Search results

Using an exploratory multi-case study approach, we examined student perceptions of leadership through analysis of introductory discussion board forums in online undergraduate and graduate leadership courses to formulate leadership student personas. A review of related literature reveals that leadership’s broad application results in a vast array of interests and motivations related to pursuit of a leadership degree. To that end, development of student personas provides leadership program administrators and faculty with a better understanding of their needs and characteristics. In this application paper, we will share qualitative data compiled from four online leadership courses. Our preliminary findings identified data-driven personas that showcase how leadership students with varying backgrounds and aspirations envision knowing our leadership students, as well as recommending future research that can help advance the field of leadership education.

Much of recent research on leadership education focuses on the application of a particular assignment or project to develop an individual’s leadership. Other research has examined leadership development from different educational levels such as graduate, undergraduate, and even K-12. The following paper is an idea brief surrounding a newly created and recently implemented, organizational leadership graduate degree program. This brief further discusses and explores the creation and on-going development of the graduate program in leadership education as a whole through the pedagogical lens of Cultural-Historical Activity theory. The paper also describes the use of embedded assessments within the core classes that potentially provide the student with the knowledge and skills to successfully complete their applied research capstone project.

Leadership education must evolve to keep pace with the growing recognition that effective leadership happens in a complex environment and is as much a systemic variable as a personal one. As part of a program review process, a graduate leadership program at a private Midwestern university conducted a qualitative review of 18 online graduate programs in leadership education. In the absence of a discipline or accrediting body to govern leadership degree programs, we utilized the integrating framework of complexity leadership theory (CLT), as well as two professional societies, to understand how the curricula and competencies of online graduate education align and diverge to meet the changing assumptions and challenges of leadership.

The main purpose of this paper is to show how by using very simple concepts and techniques, which I have learned during my training at the Program for Excellence in Teaching (PET) at the University of Missouri‐Columbia and teaching experience at the same university for six years, the classroom atmosphere can be improved and become more interesting and through which students can learn more. It is not to say that there is no need for new teaching theories and concepts, but I believe we are more in need of knowing how to apply what we already know. The lack of sufficient empirical test is another reason for writing this paper. In this paper I conduct five different statistical tests to show how interactive learning, in which students have active role in developing new/unknown concepts, is more effective than traditional teaching (lecturing), in which students have passive role in learning new materials.

Purpose: We critically examine the idea of neurodiversity, or the uniqueness of all brains, as the foundation for the neurodiversity movement, which began as an autism rights movement. We explore the neurodiversity movement's potential to support cross-disability alliances that can transform cultures.

Methods/Approach: A neurodiverse team reviewed literature about the history of the neurodiversity movement and associated participatory research methodologies and drew from our experiences guiding programs led, to varying degrees, by neurodivergent people. We highlight two programs for autistic university students, one started by and for autistics and one developed in collaboration with autistic and nonautistic students. These programs are contrasted with a national self-help group started by and for stutterers that is inclusive of “neurotypicals.”

Findings: Neurodiversity-aligned practices have emerged in diverse communities. Similar benefits and challenges of alliance building within versus across neurotypes were apparent in communities that had not been in close contact. Neurodiversity provides a framework that people with diverse conditions can use to identify and work together to challenge shared forms of oppression. However, people interpret the neurodiversity movement in diverse ways. By honing in on core aspects of the neurodiversity paradigm, we can foster alliances across diverse perspectives.

Implications/ Values: Becoming aware of power imbalances and working to rectify them is essential for building effective alliances across neurotypes. Sufficient space and time are needed to create healthy alliances. Participatory approaches, and approaches solely led by neurodivergent people, can begin to address concerns about power and representation within the neurodiversity movement while shifting public understanding.

The chapter proposes a three step framework to assist in the study of technological change in historical terms, using one class of technology, computational devices and computers, to illustrate the approach. Step one explores the economic dynamics of computing to demonstrate the value of studying a specified technology to gain insights about other forms of technologies. Second step attempts an understanding of users and historians respond to the issue of change. Finally, a framework for studying the role of change in technology is presented. Many examples are drawn from different periods in the modern history of information processing.

Entrepreneurial orientation (EO) has emerged as a core concept in the field of entrepreneurship. Yet, there continue to be questions about the nature of EO and how best to conceptualize and measure it. This chapter makes the case that EO has grown beyond its roots as a firm-level unidimensional strategy construct and that a new multidimensional version of EO is needed to capture the diverse manifestations and venues for entrepreneurial activity that are now evident around the world – global entrepreneurial orientation (GEO). Building on the five-dimension multidimensional view of EO set forth when Lumpkin and Dess (1996) extended the work of Miller (1983) and Covin and Slevin (1989, 1991), the chapter offers an updated definition of EO and a fresh interpretation of why EO matters theoretically. Despite earnest efforts to reconcile the different approaches to EO, in order to move the study of EO and the theoretical conversation about it forward, we maintain that as a group of scholars and a field, we need to acknowledge that two different versions of EO have emerged. Given that, we consider original approaches to measuring EO, evaluate formative measurement models, consider multiple levels of analysis, call for renewed attention to EO configurations, and discuss whether there is a theory of EO.

This article suggests that Patrick Pearse’s thought and work was rooted in the child‐centred movement of the late nineteenth‐century, was informed by the tenets of progressivism and predated the work of later influential educational thinkers. It is further argued that Pearse developed a unique conceptualisation of schooling as a radical form of political and cultural dissent in pre‐1916 Ireland. Aspects of Pearse’s thought that are evidently problematic are highlighted and the article suggests that discussions of his work might benefit from moving to these more substantial and germane areas.

Purpose – This study explored agentive and sustainable teacher development as part of literacy coaching that employed a reflective framework and video with an apprenticeship stance. This chapter examines principles of apprenticeship and the Gradual Release of Responsibility (GRR) model to analyze the transition of responsibility for reflection from coach to teacher.

Design/methodology/approach – An earlier seven-month multiple case study of literacy coaching with four secondary level teachers revealed seven joint actions (i.e., revoice, build, ask questions to develop understanding, ask dissonant questions, suggest, disagree, reconceptualize) and four categories of joint action (i.e., directive/consonant, directive/dissonant, responsive/consonant, and responsive/dissonant) within a model of joint action for literacy coaching (Reichenberg, 2018). This analysis mapped those joint actions onto the GRR model (McVee, Shanahan, Hayden, Boyd, & Pearson, 2018; Pearson & Gallagher, 1983). This chapter explicates reasoning for variability in responsibility and the potential relationship between variability and the development of teachers’ thinking and action through in-depth analysis of a single coaching session. Examples from other teachers’ coaching sessions are included.

Findings – Synthesis of the two models shows that joint actions initiated by the coach that were directive/dissonant fell on the left side of the GRR model with primary coach responsibility. Actions initiated by the coach that were classified as directive/consonant came next on the journey toward the middle, followed by responsive/dissonant actions. Responsive/consonant actions encompassed the middle region of shared responsibility. The same actions initiated by the teacher mirrored this progression. Principles of apprenticeship in this gradual release of responsibility highlight the bi-directionality of expertise in situated action informed by historical and dynamic context (Mercer, 2008). Evidence of teachers’ growing agency and sustainability were present in joint actions they initiated within the context of literacy coaching.

Research limitations/implications – Analysis of the actions of a literacy coach and teacher as directive, responsive, consonant, and dissonant add complexity to the discussion about how to transfer responsibility for reflection from coaches to teachers. Awareness of how joint actions map onto the GRR model can inform coaches’ and teachers’ decisions as they thoughtfully move toward greater teacher agency within coaching interaction.

Practical implications – The reflective framework employed in this study is applicable to a variety of settings such as instructional coaching across the disciplines, coaching by in-service literacy specialists, and the preparation of pre-service literacy coaches. The model of joint action for analyzing coaching interaction could be used by in-service literacy coaches, pre-service literacy coaches, and teachers who are being coached.

Originality/value – This chapter analyzes the transition of responsibility for reflection from coach to teacher. Principles of both the GRR model and apprenticeship theory provide a theoretical explanation for how these teachers achieved greater agency and sustainable development of a reflective stance.

It has often been said that a great part of the strength of Aslib lies in the fact that it brings together those whose experience has been gained in many widely differing fields but who have a common interest in the means by which information may be collected and disseminated to the greatest advantage. Lists of its members have, therefore, a more than ordinary value since they present, in miniature, a cross‐section of institutions and individuals who share this special interest.