Date of Award
7-2026
Document Type
Dissertation
Degree Name
Doctor of Education
Department
Education
First Advisor
Michelle Whitacre
Second Advisor
Graham Weir
Third Advisor
Lynda Leavitt
Abstract
Among several learning theories that were dynamic and constantly evolving with time, cognitive and constructive theories were predominant in the field of education. However, these theories often included overlapping and contrasting concepts, contributing to confusion in terminology among teachers and limited explicit use in instructional practice. Within the context of K-12 education, teachers demonstrated conceptual awareness of cognitive and constructive learning theories; however, the theories were not a part of day-to-day conversations and were minimally identified in practice. Instead, the theories were implicitly applied as teachers balanced competing professional responsibilities, including daily routines, syllabus requirements, district standards, new initiatives, differentiated instruction, and classroom size. Through an examination of existing scholarship and qualitative data, the scholar practitioner identified a need for intentionality in the identification, application, and integration of cognitive and constructive learning theories in instructional practice.
To address the gap between implicit utilization and intentional praxis, the scholar practitioner employed a design thinking methodology to design and implement a cognitive-constructive toolkit with elementary teachers within a Professional Learning Community (PLC). Grounded in the foundational scholarship of Piaget, Vygotsky, and Bruner, the toolkit included a simplified cognitive-constructive framework and a PLC structure supported by collaboration, reflection, collective inquiry, and shared instructional practices (Christiansen & Robey, 2015; DuFour, DuFour, & Eaker, 2008). These components were designed to explore intentional identification, application, and integration of cognitive, constructive, and cognitive-constructive learning theories in instructional practice. The toolkit was developed using input from the stakeholder community and was tested over an eight-week period with elementary teachers.
To evaluate the toolkit implementation, the scholar practitioner employed an exploratory qualitative multiple-case study design informed by Yin (2018). The study examined two elementary teachers as distinct cases within a shared PLC context and incorporated both within-case and cross-case analysis to strengthen analytic rigor and credibility (Crowe et al., 2011; Greenhalgh, 2025). Data sources included biweekly reflection logs, transcripts from orientation, PLC sessions and interviews, and annotated lesson plans. The scholar practitioner conducted thematic analysis using both deductive and inductive coding to identify emerging themes, patterns, and findings.
The scholar practitioner’s findings indicated that implementation of the cognitive-constructive toolkit supported by participation in a PLC increased teachers’ intentionality, reflective practice, and ability to identify, apply, and integrate cognitive and constructive learning theories in instructional practice. Additionally, the study revealed that reflection and collaboration within the PLC structure were critical in supporting implementation (Christiansen & Robey, 2015; DuFour et al., 2008). Teachers reported that the PLC provided a collaborative space to analyze instructional practices, clarify conceptual understanding, and problem‑solve challenges. While time constraints and an initial lack of clarity around framework components emerged as barriers, ongoing collaboration, reflection, and shared sense‑making served as key enablers of change.
Overall, the scholar practitioner’s study aligned with the Ed.D. leadership conceptual framework by embracing the model of transformational leadership grounded in human‑centered design. The scholar practitioner engaged stakeholders through collaborative inquiry, leveraged data‑informed decision‑making, and supported iterative improvement and organizational learning. Most importantly, the cognitive‑constructive toolkit demonstrated strong potential as a meaningful, scalable approach for supporting instructional improvement and bridging the gap between learning theory and instructional practice.
Recommended Citation
Nathaniel, Azam, "Toward Intentional Praxis: A Design Thinking Multi-Case Study of Cognitive-Constructive Toolkit Implementation in an Elementary Professional Learning Community" (2026). Dissertations. 814.
https://digitalcommons.lindenwood.edu/dissertations/814
Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.