Doctor of Education in Educational Leadership Program
Jan Ziegler - "These Japanese Eyes" A Study in Contradiction: Japanese American Internment Camp Schools at Rohwer and Jerome, ArkansasThe Leadership Team
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:
The doctoral knowledge core
includes 33 hours of coursework and 12 hours of dissertation. The program
combines flexibility with integrity in that graduate work from another
institution can be transferred in for the prerequisites leading up to the
doctoral block, but all EdD graduates from ASU will have experienced ASU's
unique and dynamic doctoral knowledge core.
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.
A cohort is a group of 10-12 students who are admitted into the doctoral program in the fall semester of each academic year. These students will begin the course work together, complete assigned projects and provide a support group for one another. The faculty believe that the cohort concept is the primary reason for the high percentage of students who complete the doctorate at ASU.
When Arkansas State University was asked to participate in the Beta-Testing of a training simulation being developed by the University Council of Educational Administration (UCEA), Cohort VII agreed to accept the challenge. On October 30, 1999, the Center for Excellence was invited to share the platform at the UCEA national convention with notable universities such as the University of Nebraska-Lincoln, University of Nevada-Las Vegas, Northern Illinois University and the Univeristy of Tennessee who were also actively involved inthe Beta-Test. Roger Lee and Philip Clark, two doctoral students, represented the Cohort with faculty representatives David Holman and George Foldesy. This experience culminated in a double session where the doctoral students presented suggestions for the improvement of the training modules.
Dissertation
Summaries
Please contact the Center for additional
information on the following dissertations:
The internment camp experience included a rather complex educational program designed to "indoctrinate" the students into the "principles of Democracy," to make of them "good American citizens," and ultimately, to scatter them and their families across the vastness of the American continent. It is this educational program, the school experience and what it entailed for its students and teachers, which is the focus of this qualitative dissertation.
The school experience at Rohwer and Jerome is examined in depth through primary and secondary documents written by students, teachers, administrators, members of the community, and officials of the War Relocation Authority, the civilian agency established to oversee the camps. Adding further depth are interviews with individuals personally connected to the experience. This dissertation focuses on the schools' physical components, philosophical undergirding, and curricular and operational issues, and the interaction of these with the local and national political climate and the mindset of the students and the teachers. The study consists of a thematic analysis of what emerge as ironies, paradoxes, and contradictions surrounding the educational experience, and concludes that the schools at Rohwer and Jerome feel far short of their goals in virtually every aspect. The implications of the camp schools' shortcomings are considered within the context of educational expectations in the new millennium.
Prior to this investigation, there was little recent empirical evidence identifying and describing factors affecting faculty members' decisions to seek grants or to engage in scholarly activity. In addition, there was little information on special incentives to enhance faculty research and development involvement.
Survey research was the method of data collection. Participants were 401 academic affairs administrators and 239 faculty members from institutions classified by the Carnegie Foundation as research universities, doctoral granting universities, and masters (comprehensive) universities. Variables included numerous measures of scholarly productivity, factors that are considered in merit, promotion and tenure decisions, and barriers and incentives that encourage or discourage scholarly activity.
A multiple regression analysis revealed that ten variables accounted for 45.7% of the change in faculty productivity. The strongest predictor is self ranking on research as a personal strength, accounting for 14.6% of the change in productivity levels; that is, as faculty rank themselves as stronger in research compared to teaching and service, there is a corresponding increase in productivity. Other variables that are positively correlated with increased productivity include: a lack of support for graduate students (8.3% of the change); pressure to write grants (4.3%); academic rank (4.1%); high quality faculty leaving the institution (2.6%); and the availability of the internal seed money to lay the foundation for external grants (2.4%).
Variables that are predictive of decreases in productivity include lack of preparation for grant writing (5.1%), heavy teaching loads (2.8%), and poor library resources (1.7%). As these factors become increasingly a problem in the work life of faculty, productivity declines. Gender is also a predictor of productivity; being female is associated with the reduced productivity (2.8%).
Another finding is that faculty and administrators disagree on what motivates or hinders faculty scholarship.
The study was needed to gather information that might assist facility administrators in serving the academic community in a more efficient and professional manner. By understanding that differences in perceptions of quality exist from one group to another, the facility administrators should better understand how to operate within those differences. This study may also offer the tools that will allow for a more cooperative style of management in the support areas of higher education.
Seven research questions were asked at the beginning of the study. Five of the questions dealt with individual aspects of facility departments. The sixth question dealt with the overall perceived service quality. The final question examined the conception that a relationship exists between length of service to an institutuion by academic department heads and their perceived service quality.
The academic chairs rated the service quality lower than did the facility management administrators. This was not unexpected; however, neither group rated any of the individual areas, or the overall quality, at a rate that exceeded what was expected. The perceptions of academic department heads indicated a need for better communication about scheduling, planning, and prioritizing. The study also indicated there appears to be no significant relationship between length of service at an institution by academic department heads and their perceived qualtiy of service by the faculty department.
In recent years there seems to be an increased interest by facility management to serve their customers in a better more economical way. The literature indicates that new methods of improvement are continually being introduced. The data gathered in this study tend to indicate improvement could be accomplished by better communications and a better understanding of the perceptions of the customer.
Students representing three cohorts of graduates from the Arkansas State University Physical Therapy Program (n=57) comprised a sample of convenience for this study. Using multiple regression for data analysis, non-cognitive variables proved to account for a greater degree of the variance in licensing examination scores than did cognitive variables. A combination of four of the domains from the NCQ-R offered the best prediction model. Interestingly, two of these four domains were inversely related to licensing examination scores.
Using the data, separate model policies were constructed for each of the areas of recruitment, retention, and mentoring of diverse faculty in colleges of education in higher education institutions. Those submitting information indicated the importance of Affirmative Action and Equal Employment Opportunity toward achieving diverse faculty. A separate policy addressing laws, policies, and procedures of Affirmative Action and Equal Employment Opportunity was formulated from information received.
The model polices were critiqued by individuals knowledgeable in diversity
of faculty in higher education. The reviewers have written many peer-reviewed
journal articles on the topics and some are connected with the Human Resource
and Administration department of the employing institutions.
The Center faculty have been actively involved in professional activities throughout the Delta region, the state of Arkansas and nationally. Our professors have published articles, presented papers at national conferences and authored grants. Faculty members have worked with school districts on issues related to desegregation plans, middle school student mentoring progrmas, facilitating curriculum revision, program evaluation, magnate schools and a host of other projects. Professors have committed to coaching in the Arkansas Leadership Academy, the Arkansas Principals Institute and have participated in numerous accreditation visits under the auspices of North Central Association and the Arkansas Department of Education.
Center faculty are as follows:
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
David
Cox, Professor Research Interests: applying family systems thinking to leadership in organizations, infusing "spirit" in the workplace through open space technology; changing organization culture through "dialogue".
Gerald
Dickinson, Professor Research Interests: School finance, school governance, desegregation programs, magnet schools and program evaluation
George
Foldesy, Director of the Center for Excellence in Education and Professor
Research Interests: Education law
Mitchell
Holifield, Chair of Educational Administration & Secondary Education
and Professor Research Interests: professional ethics and ethical reasoning.
David
Holman, Professor Research Interests: multi-age, student achievement and testing
Mitchell
Masters, Coordinator of Community College Teaching Program and Professor
Research Interests: organization and governance, curriculum, and student achievement in higher education.
Hope
Phillips, Support Staff
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 $13,274 per year for a 20-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.
Application
Guidelines
Dr. Eugene W. Smith Research
Fellowship
Critera for the Fellowship
The Foundation shall designate and identify the endowment fund as the Dr. Eugene W. Smith Research Fellowship at Arkansas State University with the purpose of the fund being to assist deserving students who are pursuing a doctoral degree in educational leadership at Arkansas State University.
Application Process
Conditions
Fall Assistant Principals' Institute
The College of Education and the Center for Excellence in Education hosted a Fall Assistant Principals' Institute. In addition to the College and the Center, the institute was funded by the Department of Educational Administration and Secondary Education and North Central Association. Their contributions allowed the participants to attend free of cost. The day long even included several presentations, lunch and a book written by Michael Fullen titled "What's Worth Fighting For In the Principalship."
Topics and presenters included:
Plans are now being made for next years institute. If you are interested in attending the Fall 2001 session, watch for your mail or call us at (870)972-3943.
At ASU we learned skills and made friendships that will last a lifetime. Those experiences and memories are ones we don't want to forget. The ASU Alumni Association provides the avenue to maintain ties and strengthen our commitment to our alma mater, as well as receive benefits available only to association members. A portion of all membership dues is returned to your degree college. To join or contact the Office of Alumni Relations, 1-888-225-8343, or visit the alumni webpage at http://alumni.astate.edu.
revised: May 21, 2001