Doctor of Education in Educational Leadership Program

Graduates

Dissertation Summaries

University Career Center Registrants' Perceptions of the Helpfulness of Career Services in Securing Post-Graduation Employment - Neal Vickers

The Influence of Selected Personal Factors and Motivational Styles in the Advancement of Women in Higher Education - Reita Gorman

Superintendent Perceptions of the Interstate School Leaders Licensure Consortium Standards for School Leaders - Mary Elizabeth Boeckmann

The Relationship Between Participation in Shared Governance and Organizational Commitment Reported by Non-Academic Staff In Public Research, Doctoral, and Master's Colleges and Universities - Jim Haynes

The Effects of Problem-Solving Training on Self-Perception of Problem-Solving Skills, Locus of Control, and Academic Competency for At-Risk Adolescents Participating in Arkansas State University's Youth Opportunities Unlimited Program - Patricia Glascock

A Comparative Analysis of Supervisors' Power Bases and Teachers' Perceived Level of Empowerment in Secondary and Two Year Post-Secondary Institutions - Leslie Battles

Financial Assistance

Arkansas State University established the doctoral program in Educational Leadership in 1992 and admitted the first cohort of students. Since the program's inception we have made numerous refinements. We are very proud of what we have put together. Our goal is to keep improving the program. Here are what we consider to be the major features of the program:

Four strands or themes serve as a guiding framework for the program:

• Self
• Leadership
• Organizations
• Change Process

Students proceed through the program with a cohort of 10 to 15 classmates. A cohort starts every fall and the students move together for a fall, spring, summer, fall, spring sequence of courses in the doctoral block.

During a regular academic term, students take back-to-back courses one night a week (starting at approximately 4:00 p.m.). In the summer, classes are three nights a week for one summer term.

Coursework is arranged in an organized sequence from theory to application. The themes of Leadership and Organizations serve as bookends to the program of study. This is a true "program" experience and, we think, a life-changing experience that is challenging, yet fun.

The program includes an "Integrative Seminar." This is an applied, field-based project that challenges each cohort to "think outside the box" (course boxes) by working collaboratively to explore an area of inquiry and produce a group product. Other goals are to learn about group dynamics and to practice team building skills.

The traditional doctoral "comprehensive exam" is not traditional at ASU. The exit assessment at the end of coursework, before moving on to the dissertation, has been constantly evolving. At the present time students can engage in a combination of activities to meet the exist assessment requirement (e.g., write an article, make a professional presentation, submit a grant proposal, develop a program portfolio, carry out an individual project, carry out a group project).

There is no "cut off" GRE or MAT entrance score. While a score is called for and is taken in to consideration, other scholarship and professional promise indicators also are examined.

Though an analysis of graduate transcripts, students can learn on the front end exactly what will be required of them to complete the degree. There will be no surprises after entering the program.

The program includes specific coursework to help with the preparation of a dissertation proposal. A supportive faculty is dedicated to guiding students through to completion.

Evaluations from the students and two external consulting teams have had high praise for the program. The program has been shared with colleagues at national meetings and features of our program have been incorporated into other new doctoral programs around the country.

We believe that the unique quality of our program has attributed to the high completion rate. Nationally, approximately 50% of the students who enroll in doctoral programs complete the degree requirements. So far, the first cohort has an 80% completion rate, with the promise of the remaining students finishing this May.

Graduates

1995

• Jane Jamison, Director of Federal Programs, Testing & Technology

Jonesboro Public School District, Jonesboro, AR
 
• Jackie McBride, Assistant Superintendent for Elementary Education

Jonesboro School District, Jonesboro, AR
 
• Helena Ruhl, Chair of Business & Social Science

Three Rivers Community College, Poplar Bluff, MO

• Alfred Harrell, Entrepreneur

Hot Springs, AR

• Dana Cantu, Coordinator of Academic Excellence Programs

South Texas Community College, McAllen, TX
 
• Sue Castleberry, Jr. High School Principal

Valley View School District, Jonesboro, AR
 
• Karen Coy, Assistant Principal

NEA School District, Paragould, AR
 
• Wayman Estes, Instructor

Cossatot Technical College, DeQueen, AR
 
• Patricia Judd, Instructor

Three Rivers Community College, Poplar Bluff, MO
 
• Duane Widhalm, Superintendent

Houston Public Schools, Houston, MO

 1998

• Pam Cicirello, Director of Admissions & Records

Pulaski Technical College, Little Rock, AR
 
• Dennis Martin, Superintendent

Evening Shade School District, Evening Shade, AR
 
• Sharon Taylor, Elementary Principal

Valley View Intermediate School, Jonesboro, AR
 
• Ann Webb, Elementary Principal

Newark School District, Newark, AR

• Les Battles, Instructor-Math & Science Department

Arkansas State University-Beebe, Beebe, AR
 
• Beth Boeckmann, Elementary Principal

Wynne Public School, Wynne, AR
 
• Steve Bounds, Associate Superintendent

Poplar Bluff School District, Poplar Bluff, MO
 
• Joe Carreiro - Retired

• Pat Glascock, Counselor

Student Counseling & Psychological Services-Arkansas State University, Jonesboro, AR
 
• Reita Gorman, English Teacher of Academically Talented

Jonesboro High School, Jonesboro, AR
 
• Jim Haynes, Director

Food Services-Arkansas State University, Jonesboro, AR
 
• Aaron Hosman, Assistant Superintendent

Greene County Tech School District, Paragould, AR
 
• Neal Vickers, Coordinator

Career Planning & Placement-Arkansas State University, Jonesboro, AR
 
• Wayne Wilson, Adult Education Coordinator

Ozarka Community College, Melbourne, AR

Overview
This study was conducted in the summer and fall of 1997 to determine if university career center registrants perceive traditional career services as helpful in securing employment following graduation. Past studies focused on the perceptions of career services providers, not service users, and the benefit or helpfulness of the career center as a whole. This study examined individual career services by surveying users. May 1997 bachelor degree graduates from Arkansas State University and fifteen similar institutions participated in the study.

Data indicated the extent of career services use by graduates, identified critical career services, and those most critical in acquiring employment following graduation. Analyses were conducted to determine if relationships existed between selected variables (registration status, gender, age, race, GPA, and academic area of study) and respondents' perceptions of the helpfulness of each career service. Finally, the predictions of career services professionals were compared with the perceptions of graduates to determine if the professionals could accurately predict how graduates view centers' services.

Methodology
A 22 item survey (12 career services - 10 other methods) was developed from 10 institutions' follow-up surveys and the five National Association of College and Employers (NACE) longitudinal surveys conducted over the past 22 years. Survey items instructed respondents to rate its helpfulness in acquiring employment following graduation according to a three choice scale - (1) No Help, (2) Helped Some, or (3) Was Critical in Getting a Job. Two thousand three hundred and forty (2,340) surveys were mailed, 2,256 delivered, 446 returned, and 354 were ultimately deemed usable.

Findings
"Career Services Use" indicated by respondents followed this order: attending the job fair, receiving resume help, using the career library, using career handouts, using job listings, referrals to employers, career counseling, on-campus interviews, credential/portfolio services, career workshops, career center computers, career center web site. "Critical Career Services or Other Methods of Acquiring Employment" were ordered as follows: applying directly to an employer, using family/friend contacts, former internship/job contact, newspaper ads, credential/portfolio services, faculty member referral, career center referral. "The Single Most Critical Career Service/Method" in respondents' job search success was ordered as follows: applying directly to an employer, receiving assistance from family/friend contacts, on-campus interviews, former internship/job contacts, receiving resume help, attending the job fair. Forty-two percent of respondents (42.1%) indicated a career service as most important in their job search success. Early and late seniors registrants in the career center rated the job fair more helpful than Graduate registrants. Age proved to be significant relative to participation in career center workshops - indicating as age increased so did workshop helpfulness. Choice of major was significant for Education majors relative to seven career services. Education majors considered these services more helpful than did Business and Arts & Sciences majors, respectively. Gender, race, and GPA were not significant factors in the study. The perceptions of directors were not related to the ratings of graduates concerning career services helpfulness.

Conclusions
The typical participant profile was a 22-year old, Caucasian, female, Education major with a 3.30 GPA who registered with the career center in the first semester of her senior year. Her foremost helpful methods of find employment were things she could do for herself - applying directly to an employer and using assistance from family or friends. She would have participated in the job fair, and sought assistance in generating her resume from career center staff. She ultimately would have acquired her job by applying directly to an employer - even after participating in on-campus interviews and the job fair. Findings suggest her student teaching internship could have been very helpful in acquiring employment.

Study findings corroborate past studies. The top methods of finding the first job were direct contact with employers, family & friends, then career services. Career Center services do help graduates acquire employment, as indicated by 6 of the top 10 most critical contributions to employment being career services. Contract employment agencies are not helpful to recent graduates - only 4.24% indicated these services were critical. Directors rated the helpfulness of career services different from graduates (9 of 12 were rated higher by directors).

The purpose of this study was to examine whether a relationship existed between situational and professional factors and strength of autonomy and whether those factors and motivational characteristics related to women's career choices. The external situational factors were compared with internal motivational factors which would lead women to make conscious, self-directed decisions about whether they would choose to move into administrative/leadership positions.

Survey data were collected from 962 administrators and faculty members currently employed by colleges and universities with enrollments of over 5,000 in fifty states. The data revealed that the most significant variables that impact women's career choices are years of experience in higher education, current position, tenure, and current age. The strength of autonomy demonstrated across positional titles indicated that women in higher education are strongly self-determining and made choices based on internal controls. Women in tenured positions were less likely than women in non-tenured positions to seek administrative leadership positions. Women with over fifteen years' experience in their current positions were less likely than women with less experience to seek administrative positions. Women over 56 years old were less likely than younger women to seek administrative positions.

The results supported the literature which indicated that women are tenured at much lower rates than men. However, the results failed to support related literature which indicated that marriage and family are incongruous with university expectations. The results also failed to support related literature which often presents academic women as victims of the patriarchal culture which exists at all levels of the university. By linking their intrinsic motivational orientations with their biographical dimensions, the date indicated that women in higher education are doing exactly what they want to do, and they are doing it because it brings them a balanced sense of challenge and accomplishment. Overwhelmingly, the women in this study were not driven by status and rewards (except in comparison to each other).

While women across academic positional lines were very much alike, their motivational styles were different. Women in mid-level administrative positions were more self-determining than women in executive or faculty positions. Women in faculty positions felt the least in control of their professional environment and were the women most influenced by status, power, and financial rewards. Since the majority of reported leadership positions were filled by women with over twenty years' experience in higher education, the findings of this study imply that locating capable women to fill administrative leadership vacancies will be increasingly difficult in the future.

Over the past several years, numerous leadership issues have emerged as efforts to reshape education have been engaged by those practicing in the field, as well as by those in institutions who primary function is to prepare leaders for the future. Traditional leadership paradigms have failed to keep pace with the demands of society, business, or the educational community (Lewis, 1987, Fullan, 1998).

A number of education related organizations have provided perspectives for effective administration intended to enhance the leadership ability of those in critical positions. Among such organizations is the Council of Chief School Officers (CCSSO). The CCSSO is a nationwide, nonprofit organization composed of public officials who head departments of education in the 50 states, the District of Columbia, and the Department of Defense. The Interstate School Leaders Licensure Consortium (ISLLC), organized by the CCSSO, was formed for the purpose of developing model standards and assessments for school leaders.

The consortium relied heavily on the linkage between educational leadership and productive schools, especially in terms of student outcomes. The consortium also reached educational and societal trends resulting in emerging views of leadership and standards that give meaning to those emerging views.

Only a few studies have been conducted recently to assess the value administrators place on standards that were developed to help define what school leader behaviors are necessary for successful leadership. In 1992, the state of Connecticut awarded a grant to the University of Connecticut to assess leadership descriptors relative to their beliefs, values, and day-to-day performance. The premise of the study rested on two basic assumptions: (1) teaching and learning is the fundamental mission of schools, and (2) the improvement of teaching and learning is never-ending. Another study by Johnson (1996) concluded that the responsibility of the superintendent was a teaching mission. The superintendent modeled a leadership style they believed would inspire others.

This study was conducted to determine the extent to which the qualities of leadership embodied in the ISLLC model standards were reflected in the value and the day-to-day performance of superintendents. The six model standards used in the study are found in the ISLLC publication, Standards for School Leaders (1996).

Data was collected from a random sample of 17 states from which more than 500 superintendents participated in the study. Respondents were asked to rate on a scale of 1-4 the value they placed on the standards and the extent to which they incorporated (used) the standards into their day-to-day performance.

Superintendents regarding the standards highly (mean of 3.70 on a scale of 1-4). The extent to which standards were incorporated into the day-to-day performance was significantly lower (mean of 3.37 on a scale of 1-4). Thus, the conclusion of the study suggest that although the respondents had high regard (value) for the standards, they tended to place them into their day-to-day performance at a lower rate.

The study also revealed that female administrators were more likely to place higher value on the standards than their male counterparts. However, there was no significant difference between male and female respondents with regard to incorporating the standards into their day-to-day performance.

Additionally, the study noted that superintendents with more experience and recent formal educational activity were most likely to place greater value on the standards than those with less experience and less recent educational activity. More experienced superintendents with recent formal educational activity were also more likely to incorporate the standards into their day-to-day performance.

The implications of this study include institutions engaged in preparation of educational leaders should examine their development and training programs to ensure that they are aligned with current knowledge and practice founded on research and successful practice. Secondly, leadership (administration) certification should be based on model standards that incorporate qualities that embody the critical elements of what leaders should know and are able to do. Finally, leadership preparation programs should develop viable extensions to their formal programs that assist leaders in incorporating effective practice into their day-to-day performance as administrators.

The purpose of this study was to determine if the level of participation in shared governance experienced by non-academic staff at public colleges and universities was related to the degree of organizational commitment they felt to these institutions. A second purpose was to determine if the existence of formal non-academic staff governance bodies was related to staff perceptions of increased participation in decision-making and organizational commitment when compared to informal systems. The study also considered whether the enrollment sizes of institutions were related either to staff participation in decision-making or to organizational commitment. Finally, the study investigated the relationship of personal demographic characteristics of age, gender, educational level achieved, and tenure to organizational commitment.

Participants responded to a national survey designed to measure the level of non-academic staff participation in shared governance from both formal and informal systems, to detect the existence of a formal non-academic staff governance body on campus, to measure the degree of non-academic staff commitment, and to garner personal demographic data. The study was survey research using the Organizational Commitment Questionnaire. An institutional response rate of 62.7% was achieved through the participation of non-academic staff from 50 stats and Guam who represented 267 of the 426 public institutions that were invited to participate in the study.

Findings indicate the level of participation in shared governance reported by non-academic staff was, on average, at the administrative primacy level. Non-academic staff reported that participation is shared governance resides primarily in three of a four zone continuum as follows: (1) administrative dominance 27.1%, (2) administrative primacy 43.7%, (3) shared authority 24.3%, and (4) staff primacy 4.9%. Results suggest that when administrative dominance and administrative primacy are considered together, university governance is, in effect, under the de facto control of career administrators at 70.8% of institutions in this study.

Survey results indicate that non-academic staff from institutions with more participatory governance systems tended to report significantly higher degrees of organizational commitment. Participation at the administrative dominance and administrative primacy levels was associated with the lowest scores on organizational commitment in the survey. Participation at the administrative dominance and administrative primacy levels was not significantly associated with total commitment. Participation at the shared authority level was found to be significantly related to higher degrees of organizational commitment. Benefits associated with higher degrees of commitment were employee identification with organizational values, a willingness to expend considerable effort on behalf of the organization, and the intent to remain a part of the organization.

Formal non-academic staff governance bodies were found at 77.7% of the institutions that participated in the study. Staff at institutions that had formal staff governance bodies reported participation with the upper interval limits of the administrative primacy level. Participation was reported in the lower interval limits of administrative primacy at institutions that did not have formal staff governance bodies. No significant difference was found in the degree of commitment between staff at institutions that have formal governance bodies and staff at institutions that did not have formal staff governance bodies. The personal demographic characteristics of survey respondents were found to have little to no effect upon organizational commitment. Difference in the enrollment sizes of institutions had little to no effect on either participation or organizational commitment.

The purpose of this study was to investigate the effects of participation in (social) problem-solving training by at-risk adolescents on self-perception of problem-solving skills, locus of control, and academic competency. Study participants were 14 and 15 years old, ninth and tenth graders in Arkansas State University's Youth Opportunity Unlimited (Y.O.U.) Program. The study used a pretest-posttest, control group-treatment group, experimental design. The treatment group (n=46) received problem-solving training based on D'Zurilla dn Goldfried's (1971) model as part of their evening enrichment classes. The treatment group had two one-hour sessions of problem-solving training per week for five weeks (total 515 minutes). They had reading and math practice the other evenings. The control group (n=40) participated in health, study skills, math practice, and reading for their enrichment activities. This research attempted to determine if participation in problem-solving training would improve treatment group members' self-perception of their problem-solving skills, results in a more internal locus of control, and influence their academic competency as assessed by SAT-9 Math, Reading, and Language scores and summer grade point average.

The importance of this study grows out of findings in the literature that the development of social problem-solving skills generalizes to academic related areas. Students who perceive themselves as being able to problem-solve tend to perform better in academic areas. Likewise students who have a more internal locus of control tend to perform better on academic measures.

Participants in this study were pretested and posttested on the SAT-9, Problem Solving Inventory for Adolescents (PSI-13F), and Nowicki-Strickland Locus of Control Scale for Children (CNSIE). The SAT-9 Math, Reading, and Language scores and summer grade point average were measures of academic competency. The PSI-13F was used to determine participant's perception of problem-solving skills. The PSI-13F was developed by Heppner and associates (Heppner & Baker, 1997). The PSI-13F has a fourth grade reading level which made it appropriate for this population. CNSIE developed by Nowicki and Strickland (1973) was used to assess locus of control. The CNSIE has been used extensively to measure locus of control in children and adolescents.

Analysis of Covariance was calculated with no significant differences between the control group and treatment group, except on SAT-9 Math scores. The treatment group scored significantly higher on posttest of SAT-9 Math than the control group when the premeasure was factored out. Several explanations might suggest why participation in problem-solving training resulted in improvement in math scores. The structure of the social problem-solving model (D'Zurilla and Goldfried, 1971) is readily adaptable to math. The elements include setting up the problem, getting all the relevant information, determining what process to use, doing the process, and evaluating the results. Additionally, the problem-solving training taught students how to approach problematic issues, such as negative feelings toward math, and how to develop a realistically positive approach. Likewise, learning how to approach problematic issues or feelings instead of avoiding them tends to lessen anxiety which could result in improved performance. Lessening anxiety and improving performance result in more confidence in dealing with the problematic issues or feelings.

Analysis of variance (two-way, race by gender) were calculated for self-perceived problem-solving skills, locus of control, and academic competency. Overall, there were several differences based on gender and race in regards to PreSAT-9 Math, Reading, PostSAT-9 Math, Reading, and Language. Generally speaking, females scored higher than males and White students scored higher than Black students on SAT-9 Math, Reading, and Language.

Follow-up independent t-tests and Analysis of Covariance were utilized to determine differences based on race for self-perceived problem-solving skill shown in ANOVA. The findings indicated that Black students' perceived themselves as significantly more effective problem-solvers than White students at pretesting. However posttesting indicated White students made significant gains in self-perception of problem-solving skills with the pretest factored out in comparison to Black students. An Analysis of Covariance (three way, group by gender by race) and follow-up independent t-tests demonstrated that White females in the treatment group made significant improvement in self-perceived problem-solving skills in comparison to White females in the control group.

Moderately significant negative relationships were noted between self-perceived problem-solving skills and academic competency and between locus of control and academic competency. Overall at posttesting, individuals who had better perceptions of their problem-solving ability scored higher on the academic competency area of SAT-9 Language than individuals with lower perceptions of their problem-solving ability. Likewise at posttesting, individuals with a more internal locus of control scores better on the academic competency area of SAT-9 Reading than individuals with a more external locus of control.

The findings of this study would support the notion that students can profit both socially and academically from participation in (social) problem-solving training. Problem-solving training could be incorporated into school based curricula on a regular basis. Gaines from participation in (social) problem-solving training could influence student performance and result in improved academic performance and learning.

The relationships between teacher empowerment and supervisory power bases in Arkanss secondary schools and two-year colleges were explored in this research project. Two questions were addressed. The primary question investigates the relationships between teachers' perceived level of empowerment and their perception of supervisors' use of power bases. A secondary question allows for a comparative analysis of power bases and teacher empowerment between the two types of institutions.

Two instruments combined into one format were used to gather data from participating teachers: the School Participant Empowerment Scale (SPES) (Short & Rinehart, 1992) and the Rahim Leader Power Inventory (RLPI) (Rahim, 1989). Since the instruments were adapted to conform to specific education institutions, both were slightly modified. These changes were primarily in the working of the questions. To determine the validity of the instrument, reliability coefficients were determined for each institution. The results of these tests indicated the overall alpha values of .95 for high schools and a .96 for colleges. The overall alpha values for the Rahim Leader Power Inventory were .87 for high schools and a .90 for colleges. The reliability coefficients suggested the instrument was valid.

The instrument was distributed to a statistically significant sample of high school teachers and two-year college teachers. The data collected were from 291 responding high school teachers, representing a fifty-seven percent return rate, and 46 college teachers, representing a fifty-six percent return rate.

The results of the primary question revealed that there was a significant relationship between empowerment and power bases in each institution. A canonical correlation to examine the association between power and empowerment for high school teachers yielded a correlation value 0.6363 and 0.8175 for two-year colleges. Examination of the mean scores for the six dimensions (autonomy, professional growth, self-efficacy, decision making, status, and impact) revealed that high school teachers believed they were empowered in all areas except decision making and college teachers were empowered in all dimensions. Further investigations of the mean scores regarding the five power bases (reward, referent, coercive, legitimate, and expert power), revealed that high school teachers believed their supervisors exhibited power in all dimensions except reward power. College teachers perceived that supervisors exhibited power in all five power bases.

A canonical correlation analysis was performed to identify and quantify the association between the two sets of variables (power bases and empowerment dimensions) and to measure the strength of association between the two sets of variables. The results of the first canonical analysis for high schools yielded a correlation value of 0.6804 for high schools and a value of 0.8175 for two-year colleges. Both institutions revealed strong relationships between the empowerment dimensions and power bases.

A discriminate analysis was performed to determine a pattern of relationships among variables that distinguish between the two types of institutions. The investigation revealed that the two institutions show a significant difference on two power bases and two empowerment variables. The two power bases were reward power and legitimate. High school teachers perceived their supervisors as having legitimate power but not reward power. College teachers believed their supervisors had reward power but not legitimate power. The two empowerment variables were decision making and impact. High school teachers perceived themselves as not having empowerment in the dimension of decision making but having impact. College teachers perceived they had empowerment in the area of decision making but not impact.

Daniel Cline, Professor
Ed.D. - Indiana University

Research Interests: Ethics in higher education, ethics in K-12 leadership, special education and disability law, the basis for discrepancies between legal mandates and local practice in special education law, how administrative structures and processes in school affect outcomes for teachers and students

Research Interests: applying family systems thinking to leadership in organizations, infusing "spirit" in the workplace through open space technology; changing organization culture through "dialogue".

Research Interests: School finance, school governance, desegregation programs, magnet schools and program evaluation

Research Interests: Education law

Research Interests: professional ethics and ethical reasoning.

Research Interests: multi-age, student achievement and testing

Research Interests: organization and governance, curriculum, and student achievement in higher education.

Students attending Arkansas State University enjoy one of the lowest tuition rates in the nation.  Graduate assistanships are available for those desiring to join the faculty for a full year of study in educational leadership.  The Center will provide a stipend of $12,527 per year for a 17-hour work week.  Financial assistance in the form of scholarships, loans and fellowships are also available.  The university participates in the Federal National Direct Student Loan Program, the Stafford Loan Program, and the Federal Supplement Loan for Students Program.  Out-of-state tuition may be waived under the Regional Attendance Policy or if the applicant is an alumnus of Arkansas State University.