Leadership matters: preparation program quality and learning outcomes
| Published date | 08 April 2019 |
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1108/JEA-05-2018-0093 |
| Date | 08 April 2019 |
| Pages | 185-206 |
| Author | Yongmei Ni,Andrea K. Rorrer,Diana Pounder,Michelle Young,Susan Korach |
| Subject Matter | Education,Administration & policy in education,School administration/policy,Educational administration,Leadership in education |
Leadership matters: preparation
program quality and
learning outcomes
Yongmei Ni and Andrea K. Rorrer
Department of Educational Leadership and Policy,
University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah, USA
Diana Pounder
University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah, USA
Michelle Young
Curry School of Education,
University of Virginia, Charlottesville, Virginia, USA, and
Susan Korach
Department of Educational Leadership and Policy Studies,
University of Denver, Denver, Colorado, USA
Abstract
Purpose –Informed by learning transfer theory, the purpose of this paper is to validate the instrument
measuring educational leadership preparation program (LPP) quality attributes and graduates’leadership
learning and to assess the direct and indirect relationships among them, as reported by program graduates.
Design/methodology/approach –This study uses data collected from the 2016 INSPIRE-G Survey, which
gathers information from LPP graduates in the USA on their perceptions of program quality and leadership
learning. Structural equation modeling was used to determine which program quality factors directly and
indirectly influence graduate leadership learning.
Findings –The results suggest significant relationships between the assessed LPP attributes and leadership
learning. Faculty quality and program rigor and relevance (PRR) had the strongest association with
leadership learning, although the relationship between faculty quality and learning was fully mediated by
PRR. Internship experiences and peer relationships were also important predictors of leadership learning.
Studying with a cohort had a small but positive relationship withgraduates ’leadershiplearning, although the
relationship was fully mediated by perceived peer relationships.
Originality/value –This study further validates the INSPIRE-G Survey and affirms the imperative
role of leadership preparation as a predictor to graduate reported learning outcomes and learning
transfer. Moreover, this study illustrates the importance of leadership preparation by demonstrating
positive relationships between program quality features and reported leadership learning outcomes.
Finally, the INSPIRE-G instrument demonstrates its utility as a reliable measure of program quality,
which opens the door to large-scale and longitudinal studies of the transfer of learning from leader
preparation to practice.
Keywords Leadership development, Structural equation modeling, Leadership preparation,
Leadership learning outcomes, Program quality
Paper type Research paper
Introduction
Credentials and/or selection for a leadership role do not necessarily assure that someone is highly
qualified to lead, as arguably exemplified by recent political elections. The field of education,
similar to the societal context in which it is embedded, is experiencing an intensified demand for
highly qualified, high-quality leaders. After all, principal leadership is now recognized as
instrumental in ensuring overall school success and as a “driver”for school improvement
(Bryket al., 2010). Despite the fact that the principal’s significant, albeit indirect, effect on student
learning is also a commonly accepted as the second to teachers in influence on student outcomes
Journal of Educational
Administration
Vol. 57 No. 2, 2019
pp. 185-206
© Emerald PublishingLimited
0957-8234
DOI 10.1108/JEA-05-2018-0093
Received 25 May 2018
Revised 30 November 2018
25 January 2019
13 February 2019
Accepted 13 February 2019
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:
www.emeraldinsight.com/0957-8234.htm
185
Preparation
program
quality
(Hallinger, 2011; Hoy and Miskel, 2007; Leithwood et al., 2004), a focus on leadership preparation
and leader preparation evaluation remains largely neglected (Bush, 2018).
Though progress has been made on fortifying the belief that leadership matters, the
“what leaders need to know and be able to do,”“do they need formal training and
development,”and the “who should prepare principals and how”remain contested terrain.
Yet, in the midst of these debates over how leaders are prepared, demands for principals
who are “ready, day one”have amplified. Professional standards such as the Professional
Standards for Educational Leadership (PSEL) and National Educational Leadership
Preparation (NELP) standards (NPBEA, 2015, 2018) in the USA, the Australian
Professional Standard for Principals, and the Leadership Profiles and the National
Standards for Headteachers in England and the Standard for Headship in Scotland
(Cowie and Crawford, 2009), and even state-level rules and policies reflect this mounting
expectation. “Ready, day one”expectations inherently require leadership preparation
programs (LPPs), particularly, to demonstrate high standards of quality and
accountability and transparency with program effectiveness data, program outcome
data (e.g. changes in practice among graduates), if they are to be relied upon as
contributors to the pipeline of quality leaders who can produce positive student and
organizational outcomes.
To date, limited empirical evidence of the quality and effectiveness of LPPs to prepare
“ready, day one”leaders has existed (Orr and Barber, 2009; Ni et al., 2016). This paper
addresses that gap by expanding and deepening our understanding of the relationship
between selected LPP elements and learning outcomes as reported in the previous
Pounder and Orr (2007) and Orr (2011) studies. Utilizing structural equation modeling
(SEM) as the primary analytical tool and using the Initiative for Systemic Program
Improvement through Research in Educational (INSPIRE) Leadership Survey Suite,
this study was designed:
(1) to validate the instrument measuring educational LPP quality attributes and
graduates’leadership learning; and
(2) to assess the direct and indirect relationships among them, as perceived and
reported by program graduates from multiple LPPs nationally.
Our primary findings include the following:
(1) graduates who perceive high-quality program features report more leadership
knowledge and skill learning;
(2) the relationship between faculty quality and graduate learning is mediated through
program rigor and relevance (PRR);
(3) the relationship between cohort participation and learning is mediated through peer
relationships;
(4) program features, such as PRR and faculty quality, have stronger relationships with
reported graduate leadership learning than other features; and
(5) the INSPIRE-G survey confirmed strong reliability and validity in measuring
program features and learning outcomes, as reported by graduates.
Taken together, the current study deepens our understanding of the pivotal role of LPPs,
particularly the quality features (e.g. PRR, faculty and internship quality, cohort structure).
Moreover, this study demonstrates that the program features matter to the learning as
experienced by the graduates and this learning is an antecedent to the ability of graduates
to demonstrate success in practice. As such, this paper emphasizes that high-quality
leadership preparation is an essential step in building the capacity of school leaders,
186
JEA
57,2
To continue reading
Request your trial