Uncovering the identities of students and graduates in a CPED-influenced EdD program Debby Zambo a * , Ray R. Buss a and Ron Zambo b a Leadership and Innovation, Arizona State University, PO Box 37100, Glendale, AZ 85069, USA; b Elementary Education, Arizona State University, PO Box 37100, Glendale, AZ 85069, USA The educational doctorate (EdD) is being re-envisioned as a distinct professional degree. Today’s EdD graduates are envisioned as scholarly practitioners. Given this it may be reasoned these individuals have unique identities comprised of several layers. In this study, we examined how 18 entering students and 17 graduating students from an EdD program viewed themselves as learners, leaders, and action researchers. Data were obtained using a questionnaire with closed- and open-ended items, follow-up interviews were conducted with 12 incoming students and 12 graduates, and dissertations were also examined. Data were analyzed using quantitative and qualitative procedures. Questionnaire results indicated no significant differences between groups, but qualitative results showed students new to the program held strong identities as learners and leaders, but not as action researchers. Graduates held stronger views of each layer and their views were aligned to the program’s vision. From these findings implications are provided for program developers and students. Keywords: identity formation; doctoral student; doctorate; identity; doctoral education In 2007 the Carnegie Project on the Education Doctorate (CPED) and its affiliate insti- tutions began working to re-examine, re-focus, and re-design the educational doctorate (EdD) as a distinct professional practice degree (CPED 2010; Latta and Wunder 2012; Perry 2011; Perry and Imig 2008). Newly designed CPED-influenced programs follow a common set of principles and design features, but have latitude to develop individual missions and goals. CPED-influenced programs focus on developing scholarly prac- titioners, individuals who have the knowledge, skills, and dispositions they need to solve the problems of practice they routinely encounter (CPED 2010). Given this vision, it is plausible that these programs are developing individuals with distinctive identities. As a member of CPED, our program aspires to develop scholarly and influential practitioners, individuals who have the abilities they need to lead change and improve local situations. We envision that graduates of our program will be able to apply ideas and information learned at the university to their practice, collaborate with stakeholders, and use systematic inquiry to improve their practice. In sum, © 2013 Society for Research into Higher Education *Corresponding author. Email: Debby.Zambo@asu.edu Studies in Higher Education, 2015 Vol. 40, No. 2, 233–252, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2013.823932