becoming critically aware of one's own tacit assumptions and expectations and those of others and assessing their relevance for making an interpretation (p. 4). One of the goals of transformation theory is to aim the learning toward re ective processes that enable selfevaluation of one's values, beliefs and experiences. This process is crucial for change. Becoming critically re ective of one's own assumptions is the key to transforming one's taken-for-granted frame of reference, an indispensable dimension of learning for adapting to change (Mezirow, 1997, p. 9). Ironically, traditional educational preparation programs and the hierarchical structure of public schools tend to perpetuate compliance and maintenance of the status quo (Brown, 2006b). Thus, transformation theory and its product, transformative learning, aids leaders in understanding and developing the necessary skills and processes which encourage them to challenge the status quo. In essence, transformative learning helps leaders to deconstruct conformity to the many social and cultural canons which have permeated U.S. public schools to the detriment of many of our students. Quality educational practitioners understand that to maintain the status quo (of the existing social and cultural canons) is to impede development of a sense of responsible agency (Mezirow 1991, p. 8). Important in the study of adult learning theory, particularly in reference to praxis, is the concept of emancipatory thinking brought on by transformation. Tennant (1998) describes evidence of transformative learning as a reaction that incites a refusal to be positioned when the interests served are those of domination and oppression; and encourages alternative readings of the text of experience (quoted in Mezirow 1991, p. 24). To this point, much of our discussion has been about how adult learning theory promotes re ective thinking, stimulates potential for transformation, and emancipates one's thinking to the level of action. To prepare quality educational leadership practitioners who demonstrate those capacities, we suggest action research a systematic inquiry conducted by teachers, administrators, counselors, or others with a vested interest in the teaching and learning process or organizational environment for the