Search results

In colleges of agriculture leadership education is one area of study where enrollment and demand are outstripping the capacity of institutions to deliver the coursework. However, few faculty members are prepared to teach leadership contextually based in agriculture. Responding to this challenge, the Leadership Education Institute (LEI) for faculty in colleges of agriculture was created. The primary goal of the project was to prepare agricultural faculty to teach leadership as a secondary discipline. This multi-year project, funded by a USDA Higher Education Challenge Grant, was a collaboration of faculty from Oklahoma State University, the University of Nebraska-Lincoln, and the University of Georgia. The project resulted in directly impacting food and agricultural sciences education at 10 institutions across the nation by improving teaching competency of leadership education faculty in colleges of agriculture.

This article explores leadership studies as a complementary and integrating discipline in undergraduate liberal education curricula. A significant historical purpose of liberal education was to liberate and prepare its graduates to be active and capable participants and leaders in social, economic, religious, and political realms. This historical purpose has become resurgent in recent critical examinations of liberal education. Some now argue that the undergraduate liberal education should return, in part, to preparing citizens for leadership responsibilities necessary to strengthen our communities, nation, and democratic institutions.

There appears to be a symbiotic relationship between liberal education and leadership studies. The knowledge, attitudes, and skills necessary for effective leadership appear to be closely aligned with the desired learning outcomes of a liberal arts education, regardless of major. This article concludes that leadership studies may be an important and beneficial component of undergraduate liberal education curricula.

This commentary details the process aimed at developing the Inaugural National Leadership Education Research Agenda. The goal of the project is to create a guiding document to assist in further defining Leadership Education as a discipline and provide directional research priorities for that discipline. The commentary provides a foundational understanding and creates transparency for the process in an effort to solicit collaborative partnerships and dialogue that will ultimately provide more holistic research priorities and enhanced opportunities for scholarship within Leadership Education.

The inaugural National Leadership Education Research Agenda was created to establish a foundation for scholarship that will guide the field of Leadership Education and develop it as a discipline. Its timely research priorities present a framework for scholarship and resulting applied and basic implications. This paper provides perspective about the agenda’s conceptualization, development, and application. It establishes perspective for the applied nature of the agenda and transdiciplinary scholarship that can lead to powerful implications for the field of Leadership Education and the constituents it serves. Further, it explores the agenda’s priorities and how the resulting collaborative dialogue can advance the fields of Leadership and Leadership Education globally.

Instructional leadership has taken center stage in recent years as the emphasis on school leaders’ role in improving instructional programs and impacting student learning has increased under the pressures of the accountability movement. While there is a growing literature that has highlighted the indirect impacts of effective instructional leadership on student learning, little is known about these effects in the area of special education. Because this direct involvement in instructional and curricular matters has typically fallen outside the traditional roles of principals and other school leaders, the need for purposeful focus on developing these skills is paramount in a climate that is calling for leaders who can facilitate growth and improvement in student learning, particularly in the area of special education. This chapter explores instructional leadership in the context of special education with a focus on small to mid-sized schools. We identify a set of factors that are critical to the effective implementation of instructional leadership in the area of special education which include, communication, teacher evaluation and supervision, staff development, instructional programing, and instructional design. The chapter goes on to discuss how school leaders can cultivate growth and improvement in special education programming through the use of coaching models and distributed leadership. Lastly we explore the implications for practice including discussions of reforming principal preparation programs and shared leadership.

Leadership in higher education has become of increasing importance as the size of the enterprise has grown, and this has naturally led to a growing research interest in the topic. Using systematic review methods, this chapter interrogates and synthesises the research literature on leadership in higher education in terms of its meanings, application and practice, and the issues and critiques raised. It concludes that research into leadership in higher education has been both extensive and global in nature, identifying a variety of understandings, practices and approaches adopted, and the continuing dominance of white men in senior leadership positions. There is clearly scope for more research on this topic, which could both emphasise different issues and give greater recognition to the particular nature of higher education and higher education institutions.

Women who are the primary caretaker of the home, as a choice or as a necessity, have to negotiate an effective work-life balance and many times, the need to take care of their home results in lost opportunities for career development and advancement (Maki, 2015). For most, the opportunity to capitalize on the missed opportunities will occur after childbearing years (Maki, 2015). This study reconstructed the advancement to executive leadership of women who were employed at four-year, public universities using narrative inquiry and guided by the conceptual framework of social cognitive theory (Andrews, Squire, & Tamboukou, 2013; Bandura, 1989). In this study, six women in higher education were interviewed to discuss work-life balance as it pertains to being an executive leader of a four-year public institution. The participants of this study pinpointed family and work-life balance as important factors for their decision-making process. Balancing work and life can be challenging when you are a person in a leadership position and the degree of difficulty increases when children and family are included. Many women believe that they must choose between their careers and their family. Women postponing their careers for their spouses may not seem abnormal because there tends to be an expectation that male's advancement is prioritized over the woman's (Parker, 2015). As more women are taking on leadership roles, the idea and evolution of establishing and maintaining a strategy for work-life balance becomes a very integral topic and one that needs continuous exploration.

The purpose of this chapter is to introduce the role of the doctorate as an investment in education, and to consider whose education is being invested in, how and why. We examine the role of postgraduate research within the doctorate and how this may contribute to a self-improving profession, self-improving educational institutions and self-improving education systems.

The methodology is the representation of different chapters from authors that explore the key themes that we introduce in this chapter.

We present the three main findings from a British Educational Leadership, Management and Administration Doctoral Research Interest Group seminar series funded by the British Educational Leadership, Management and Administration Society (BELMAS). First is the progression of a systemic basis for active educational research, engaged with the mobilization of learning-based and pedagogic knowledge leadership within doctoral scholarship, learning and pedagogy. Second is the continued examination of the internationalization of purpose, structure and function in doctoral study through evidence informed leadership. Third is the provision of opportunities to explore ways in which doctoral study may facilitate educational leaders to recognize ‘minoritised’ and marginalized communities, and disrupt dominant discourses that work within patterns of ecologies that ‘pathologise’ diversity and difference.

Here, a clearly stated focus emerged during the seminar series, emphasizing how leaders engaging with doctoral learning have the opportunity to articulate generative transformative theories of human learning for a civic curriculum, and to apply this new knowledge to work for change for students’ full economic, cultural and political participation in the society.

Standard doctoral preparation includes formal training in a specific academic discipline. In some instances, this training includes experience serving on departmental and university-wide committees. Structured leadership education, however, is most often a peripheral concern of the graduate school experience. For a significant number of doctoral students, formal leadership education is simply not considered to be of primary importance to the careers to which they aspire within higher education. Recognizing a need for increased leadership preparation in higher education, this chapter aims to highlight one systematic model for leadership education at the doctoral student level, the Rutgers University PreDoctoral Leadership Development Institute (PLDI).