![]() Correspondingly, this paper is organized in the following order per Creswell and Plano Clark (2018): (a) Quantitative Phase-data collection and analysis (b) Qualitative Phase-data collection and analysis (c) Results-Quantitative and Qualitative Phases (d) Discussion (e) Implications and Recommendations and (f) a Conclusion. The results of both phases were integrated to develop a more robust and meaningful snapshot of the pedagogical practices of leadership educators (see Table 1 for detailed information as well as the order of phases for the mixed methods sequential explanatory design procedures in the study). Integration (Creswell & Plano Clark, 2018) occurred during the interview protocol development process which was informed by the results from the initial quantitative phase with the aim of investigating survey results in more depth. A follow-up explanations variant of the sequential Explanatory mixed methods design (Creswell & Plano Clark, 2018) including a (a) survey of leadership educators to identify the frequency of use of instructional and assessment strategies, and (b) qualitative interviews with recommended “exemplary” leadership educators exploring their experiences teaching leadership were employed. Moreover, because of the interpretative nature of the qualitative research, the investigator may introduce his bias into the analysis of the findings. Due to the nature of qualitative research, the data obtained in the second phase of the study may be subject to different interpretations by different readers.This population does not include the thousands of student affairs professional who facilitates leadership learning in co-curricular contexts. This research included only leadership instructors who reported teaching an academic credit-bearing course within the last two years.The focus of this research was on the instructional strategy use of leadership educators in face-to-face modalities only.As a result, the diversity of participants included in the qualitative phase of this study do not fairly or accurately represent the diversity of leadership educators, nor is this group of participants in line with the diversity of the participants in the quantitative phase of this study. While a snowball sampling technique (Creswell & Poth, 2018) was used to identify potential participants for this study, none of the participants who were recommended to the researcher were people of color.The participants in the quantitative phase of this study were derived from an international sample where the participants in the qualitative phase of this study were from a U.S.-based sample only.The researcher cannot say with confidence the sample will be representative of the population. Equally, due to the funding available to the researcher, the qualitative phase of the study was limited to 13 leadership educators from four states and 11 universities, nine of which were associated with institutions in Ohio or Illinois.The quantitative phase of the study tapped into a select population of leadership studies instructors from specific professional association databases, listservs, and directories.Explore in-depth leadership educators’ pedagogical habits and decision-making processes.Identify the instructional and assessment strategies leadership educators use most, and.This study was proposed to examine specifically leadership educators’ experiences “doing” leadership education and further understand how they approach their craft. Only recently have scholars explored leadership educators’ journeys becoming and being leadership educators (Jenkins, 2019 Priest & Jenkins, 2019a) and the factors that shape their professional identities (Guthrie & Jenkins, 2018 Jenkins, 2019 Priest & Jenkins, 2019b Priest & Seemiller, 2018 Seemiller & Priest, 2015, 2017). For the more that is known about how leadership is taught, the more possibilities emerge for targeted and relevant leadership educator professional development programs and resulting student learning.Īdditionally, the literature related to the experiences of leadership educators, particularly through qualitative and mixed methods research designs, is scant. As the number of leadership programs surpasses 2,000 globally (ILA Program Directory, 2020), so does the need for scholars to study the pedagogical habits of leadership educators. Little is known about the instructional and assessment strategy choices of leadership educators in higher education outside of recently published quantitative studies (Jenkins 2012, 2013, 2016, 2018) and a review of the sources of learning in undergraduate leadership programs (Allen & Hartman, 2009 Eich, 2008 Zimmerman-Oster & Burkhardt, 1999). ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |