U2A1 & U2D1 - Advanced Searching Teachniques - please follow all instructions and read all attached documents. Due Sunday by 9pm. CST. My Field is Public Service Leadership

Article6-AnevaluationoftheFloridadivisionofcommunitycollegesandworkforceeducationChancellorsLeadershipSeminar-Aphenomenologicalstudy.pdf

Home >Business & Finance homework help >Operations Management homework help >U2A1 & U2D1 - Advanced Searching Teachniques - please follow all instructions and read all attached documents. Due Sunday by 9pm. CST. My Field is Public Service Leadership

AN EVALUATION OF THE FLORIDA

DIVISION OF COMMUNITY COLLEGES AND WORKFORCE EDUCATION

CHANCELLOR’S LEADERSHIP SEMINAR:

A PHENOMENOLOGICAL STUDY

Joni F. Oglesby

RENA M. PALLOFF, Ph.D., Faculty Mentor and Chair

JEROME HALVERSON, Ph.D., Committee Member

KEITH PRATT, Ph.D., Committee Member

Harry McLenighan, Ed.D., Dean, School of Education

A Dissertation Presented in Partial Fulfillment

Of the Requirements for the Degree

Doctor of Philosophy

Capella University

December 2008

3339025

3339025 2008

Abstract

As a result of reports of an impending leadership crisis among America’s community

colleges (Shults, 2001; Kelly, 2002) many community colleges implemented leadership

development programs between the late 1990s and early 2000s giving birth to a number of

program completers who have attained senior administrative positions including the presidency.

This phenomenological study reviewed the lived experiences of participants who

completed one of the annual Chancellor’s Leadership Seminars (CLS), a program implemented

for the purpose of developing future community college presidents in Florida. The study sought

direct feedback from past CLS participants regarding the relevance and efficacy of the CLS to

their actual feeling of being prepared to respond to the responsibilities of their new positions.

Forty-four individuals responded to the calls for participants. Of the forty-four, seven

respondents had been promoted after completing the Chancellor’s Leadership Seminar thereby

meeting the criteria for inclusion in the study. The seven participants completed a questionnaire

and a survey. Additionally, four of the seven participants also consented to participating in a

telephone interview.

Business, industry, and education are all facing many challenges. As such, future

community college presidents must be well-versed in issues relating to funding, demographics,

technology, society, the economy, as well as the importance of accountability and ethical

leadership.

Past Chancellor’s Leadership Seminars have been effective but, according to past

participants, could have been more effective.

iii

Dedication

This dissertation is dedicated to my parents for their encouragement, support, discipline,

love, and respect. Dorothy, J.D., and Fay, you are the most awesome parents!

Gary and David, my beloved children – I am blessed to be your mother! This dissertation

is dedicated to you too. Please follow in my footsteps!

Jalanda Hudson, I dedicate this dissertation to you too and I encourage you to “Bee” all

you can be!

And finally, this dissertation is dedicated to my husband, Jerry. Thank you for pushing

me, for being there through the ups and downs, and for the many dinners you “cooked.” Mostly,

thank you for your never-ending, never-wavering love!

Acknowledgments

Thank you to my family all over the world. Many kept in touch, constantly providing

encouragement and countless prayers. Thank you to my friends who I have neglected much too

often while in pursuit of this dream. And thank you to the many coworkers over the years who

thought I couldn’t talk about anything else but this dissertation!

Thank you to my husband who “saved the computer” while the roof was being ripped off

during Hurricane Jeanne! Thanks also to the many people who helped put my life back together

after the hurricane: Gene and Laurie; Jalanda, Isaac, and Aaron; Melinda and John; Bernadette

and Calvin; Winifred Greer; and countless others who provided their physical and emotional

support. Thank you to the many people who so graciously participated in this study. With all of

the starts and stops, yours was a “study” in perseverance.

And speaking of perseverance, my advisor and dissertation committee members are the

definition of the word! Jon Gehrz has been an outstanding advisor. Thank you for always being

there when I needed you (whether I knew it or not)! To my committee members: I knew when I

met each of you that you were the right people for my committee. This has been a very long

journey and I am so grateful that you have stayed with me through the process. Thank you Dr.

Keith Pratt and Dr. Jerome Halverson for your recommendations, suggestions, and fabulous

support! And this accomplishment could not have been possible without the guidance,

encouragement, and support of Dr. Rena Palloff who was sent from God to be the perfect

committee chairperson for me. Dr. Palloff, I write this with tears in my eyes. I cannot thank you

enough!

Table of Contents

Acknowledgments iv

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION 1

Introduction to the Problem 1

Background of the Study 3

Statement of the Problem 6

Purpose of the Study 8

Rationale 8

Research Questions 9

Significance of the Study 9

Definition of Terms 10

Assumptions and Limitations 12

Nature of the Study or Theoretical/Conceptual Framework 14

Organization of the Remainder of the Study 17

CHAPTER 2: REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE 18

Introduction 18

Loss of Human and Intellectual Capital 18

Future Community College Factors 20

Succession Planning and Leadership Development 32

CHAPTER 3: METHODOLOGY 43

Introduction 43

Qualitative Research/Phenomenological Design 43

Population Selection, Data Collection and Analysis 45

Data Collection Process and Data Analysis 49

Ethical Issues 51

CHAPTER 4: DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS 53

Introduction 53

Data Gathering 53

Analysis 57

Participation Responses 58

Part 1 of the Survey 58

Part 2 of the Survey 63

Telephone Interviews 75

Themes 80

Summary 84

CHAPTER 5: RESULTS, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS 86

Introduction 86

Results and Conclusions 87

Limitations of the Study 90

Recommendations 92

vii

Summary 94

REFERENCES 96

APPENDIX A

Questionnaire of Past Participants of the Division of

Community Colleges and Workforce Educations Chancellor’s

Leadership Seminar 107

APPENDIX B

Draft Survey of Past Participants of the Division of

Community Colleges and Workforce Educations Chancellor’s

Leadership Seminar 108

APPENDIX C

Telephone Interview Questions for Past Participants of the

Division of Community Colleges and Workforce Educations

Chancellor’s Leadership Seminar 112

CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION

Introduction to the Problem

Significant emphasis has been placed on determining the content of a leadership

development program so that participants will be successful community college senior

administrators (American Association of Community Colleges, 2007a). As a result of reports of

an impending leadership crisis among America’s community colleges (Shults, 2001; Kelly,

2002) many community colleges implemented leadership development programs between the

late 1990s and early 2000s giving birth to a number of program completers who have attained

senior administrative positions including the presidency. Numerous programs have been

developed at the district, state, and national level to prepare future community college presidents

and administrators. According to George Boggs, president of the American Association of

Community Colleges,

Opportunities must be provided to encourage even more of our best people to prepare for

positions of leadership. Mechanisms must be put in place to develop these potential

leaders – leaders who are not afraid of change but who also embrace the community

college mission and values. Future leaders must exhibit a passion for what out colleges

do to help students make their dreams come true. (2002, p. vii)

Leadership development programs aimed at addressing the critical shortage of qualified

future community college leaders range from in-house programs to national programs. In-house

leadership development programs are undoubtedly as diverse as the institutions that develop

them.

Sharples and Carroll (2002) advise that leadership development program curriculum

should include both learning activities and structured teaching. Some programs are offered as

part of a formal program culminating in a degree centered on community college leadership.

Other programs are offered in the form of institutes, workshops, seminars, or conferences. These

other programs are often sponsored by professional organizations, associations, or individual

colleges and universities and are usually offered on a noncredit or non-degree-seeking basis

(Council for the Study of Community Colleges, 2007).

There are many university-provided formal leadership development programs that are

designed to prepare students for community college leadership. These programs include

leadership training for current community college administrators as well as degree-granting

programs that are researched based for scholars in the field. Programs range from those that are

part of a general education curriculum to those that specific to community college leadership

(Council for the Study of Community Colleges, 2007).

It is not atypical for participants to be asked to complete feedback forms at the end of

sessions, seminars, or conferences (Kirkpatrick, 1984). Kirkpatrick (1984) has termed these end-

of-program evaluations as reactive. They gauge the reaction of the participants immediately

after completing the program. Additional and more meaningful data can be studied from follow-

up or post-program evaluations completed after participants have assumed new positions and had

time to reflect on the impact of the leadership development programs on their job performance

and success levels. Kirkpatrick presents four levels of evaluation which if followed, will enable

program developers and researchers to determine if learning objectives have been met and to

judge the efficacy of those objectives.

This study reviewed the lived experiences of participants who completed one of the

annual Florida Division of Community Colleges and Workforce Education Chancellor’s

Leadership Seminars (CLS) and who have been promoted into senior administrative positions

within the same institution in which they were employed prior to participating in the CLS. The

study also sought direct feedback on the relevance and efficacy of the CLS to their actual feeling

of being prepared to respond to the responsibilities of their new positions. The study looked for

commonalities and differences for the purpose of identifying barriers and contributors to success

for those who completed the CLS, and were promoted to a senior administrative position within

the same institution in which they were employed prior to participating in the CLS.

Background of the Study

President Truman convened the Commission for Higher Education in 1947

recommending the establishment of public, postsecondary institutions. These institutions were

to be called community colleges. The Commission released a report that called for an end to

barriers to higher education based on race, gender, income, geographic location, and religion

(Witt, Wattenbarger, Gollattschek, & Suppiger, 1994; Harris, 2002; Cohen & Brawer, 2003).

Conceived as an extension of the public school systems, community colleges – a new type of

postsecondary institution – were to focus on the educational deficiencies of high school

graduates who had aspirations of completing a 4-year degree but who were under-prepared or

economically disadvantaged (Cohen & Brawer, 2003; Yarrington, 1969). Scholars acknowledge

the long road community colleges have traveled from the vision of President Truman in 1947 to

today (Cohen & Brawer, 2003; Vaughn, 2000).

Modern day community colleges are the principal point of entry into higher education for

under-represented minorities, low-income youth, and immigrants (Koltai, 1983; Quigley &

Bailey, 2003). Community colleges of today are a notable part of society, providing low cost,

high quality postsecondary education for a wide range of people including graduating high

school seniors, first-time-in-college students, working adults, and senior citizens.

Distinctive among American higher education systems, community colleges respond in

many ways to the needs of their communities. Many American community colleges are now

comprehensive community colleges. These comprehensive community colleges offer more than

certificates and associate degrees. They provide well-rounded student development and activity

programs. Comprehensive community colleges also meet many of the needs of their

communities for job training, skills development, and enhancement. They provide continuing

education for professionals as well as lifelong learning opportunities to the general public. Many

also provide the venue for arts and entertainment (Cohen & Brawer, 2003; Florida Statutes,

2006; Yarrington, 1969). Community colleges are responsive, innovative, resourceful, and

flexible (Boggs, 2002).

In 1957 at their spring legislative session, the Florida Legislature called for the

establishment of a statewide network of public junior and community colleges (Witt et al., 1994;

Yarrington, 1969). Over time, the network has metamorphosed from a few school board-

governed junior colleges to the system in place today which includes 28 local board-governed

self-governing comprehensive community colleges (Witt et al., 1994; Albertson, 2002; Albertson

& Wattenbarger, 1998).

The community colleges were strategically located within commuting distance of 99% of

the Florida’s population (Florida Statutes, 2006; Florida Department of Education, 2007b,

2007c). Many Florida community colleges opened in local high schools or temporary facilities.

With limited resources, they relied on high school teachers and/or adjunct faculty to provide

instruction (Albertson & Wattenbarger, 1998).

The evolution of the Florida Community College System is noteworthy. The System is

supported by the Division of Community Colleges and Workforce Education. The System now

offers over 750 associate in arts and associate in science degrees as well as over 500 certificate

programs (Albertson & Wattenbarger, 1998). In the early 1990s, the Florida legislature

approved the addition of workforce development as an integral component of Florida community

colleges (Albertson, 2002; Witt et al., 1994). In 2001, St. Petersburg Junior College was

authorized to offer a limited baccalaureate degree program, changing its name to St. Petersburg

College. Other colleges were granted approval to offer limited baccalaureate degree programs

including Chipola Junior College in 2003, Miami-Dade Community College in 2003, Okaloosa-

Walton Community College in 2004, and Edison Community College in 2005. Each of these

colleges also dropped “junior” or “community” from their names (Florida Community Colleges,

2005).

The future of the Florida Community College System is sure to be as dynamic as it’s

past. The future of the System will include increased enrollment and program expansion. Future

community college leaders will face these and many other challenges and opportunities. Since

2000, The Florida Community College System has been preparing future leaders to address the

significant increase in the K-12 population between 2002 and 2006 (Florida Department of

Education, 2006) which will impact Florida community college enrollment over the next 10

years. Future leaders will also encounter economic and workforce development, technological

advances, social and cultural shifts, and intensified scrutiny of citizens and organizations

interested in accountability and return on investment (Desjardins & Huff, 2001; Rouche, Baker,

& Rose, 2002; Witt et al., 1994; Vaughn & Weisman, 1998; Ross & Green, 2000; Patton, 2004;

Little, 2002; Collis, 2004; Kezar & Eckel, 2004; Alfred, 2001/02). The Florida Division of

Community Colleges and Workforce Education established the Chancellor’s Leadership

Seminar, an annual 3-day seminar for the purpose of preparing the “best and brightest to be

poised and ready to navigate the future challenges and opportunities” they will encounter as

senior administrators and presidents within the Florida Community College System (Florida

Department of Education, 2007d).

Statement of the Problem

After extended careers, the pioneers of the Florida community college system are retiring

(Campbell & Kachik, 2002; Katsinas & Kempner, 2005). In the next five to seven years, and

possibly for years to come, a potentially devastating number of community college presidents

and senior administrators in Florida and across the nation are planning to retire (Shults, 2001;

Little, 2002; Kelly, 2002; Boggs, 2002; Campbell & Kachik, 2002; Katsinas & Kempner, 2005;

Weisman & Vaughn, 2002). There are approximately 1,200 community colleges in the United

States. If, according to a survey by the American Association of Community Colleges in 2001,

nearly half of community college presidents (600) plan to retire no later than 2007 and one fourth

or more of their senior administrators (approximately 900) planned to retire within the same

timeframe, approximately 1,500 new leaders are needed immediately (O’Banion & Kaplan,

2003). As a result of current and impending retirements of presidents and senior administrators,

community colleges are being challenged with the loss of administrative leadership and

knowledge (Belcher & Montgomery, 2002; Shults, 2001).

Current community college leaders, as well as those of tomorrow will be expected to

address constant technological advances, demographic shifts, and dynamic societal trends (Eddy,

Murphy, Spaulding, & Chandras, 1997; Collis, 2004; Alfred 2001/2002; Romano, 2001; Cohen

& Brawer, 2003; Evelyn, 2004; Bollag, 1998). To combat the potentially devastating loss of

senior administrators, many community colleges have implemented strategic and succession

plans that include the implementation of senior level and executive professional development

programs to ‘grow their own’ administrators (Carroll, 2004). According to Kirkpatrick (1984),

evaluations must go beyond attaining participants’ reactions immediately after completing their

professional development programs; however many organizations do not do so due to time or

budget constraints.

To garner a learning-centered determination of the effectiveness of a leadership

development program, evaluators must learn from program completers which aspects of the

programs proved effective during their first year after promotion to a senior level position. There

have been no long-range follow up studies to review and evaluate the effectiveness of the Florida

Division of Community Colleges and Workforce Education Chancellor’s Leadership Seminars.

Purpose of the Study

Conversations with Chief Human Resources Officers within the Florida Community

College System as well as the Florida Division of Community Colleges and Workforce

Education Chancellor’s staff revealed that there have been no formal long-range follow-up

studies to review and evaluate the effectiveness of Chancellor’s Leadership Seminars (CLS).

The purpose of this study was to review the effectiveness of the CLS in the Florida Community

College System from the perspectives of program participants who had been promoted into or

have changed leadership positions within their same institutions and who had been in their new

positions for at least one year. In this study, the researcher sought to identify the barriers and

contributors to program completers’ success during their first year in their new positions. The

researcher also sought recommendations for components to be added or deleted in future CLS

offerings.

Rationale

Meaningful and useful data can be studied from follow-up or post-program evaluations

completed after participants have assumed new positions and had time to reflect on the impact of

the CLS on their job performance and success levels. Kirkpatrick (1984) presents four levels of

evaluation which if followed, will enable program developers and researchers to determine if

learning objectives have been met and to judge the efficacy of those objectives.

The effectiveness of leadership development programs must be evaluated to determine if

the results met the goals and objectives, what aspects of the programs were irrelevant, and what

topics were neglected. This information will enable researchers and future program developers

to gain insight into more effective objectives for future programs as well as the topics of study to

include in them (Kirkpatrick, 1984; Royse, Thyer, Padgett, & Logan, 2005; Sanders & The Joint

Committee on Standards for Educational Evaluation, 1994).

Research Questions

To achieve the objectives of the study, the following research questions were asked:

1. What issues that were addressed in the CLS had the most impact on the success of

program completers who are Florida Community College System senior

administrators?

2. What issues during their participation were barriers to the success of CLS

completers who are Florida Community College System senior administrators?

3. What do CLS completers who are Florida Community College System senior

administrators recommend to improve future programs?

Significance of the Study

The importance of community colleges is well documented in the literature (Vaughn,

2000; Cohen & Brawer, 2003; Koltai, 1983; Gleazer, 2000). Florida community college leaders

must be well prepared to address the diversity of needs and the dynamic nature of Florida’s

community college system. Individual Florida community colleges will as part of a statewide

system face common challenges and must prepare tomorrow’s leaders to successfully address

those challenges.

This study is significant in that it examined the experiences of Florida Community

College System senior administrators who had completed the Chancellor’s Leadership Seminars

and were subsequently promoted within the same institution in which they were employed prior

to completing the CLS. Participants must have been in their new positions for at least one year.

The researcher will sought to identify aspects of the CLS that effectively prepared participants

for senior level administrative positions as well as aspects that provided barriers to success.

Indirectly, the study may also influence professional development programs at all levels of the

community college.

Definition of Terms

Association of Community Colleges (AACC): The American Association of Community

Colleges (AACC) is the principal advocacy organization for the nation's community colleges.

The Association represents over 1,100 associate degree-granting institutions and approximately

10 million students.

Association of Community College Trustees (ACCT): The Association of Community

College Trustees (ACCT) is a non-profit educational organization of governing boards,

representing over 6,500 elected and appointed trustees who govern more than 1,200 community,

technical, and junior colleges in the United States, Canada, and England.

Chief Human Resources Officers: The chief human resource officers are the senior

ranking human resources professional at each of the twenty-eight public Florida community

colleges.

Effective leadership: Effective leadership is defined as being able to meet the challenges

of community college leadership in a senior administrative position of a community college.

Effective leadership development: Effective leadership development is defined as that

which adequately prepares leadership development program participants with the knowledge,

skills, and abilities to face the leadership requirements of today’s and tomorrow’s community

college.

Florida Association of Community Colleges (FACC): The Florida Association of

Community Colleges is the professional Association of Florida’s 28 public community colleges,

their boards, employees, retirees, and associates. FACC divides the 28 public community

colleges into five geographic regions. Region 1 includes the Florida Panhandle which includes

all of Northwest Florida. Region 2 includes North Florida, centering on the city of Jacksonville.

Region 3 includes Central Florida, centering on the city of Orlando. Region 4 includes the

Florida West Coast centering on the city of Tampa. Region 5 includes South Florida centering

on the city of Miami. FACC promotes, represents, supports, and serves the individual members

and institutions in their endeavors to provide students and citizens of Florida with an excellent

comprehensive community college educational system.

Florida Community College System (FCCS): The Florida Community College System is

comprised of the 28 locally-governed public community colleges in the State of Florida.

Program evaluation: Program evaluation is defined as determining the value of

professional development programs as it (the value) pertains to the performance of program

participants.

Program participants: Program participants are individuals identified for inclusion in

leadership development programs to prepare them for senior administrative positions within a

Florida community college.

Senior administrative position: A senior administrative position is defined as a Florida

community college position with the title and responsibilities of Dean, Director,

Associate/Assistant Vice President, Vice President, Executive Vice President, or President.

Success: Success is defined as the belief that one is adequately prepared for a Florida

community college senior administrative position as a result of his/her participation in a

leadership development program.

Assumptions and Limitations

The assumptions in this study include:

1. Senior administrators in Florida community colleges who have been participants in the

Chancellor’s Leadership Seminars and subsequently promoted to a senior administrative

position are qualified to determine the effectiveness of the programs.

2. Surveys and interviews with senior administrators in Florida community colleges who

have completed the Chancellor’s Leadership Seminars and were subsequently promoted

to a senior administrative position are valid and reliable methodologies for collecting data

for the study.

3. Participant responses to the surveys and interviews are an accurate representation of their

true beliefs and experiences.

4. The lived experiences of Florida Community College System senior administrators who

have completed a Chancellor’s Leadership Seminar can provide information for

improving future Chancellor’s Leadership Seminar programs.

5. Leadership development programs that include input from the perspectives of Florida

Community College System senior administrators who have completed the Chancellor’s

Leadership Seminar can produce leaders who will effectively be able to address the

current and future needs of the community college.

The limitations in this study include:

1. This study is limited to the participants of the Florida Division of Community

Colleges and Workforce Education Chancellor’s Leadership Seminars.

2. The population for the study will only include Florida Community College System

senior administrators from the 28 Florida public community colleges who completed

a Chancellor’s Leadership Seminar, were subsequently promoted to a senior

administrative position within their same college, and who had been in their new

positions for at least one year; hence, the findings from this study may not be able to

be generalized to community colleges outside of the state of Florida.

3. Not all of the people who volunteered to participate in the study met all criteria for

inclusion hence some pertinent information may not have been included in the

findings of this study.

4. The design of the study did not allow for the measurement of changes in perceptions

over time or for the establishment of causal relationships.

5. This study may not be able to be generalized to individual Florida community

colleges leadership development programs because each institution has unique

internal and external institutional and leadership needs.

6. The study researcher completed leadership development programs and was promoted

to a senior administrative position and may have introduced personal bias to the

study.

Nature of the Study, or Theoretical/Conceptual Framework

This study employed qualitative research, specifically utilizing phenomenology. “[The]

essence of qualitative inquiry is paying attention, being open to what the world has to show us,

and thinking about what it means” (Patton, 1990, p. 140). Organizational and compositional

creativity is acceptable in qualitative research (Langenbach, Vaughn, & Aagaard, 1994). The

acceptability of creativity is beneficial in that it allowed the researcher to be more fluid in her

interviewing and follow-up questioning. Qualitative study provides “in-depth descriptions of

unique settings and people” (Gay & Airasian, 2003, p. 21). Strauss & Corbin (1998) describe

qualitative study as a “nonmathematical process of interpretation, carried out for the purpose of

discovering concepts and relationships in raw data and then organizing these into a theoretical

explanatory scheme” (p.11). It is this theoretical explanatory scheme that will enable future

community college leadership development program designers to create programs that will

provide more useful and effective preparation for future community college leaders.

This study used the qualitative methodology of phenomenological research.

Phenomenology, meeting the above-stated criteria, is “the study of the world as it appears to the

individuals when they place themselves in a state of consciousness that reflects an effort to be

free of everyday biases and beliefs” (Gall, Gall, & Borg, 2003, p.481). Phenomenology denies

the existence of a dichotomy between person and object and thus validates the importance of the

experience of the individual (Rudestam & Newton, 2001). Phenomenology using open-ended

queries and follow-up questions is an appropriate methodology to penetrate the depth and detail

of the experience of leadership development program participants (Gay & Airasian, 2003;

Patton, 1990). According to Patton, “understanding emerges most meaningfully from an

inductive analysis of open-ended, detailed, descriptive, and quotational data gathered through

direct contact…” (1990, p. 119). The study participants were asked to provide detailed and

descriptive responses to open-ended questions regarding the efficacy of the Florida Division of

Community Colleges and Workforce Education Chancellor’s Leadership Seminar they

completed. Evaluating the Chancellor’s Leadership Seminar utilized by the Florida Division of

Community Colleges and Workforce Education lends itself to a phenomenological study. The

study participants were asked to pay attention – reflect on the Chancellor’s Leadership Seminar

they completed, see what that reflection showed them, and really think – meditate on the

meanings therein as they perceived them.

To date, except for a “Participant’s Evaluation Form,” completed either at the end of

individual sessions or at the conclusion of the entire development program, no formal reflection

or evaluation of efficacy of leadership development programs has been conducted. According to

Patton (1997), program evaluation is:

The systematic collection of information about the activities, characteristics and

outcomes of programs to make judgments about the program, improve program

effectiveness, and/or inform decisions about future programming. (p. 23)

The researcher submits that the true determination of efficacy of the CLS will come from

the participants themselves who have been promoted to leadership positions and have had the

opportunity to reflect on their past CLS participation as it pertains to their new roles. To address

the apparent lack of leadership development program evaluation, the researcher will provided a

survey instrument to volunteer participants who were asked to reveal their perceptions of their

experiences as they related to the CLS they completed and its pertinence to the positions in

which they had subsequently been promoted. The researcher planned to subsequently select and

interview by telephone five study participants who would be asked more in-depth questions as

follow-up and deeper reflections to the survey.

On June 19, 2007, the researcher telephoned the Office of the Chancellor at the Florida

Division of Community Colleges and Workforce Education to inquire as to who would be the

appropriate person or office to submit a request for permission to use the Chancellor’s

Leadership Seminar in the study. In a telephone conversation with Ms. Brooke Hobbs,

Communications Director with the Florida Division of Community Colleges, the researcher

explained the purpose of the study. Ms. Hobbs informed the researcher that the Chancellor’s

Office would support the study. On June 21, 2007, Chancellor David Armstrong sent an email to

past Chancellor’s Leadership Seminar participants informing them of the study and encouraging

them to contact the researcher if they wished to volunteer to participate. Thirty past Chancellor’s

Leadership Seminar participants immediately contacted the researcher to volunteer to participate

in the study.

A phenomenological study – studying the lived experiences of people who have

completed the CLS and who were promoted to a senior administrative position within the same

institution in which they were employed prior to participating in the CLS was analyzed to

discern what aspects of their experiences proved beneficial or detrimental in preparing them for

the positions they subsequently held.

Organization of the Remainder of the Study

This study is divided into five chapters. Chapter 1 is the introduction to the study

including the background to the study, statement of the problem, purpose of the study, rationale

for the study, research questions, significance of the study, definition of terms, assumptions and

limitations, nature of the study, and the organization of the study. The literature review is found

in Chapter 2. Relevant research regarding the community college leadership shortage,

succession and leadership development planning, competencies of future community college

leaders, program evaluation, and phenomenology as a methodology is cited. Chapter 3 outlines

the research methodology. Data collection and analysis comprises Chapter 4. Chapter 5

includes results and conclusions from the study as well as the researcher’s recommendations for

further review and research.

CHAPTER 2. LITERATURE REVIEW

Introduction

In this chapter, issues associated with the loss of human and intellectual capital, future

community college factors, succession planning and leadership development, the evaluation of

leadership development programs and the significance of reviewing the lived experiences of

leadership development program participants will be reviewed.

Loss of Human and Intellectual Capital

Twenty percent of the best known companies in the United States may lose 40% of their

senior executives to retirement at any time (Caudron, 1999). According to Rothwell (2005),

there will be more job openings in the United States, as many as 62%, as a result of people

retiring or leaving for other reasons than there will be as a result of economic growth. These

massive retirements are also occurring in community colleges.

After extended careers, the pioneers of the Florida community college system are retiring

(Campbell & Kachik, 2002; Katsinas & Kempner, 2005). In the next five to seven years, a

potentially devastating number of community college presidents and senior administrators in

Florida and across the nation are planning to retire (Shults, 2001; Little, 2002; Kelly, 2002;

Boggs, 2002; Campbell & Kachik, 2002; Katsinas & Kempner, 2005; Weisman & Vaughn,

2002). American Association of Community Colleges surveys revealed that thirty-four percent

of the presidents who responded said that they had been internal candidates for their first

presidencies. Twenty-seven percent reported moving into their current presidency from a

previous presidency. The large number of retirements along with the percentages of current

presidents accepting other presidential openings suggests that community colleges need to look

to senior administrators as the next generation of presidents.

Senior administrators often make up the applicant pools for presidential openings.

American Association of Community Colleges surveys revealed that the conventional pathway

to the presidency was through the academic ranks with over 55% of presidents listing their most

recent pre-presidential position as being an academic administrator (Amey & VanDerLinden,

2002; Weisman & Vaughn, 2002). The surveys listed the most common non-administrative pre-

presidential positions as chief student development officer (7%), campus provost or campus

president (6%), and chief business officer (4%). O’Banion & Kaplan (2003) report that thirty-

three percent of presidents estimate that one fourth or more of their senior administrators will

retire by 2008. As a result of current and impending retirements of presidents and senior

administrators, community colleges are being challenged with the loss of administrative

leadership and knowledge (Belcher & Montgomery, 2002; Shults, 2001; Amey &

VanDerLinden, 2002; Weisman & Vaughn, 2002).

Retirements of presidents and senior administrators have forced community colleges to

address issues associated with the resultant loss of intellectual capital and knowledge

management (Rothwell, 2005). Knowledge management is vital to the survival and

effectiveness of community colleges. To remain effective preparers of current and future leaders

both inside and outside of the institution, community colleges must study their knowledge

management practices. Community colleges must maintain the capacity to develop, organize,

retain and utilize their human and intellectual capital (Boggs, 2002; Carroll, 2004; Katsinas &

Kempner, 2005; Pfau & Kay, 2002; Becker, 1994). Community college presidents and senior

administrators provide the leadership for the human and intellectual capital of their institutions.

Future Community College Factors

In 2004, George R. Boggs, president of the American Association of Community

College, stated that the community college system in America was at a crossroads and the ways

in which challenges were addressed would define community colleges for many years into the

future (Evelyn, 2004). One of those challenges was and continues to be the preparation for the

future. Lorenzo & DeMarte (2002) stated that future community college leaders would be faced

with growing expectations. In addition to factors under their control, there are numerous factors

such as dynamic global issues, terrorist attacks, wars, fuel shortages, federal legislations,

changing markets, etc. over which they will have no control (Witherspoon, 1997; Desjardins &

Huff, 2001). It is of extreme importance to the community college system to identify and

address future trends that the system is currently facing and will face in the future.

According to researchers and experts, there are three categories of trends that affecting

the community college and that are going to affect the system in the future. Those are

demographics, technology, and society (including issues such as changes in the family and

changes in the workforce) (Executive Leadership Institute, 2005). The way in which current and

future socioeconomic and demographic trends are addressed will help shape the quality of a

community college education.

Demographic Trends

Community colleges of the future will be met with a blossoming enrollment as a result of

domestic demographics, the globalization of students, and the growing number of adult students

(Collis, 2004; Swenson, 1998). This growth trend is expected to continue into the foreseeable

future (Shields, 2001). Figures show that 82 million students were enrolled in post secondary

institutions worldwide in 1995 and that number is expected to grow to 200 million by 2025

(Bollag, 1998). As the volume and diversity of the college-going population continues its rapid

increase, community colleges must address the broad and ever-changing range of needs and

aspirations of their students.

The next surge in community college enrollment is beginning as the children of the Baby

Boom generation reach college age. This “baby boom echo” is expected to increase enrollments

by 11 - 16% over the next decade (Gerald & Hussar, 2000). With this echo will come the

challenges of serving students who will arrive under-prepared from high school (Perin, 2002).

To address the needs of the baby boom echo students, community college administrators

must understand and prepare for the learning styles of these students. These are the students of

the M-TV generation, high-speed internet, and fast-paced video games. These technologically

advanced students work online, study online, chat online, and play online. The faculty employed

to teach these students must be equipped and willing to meet the challenges associated with

providing edutainment – entertaining education. Community college leaders must recruit and

retain creative and innovative faculty to keep the students actively engaged. In addition to the

faculty, well informed counselors and/or advisors must be in tune to the goals of the students,

assisting them with the identification of their academic pathways. These students will require a

number of success-building opportunities including student success skills classes, tutoring and

mentoring programs, academic success centers, and social organizations.

An increasing number of people of Hispanic descent are beginning to pursue higher

education (Fallows & Ganeshananthan, 2004). The growing foreign-born population in the

United States has added to the demand for community college education. Also joining this

educational melting pot is an increasing number of students from China, Russia, Japan, and

Germany. It will be vitally important for community college leaders to master the ability to

negotiate the multicultural environment that will continue to become more prevalent (Eddy,

Murphy, Spaulding, & Chandras, 1997). Community colleges must be prepared to serve the

needs of these multinational and multicultural students who come with varying levels of English

fluency and preparedness.

To address the needs of multinational and multicultural students, community college

leaders must utilize many of the strategies used to meet the challenges of the baby boom echo

students. Additionally, identifying faculty to teach English as a second language is of utmost

importance. The community college family must understand and embrace the value of diversity.

Community college staff must have the ability to address issues pertaining to education and work

authorization for multinational students. Specialized training will be required of staff members

so that they may assist these students and stay abreast of legal obligations and requirements.

Hiring bilingual staff is also paramount in recruitment and retention efforts.

Acculturating multinational and multicultural students while supporting them in

embracing their national and/or cultural diversity is of utmost importance. As the diversity in the

United States continues to increase, community college administrators must take the lead in

promoting and supporting a culture that values and embraces diversity. International as well as

cultural and ethnic student organizations must be supported and employees and students of all

backgrounds must be encouraged to participate in their activities.

The laws associated with the enrollment and/or employment of students from other

countries can be quite overwhelming. Community college administrators must take care to

ensure that the people charged with the responsibilities of employment and enrollment

management possess the acumen required to address applicable policies, procedures, statutes,

rules, regulations, laws, etc. When in doubt, advice from legal counsel should always be sought.

There are also an increasing number of adult students seeking personal and professional

enrichment through education (Collis, 2004). Undeniably there will be adult students who will

seek remedial education as they endeavor to improve their lives. Their needs will be addressed

along with the baby boom echo and multinational and multicultural students. For many adult

students, seeking remedial education will take courage, support, and commitment. Faculty and

staff must be cognizant however of these issues and interact with these students with patience,

respect, and dignity.

Some adult students look to community colleges to provide learning opportunities in

leisure or other areas of personal interest. Community colleges currently provide and must

continue to provide non-credit and continuing education courses to enrich the lives of these

students. These non-credit and continuing education programs offer a unique and affordable

service to students looking for courses ranging from conversational foreign languages to martial

arts to travel and tourism. Providing these courses to the community is a winning situation for

both the students and the community college. The lives of the students are enriched through

fulfilling their thirst for knowledge about topics of personal interest. The community colleges,

on the other hand, do not have to contend with as many constraints associated with accreditation

or state regulations (Dougherty & Bakia, 1999). Additionally, say Dougherty & Bakia (1999),

non-credit and continuing education courses have the potential for generating surpluses. In a

time of diminished funding, revenue-generating programs are quite welcomed.

As the marketplace competitiveness has increased, adult students have become

increasingly interested in vocational and workforce development courses that assist them in their

efforts to become employable, become more effective employees, or be promoted. The

knowledge and skills required for employment sustainability will continue to evolve. Whether

the needs are remedial or highly specialized, community college leaders must be prepared to

address the needs of this cadre of students. Societal trends regarding workforce development

will be of particular importance in addressing their needs.

Societal Trends

The world continues to change. Especially as a result of the World Trade Center attacks

on September 11, 2001 (Alfred, 2001/2002) and the April 16, 2007 mass shooting at Virginia

Tech in Blacksburg, VA, one of the most significant changes community colleges are confronted

with is the increased demand for safety and security on campus. Critical incident response

training and emergency preparedness planning have gained focus on community college

campuses (Romano, 2001). Community college administrators must walk a fine line between

keeping some specific details outside of public knowledge and effectively communicating

emergency processes and procedures all the while taking care to stay within legal and ethical

boundaries. College leaders are establishing safety councils and committees to provide

education and training for the campus community including safe practices and procedures, health

and safety regulations, accidents, injuries, natural disasters, and civil emergencies.

In addition to increased safety and security concerns, community college leaders struggle

to address traditional educational needs and expectations while balancing the call to provide the

knowledge and skills needed to address a knowledge-centered workforce (Cohen & Brawer,

2003). Community colleges must be prepared to partner with business and industry leaders as

they struggle to keep their employees ready to meet the challenges of an ever-changing economy

(Elsner, 2001; Myran, Zeiss, & Howdyshell, 1995).

Community colleges are being met with a burgeoning enrollment as a result of the

education demands of a knowledge-centered workforce and increased competition from a

relentless number of sources (Collis, 2004). Drucker (1994) identified the ability to develop and

apply theoretical and analytical knowledge as the most required skill for workers. In their efforts

to maintain a vital workforce, business and industry leaders are turning to community colleges.

These business and industry leaders identify the knowledge and skills their workers require and

look to the community college to help their employees develop them (Vaughn, 2000). On-

demand and contract training, in addition to the basic mathematic and communications courses,

serve to equip workers with essential foundational footing and/or professional development

opportunities. Indeed, one of the most significant trends community colleges are facing now and

will continue to address in the future is the growth and expansion of workforce development

programs.

According to Duderstadt (1999), the world is evolving into a knowledge-based society

and “entering a new age – an age of knowledge – in which the key strategic resource necessary

for prosperity has become knowledge itself; that is, educated people and their ideas” (p. 2). With

the shift from material- and labor-intensive products and processes to knowledge-intensive

products, community colleges are well positioned to provide knowledge – an inexhaustible

resource (Duderstadt, 1999). Community college leaders are being challenged to attract and

retain innovative faculty and staff committed to forging new ground in the endless mine of

knowledge.

To attract and retain these faculty and staff, community college leaders must ensure that

their campuses are great places to work and that people are excited about the prospect of coming

to work (Pomeroy, 2004). Consistently employing fair and ethical policies and procedures,

maintaining an inclusive campus environment, offering competitive salary and benefits

packages, and providing professional development and growth opportunities where employees

are encouraged to be creative and innovative will attract and retain faculty and staff that embrace

change and who are committed to student success (Zeiss, 2004b).

In addition to personnel issues, funding must also be identified to address the upward

spiraling costs of materials and equipment needed to provide a knowledge-based education that

will prepare learners for jobs and careers as well as meaningful and fulfilling lives (Duderstadt,

1999). To meet these funding challenges, community college leaders must diversify their

sources of financial support (Evelyn, 2004; Bollag, 1998). Here again, the partnerships forged

between the community college and local businesses will prove to be beneficial (Dougherty &

Bakia, 1999). Local businesses may donate funding for equipment and materials in support of

programs associated with their industries. Strategic alliances with business and industry are vital

for community colleges as they endeavor to support cutting-edge equipment and programs with

state-of-the-art technology that will provide students and employees with more effective,

efficient, and convenient work and study opportunities and environments.

Community colleges must also address the focus of society and its demand for

convenience and deference to family life. The concept of what constitutes family life is

extremely diverse. Some families are becoming more active and mobile while others are

becoming more home-bound due to child- and/or elder-care issues. As families face challenges

including time and/or transportation constraints, students will seek increased levels of

convenience, becoming less willing to travel to attain educational enrichment (Shields, 2001).

Additionally, families are facing immense financial challenges due to healthcare costs.

As employers, community colleges also struggle with providing the right balance of healthcare

options for their employees. As these costs spiral upward, companies nationwide continue to

seek financial solutions. Schoeff (2005) quotes Pitney Bowes chairman and CEO Michael

Critelli as saying, “We have to deal with health rather than health care or insurance. If we have a

healthier population, then we will have lower costs” (p. 53). Community colleges must consider

wellness programs as one means of lower healthcare costs while seeking creative options to

assuage the financial burdens on the employees as well as the institution.

According to Shields (2001), competition for students is on the rise. There is a great

variety of learning methods from which students may choose including the traditional face-to-

face, distance, and hybrid courses to cohort and independent study options. Students are taking

their hard-earned dollars to institutions that provide services when, where, and how they want

them.

There is also an increase in competition among educational providers and that trend is

expected to continue into the future. Community colleges are facing stiff competition from

companies that specialize in computer-aided, desk-top, and/or distance learning (Shields, 2001).

Additionally, there is increased competition from private colleges and universities, specialty

institutions, as well as businesses and corporations that offer educational programs and

certificates.

In an effort to be customer-driven and student-centered, community college leaders must

keep their fingers on the pulse of their students. One method of doing so would be via surveys.

There are nationally-recognized survey instruments available to assist in these endeavors (Noel-

Levitz, 2005-06). Community college leaders may seek to utilize these instruments and/or the

expertise of their institutional effectiveness personnel to determine the most appropriate methods

to employ in providing educational growth and opportunities. Seeking regular input from the

students as well as local business partners will be an imperative in providing education at the

right time, the right place, and in the right format.

Leaders in business and industry are having an increasing influence on community

colleges. As more business and industry leaders become members of community college boards

of trustees and/or become customers or partners with the community colleges, the cry for

accountability increases. A greater emphasis is being placed on institutional effectiveness and

community college leaders must meet the challenges of continuous assessment, operational and

strategic planning and action research to improve their student-, academic-, and administrative-

services (Sharples, 2002).

In an effort to help board members and workforce supporters to understand the

community college mission and how it differs from business and industry, community college

leaders must also be excellent persuaders and communicators (Sherman, 1999). In

acknowledgment of the increased influence from business and industry leaders, college leaders

must also keep abreast of trends in the business and industry world. Sitting on community and

workforce boards will help community college leaders as they endeavor to keep business,

industry, and community leaders mindful of the challenges, opportunities, and trends in academe.

From the highly specialized to the basic employment skills required by workers to

compete and be viable in the workforce, community colleges are providing a growing and

increasingly diversified list of workforce development programs. It is expected that business and

industry leaders will continue to expand their requests to include programs in local law

enforcement to homeland security, remedial math to robotics, and from remedial

communications to technical writing (Angelo, 2004). Providing customized contract training to

businesses solidifies partnerships that could prove to be lucrative in future endeavors. These

partnerships may provide new constituencies and inroads that will generate local and political

support. These local and political channels may prove to be beneficial as community colleges

seek increases in appropriations to support building maintenance and repair, renovations, or new

buildings as well as the purchase and maintenance of cutting-edge technology (Dougherty &

Bakia, 1999).

Technological Trends

Community colleges are being met with a rapidly increasing enrollment as a result of the

dynamic nature of technology (Collis, 2004). “Information technology eliminates the barriers of

space and time,” and introduces “new competitive forces such as virtual colleges and

universities, and for-profit education providers” (Duderstadt, 1999).

One of the most important developments to impact community colleges in recent history

is the advent of technology (Sharples, 2002). According to Phillippe (2000), “Technology is the

driving force behind the newest test of community colleges’ agility. So pervasive is

technology’s influence that it is a factor in most of the demographic, economic, and academic

challenges confronting community colleges as they plan for the future” (p. 140). Community

college leaders are not only challenged with staying abreast of what new technology is available.

They are also facing the challenge of determining how to shape the impact that new technologies

will have on their institutions (Van Houweling, 2003).

Community college administrators must determine the most appropriate software

configuration, implementation schedules and guidelines for their institutions (Chase, 2000). It is

vital to find the right blend of technology that will facilitate the teaching and learning process

(Eddy, Murphy, Spaulding, & Chandras, 1997) as well as the business and financial operations

of the institution (Olson, 2001). According to Morrison (1995), community college leaders need

to provide initial and on-going training for faculty, staff, and students in using new technologies.

According to Chase (2000), institutions will be impacted by the cost of technology,

including the on-going or continuous costs associated with initial purchases, constant upgrades,

and newer, more advanced technology. In addition to economic partnerships, community

college leaders must identify sources of additional funding for up-to-date technology, as well as

redirect funds from other areas of the college (Morrison, 1995). Financial models specifically

addressing technological needs must be developed to assure the most cost-effective strategies are

employed (Van Houweling, 2003).

As the demographic, technological, and social trends emerge and evolve, community

college leaders must position their institutions to be ready to meet the myriad needs presented by

all constituents. Community college leaders must diligently monitor the current and future

environments of their institutions, developing strategies for meeting threats and opportunities

associated with both environments. Maintaining a safe, student-centered, inclusive campus

environment and culture will keep enrollment growing. Maintaining such an environment will

require leadership that is prepared and ready to do so. Community college administrators must

ensure that appropriate succession planning and leadership development efforts are taken so that

organizational knowledge will not be lost but will continue to grow to meet current and future

demands. While planning for technological, societal, and demographic factors, institutional

leaders must always remember to include succession planning and leadership development.

Succession Planning and Leadership Development

“The key to success in leading change is identifying the knowledge and skills you will

need in this period of transformation” (Diamond, 2002, p. 16). “Organizational leaders must be

prepared to cope with a looming workforce crisis in the United States: the lack of sufficiently

prepared workers to fill future job openings” (Rothwell, Jackson, Knight, Lindholm, Wang, &

Payne, 2005, p. 4). As baby boomers fast approach and reach retirement age, knowledge and

expertise walk out the door with them (Byham, Smith, & Paese, 2002; Rothwell, 2002).

Community colleges are facing the same grim reality. It has been widely reported that

community colleges will be confronting the critical impact of current and impending retirement

of community college leaders (Shults, 2001; Evelyn, 2004; McKlenney, 2001; Weisman and

Vaughn, 2002; Barwick, 2002; Villadsen, 2002). Repositioning, involuntary severance,

downsizing, rightsizing, retirements and other reductions have whittled away at the ranks of

successful leaders. This leadership loss could leave institutions susceptible to a devastating loss

of talent and institutional memory that could encumber the ability of the institution to maintain

the quality educational service which students and the community require, expect and are

accustomed to receiving (Campbell & Zeiss, 2005; Shults, 2001). Substantial numbers of

experienced leaders possessing the skills, knowledge, and personal characteristics required to

competently address current and future community college issues will be required (McKlenney,

2001; Evelyn, 2004; Kelly, 2002; Shults, 2001). With much of the operating budget earmarked

for personnel costs, it makes sense to be sure the personnel are equipped with the knowledge,

skill, and abilities to maintain an optimum level of academic integrity and quality. This can be

done through succession planning and leadership development.

Succession Planning

According to Rothwell (2005), succession planning and management is any effort

designed to ensure the continued, effective performance of an organization, division, department

or work group by making provision for the development, replacement, and strategic application

of key people over time. Zeiss (2005) defines succession planning as “a systematic process

wherein personal and professional development is blended with a strategic plan to provide the

organization with skilled employees whenever and wherever they need them” (p. 159). He says

that at the core of a succession plan must be the goal to develop future leaders for the

organization.

According to the U.S. Department of Transportation (2007), the process of succession

planning focuses on people. The process plans for replacing people or specific groups of people

in the workforce. They define succession planning as an attempt “to respond to attrition by

ensuring that there are well-qualified people ready to assume critical positions in the shortest

possible time when vacancies occur.”

Each institution faces unique challenges in locating, preparing and positioning talent to

breach the gap in leadership. Because community colleges serve the needs of the workforce,

provide technical training, maintain articulation agreements with the State University System and

offer community continuing education opportunities, leadership demands are unique, requiring

specific training for the many facets of an administrative position (Romero, 2004). Given the

diversity of needs across the Florida Community College System, there is no singular succession

plan for community colleges that can be universally applied. One commonality however is the

use of leadership development programs.

Leadership Development

The “development and training of leaders is a fundamental function of a learning

organization” (Lawson and Ventriss, 1992, p. 205). More than at any time in their history,

community colleges need to plan and provide comprehensive ongoing professional development

programs for their faculty and staff. By offering professional development opportunities, an

administration increases the probability that a quality pool of employees is being qualified and

groomed to achieve advanced levels of skill and responsibility. Concordantly, workers that

sense they can reasonably expect opportunities for career and leadership development are more

inclined to build their careers in place.

Faced with an increasingly diverse student body with varying expectations, learning

styles, and service preferences; new and growing competition; technological advancements; and

changing governmental policies and societal demands, community colleges can no longer

respond in traditional ways” (Bellanca, 2002, p. 350). The president of the American

Association of Community Colleges wrote: “If community colleges are to develop the skills

needed for effective teaching, student services, and leadership, professional development

programs must be expanded and improved” (Boggs, 2003, p. 23).

Romero (2004) states that because of its unique nature, community college leadership is

significantly different from leadership in any other sector of education. Because Florida

community colleges serve the needs of the workforce, provide technical training, maintain

articulation agreements with the State University System and offer community continuing

education opportunities, leadership demands are unique, requiring specific training for the many

facets of an administrative position (Romero, 2004).

Daytona Beach Community College (DBCC) located in Volusia County, Florida

developed an in-house leadership development program. Although their program was initially

developed for DBCC faculty and staff, they have extended their program to other community

colleges (Sharples & Carroll, 2002). Their leadership development program offers events and

workshops designed to prepare participants for successful leadership. The DBCC program

provides an excellent succession plan model. The characteristics of an effective succession plan

include support from the chief executive officer as well as the top management, ownership by

line management, support from staff, simplicity, tailoring to unique organizational needs,

flexibility, a link with strategic business plans, evolution from human resources review

processes, a foundation of well-documented competencies, objective assessment of candidates,

being part of a broader management-development effort, plans for developmental job

assignments, integration with other human resources systems, accountability, and follow-up

(Caudron, 1996). The DBCC succession plan and program has all of these characteristics.

Daytona Beach Community College Vice President for Planning and Development, Dr. Charles

Carroll and Associate Vice President/Controller, Ms. Laura F. Phillips (2004) report that the

college implemented deliberate processes to ensure that a pool of internal applicants will be

ready over the next few years as many faculty and staff members plan to retire.

According to Harris (2002), program completers often excel in future leadership roles

within their institutions. In-house programs such as the one at DBCC often bring the added

bonus of providing more meaningful organizational communications, a sense of belonging for

participants, and improved morale throughout the institution (Belcher & Montgomery, 2002).

There are many university-provided formal leadership development programs that are

designed to prepare students for community college leadership. These programs include

leadership training for current community college administrators as well as degree-granting

programs that are research-based for scholars in the field. Programs range from those that are

part of a general education curriculum to those that are specific to community college leadership

(Council for the Study of Community Colleges, 2007).

The Leading Forward: The Community College Opportunity website (American

Association of Community Colleges, 2007b) is a joint effort between the American Association

of Community Colleges and the W.K. Kellogg Foundation. The website provides links to

community college leadership graduate programs in all fifty states and the District of Columbia.

The website also includes an up-to-date calendar of upcoming AACC leadership summits as well

as other events focusing on community college leadership.

The Council for the Study of Community Colleges (2007) also lists 54 links to formal,

university-based programs specializing in community college leadership or administration.

These links provide descriptions of the programs which offer masters and doctorate degrees in a

variety of formats including traditional classroom learning, colloquia, seminars, distance

learning, focus groups, mentoring, etc. The formal degree programs listed include specific

community college leadership-oriented offerings from a number of public and private institutions

(i.e., Fielding Graduate University, Florida Statue University, Michigan State University, the

University of Florida, the University of Texas, and Walden University).

Shults (2001) however, reports that the number of degrees awarded in community college

leadership and administration fell nearly 80% between 1983 and 1997. This drop in graduates

adds to the leadership replacement crisis. Non-degree-oriented programs offer additional

opportunities for leadership development.

The Council for the Study of Community Colleges (2007) is an affiliate of the American

Association of Community Colleges. The Council provides seven links and descriptions of

informal, non-degree-oriented leadership development programs. The non-credit programs listed

on their website include programs from a number of professional organizations that provide

growth opportunities developed and designed to assist participants to achieve specific positions

and/or goals. Non-credit programs listed on the website include programs at Antioch University

McGregor, The Chair Academy, Community College Leadership Development Initiatives,

Community College Teaching and Learning Online Network, The Institute for Community

College Development at Cornell, and The Mid-Career Fellowship Program at Princeton

University.

There are a number of other community college leadership programs available developed

specifically for individuals preparing for a community college presidency. The National Institute

for Leadership Development (NILD) (2007) offers a LEADERS program specifically targeted to

women seeking senior administrative or presidential positions. According to their website, their

“programs focus on crystallizing the participant’s identify, fine-tuning skills, identifying

leadership and community college issues, and developing personal confidence.”

The Thomas Lakin Institute for Mentored Leadership provides development and

mentoring opportunities for African American community college professionals who aspire to be

community college presidents. Each participant must receive the endorsement of their president.

The faculty includes community college chancellors and presidents; current and past members of

the American Association of Community Colleges Board of Directors; as well as trustees from

the Association of Community College Trustees. Topics covered in the Lakin Institute include

“What should I expect my first year?”, “How should I manage financial and other resources?”

and “How do I build a strong connection between the college and the community?” (Association

of Community College Trustees, 2007).

The Executive Leadership Institute (ELI) is sponsored by the League for Innovation in

the Community College in cooperation with the American Association of Community Colleges,

Cornell University and The University of Texas at Austin. The week-long ELI is designed for

participants who have not yet served in a community college presidency however currently

seated presidents who are contemplating a transition or newly appointed presidents are also

accepted into the program. The ELI offers the opportunity for participants to dialog with well-

respected community college leaders as they review their interests and abilities, refine their

skills, and discuss matters relating to leadership (League for Innovation in the Community

College, 2007).

In Florida, the Division of Community Colleges and Workforce Education Chancellor of

Education presents the Chancellor’s Leadership Seminar. The seminars are designed to prepare

participants for community college presidencies. Participants must receive the endorsement of

their community college president to be accepted into the seminar. The seminars include

presenters such as the chancellor, currently seated Florida community college presidents, and

other noted individuals within the state and national community college system. Some of these

individuals include Dr. Jeff Hockaday, noted community college consultant and Dr. George

Vaughn, noted professor from North Carolina State University. Topics included in previous

seminars include “Leadership Skills Needed in Community Colleges”, “Challenges of

Leadership”, and “Moving from an Internal Position to the Presidency: Yes, It Can Happen!”

(Florida Department of Education, 2007a).

According to Crews and Weakley (1996), there are four separate but interdependent

strategies that an effective leadership program should employ. The first strategy is goal-setting.

Goal-setting should be linked with interactive training seminars. The interactive training

seminars can help the aspiring leader to identify his or her strengths and weaknesses. Once these

have been identified, the aspiring leader can set goals to further enhance their strengths or to

overcome their weaknesses.

Strategy number two from Crews & Weakley (1996) is building a professional plan of

professional improvement. Once goals have been set, the aspiring leader should build a personal

plan of professional improvement. The plan may include additional seminars or training, more

formal education, or opportunities to acquire additional professional experiences.

The third strategy listed by Crews & Weakley (1996) involves coaching and mentoring.

Zey (1984) supports strategy number three. The aspiring leader should receive non-judgmental

coaching and mentoring from a seasoned leader. This leadership veteran can assist with goal-

setting and plan making. He or she can also assist with providing experiential opportunities that

will help the aspiring leader to grow professionally.

The fourth strategy listed by Crews & Weakley (1996) is community collaboration and

partnership building. The mentor/coach can assist with this strategy too. The veteran leader can

make recommendations about which external organizations with which to become involved,

which to avoid for political or other reasons, etc. The veteran leader may be able to provide

introductions that may be key to the professional growth and success of the aspiring leader.

Success in higher education involves an integral relationship with the community. The aspiring

leader must learn to effectively collaborate with the community and to build partnerships that

will be beneficial to him or her, the institution, and the community or external organization.

Williams & Moyer (1995) state that a good leadership development program incorporates

enhanced approaches for identifying, assessing, and mentoring candidates, using creative

problem solving, team-based leadership, networking, and action learning. They go on to say that

effective leadership development programs teach aspiring leaders how to solve problems by

consensus, share authority, and resolve conflicts productively. Doyle, Claydon, & Buchanan

(2000) describe an effective leader as being communicative, participative, and involving.

Programs should stress the importance of integrity. Leaders-in-training should be exposed to

innovative and exciting ideas, philosophies, programs, processes, and people. Strategies should

be aimed at developing the individual and the community, as well as the institution (Williams &

Moyer, 1995).

According to the American Association of Community Colleges (2007a), community

college leaders must be competent in organizational strategy, resource management,

communication, collaboration, community college advocacy, and professionalism. Many of

these same competencies are also espoused by Cleveland (2002), Kotter (1996), Wheatley

(2001), and Drucker (1996) with regard to business leaders.

Evaluation of Leadership Development Programs

A common theme among business models for leadership development is the need for the

perpetual evaluation of leadership development programs. McDade (1987) states that there is a

large gap in knowledge with regard to the efficacy of leadership development programs.

Kirkpatrick (1984), a leading authority on evaluation states that evaluations must go beyond

attaining reactions from participants immediately after completing their leadership development

programs. To garner a learner-centered determination of the effectiveness of a leadership

development program, evaluators must learn from program completers which aspects of the

programs proved effective during their first year after promotion to a senior level position.

Evaluating learning and change incorporated into leadership development program initiatives

reveal what people have learned from the initiative, how they have applied what they learned to

their work environment and the impact that these actions had on the institution (MetrixGlobal,

2007). To date, there have been no long-range follow up studies to review and evaluate the

outcomes of leadership development programs on the success of Florida Community College

System senior administrators.

This study will provide a phenomenological view of the lived experiences of senior

administrators in the Florida Community College System who have completed one of the annual

Florida Division of Community Colleges and Workforce Education Chancellor’s Leadership

Seminars (CLS) and was promoted to a senior administrative position within the same

community college in which they were employed prior to completing the Seminar. It is expected

that this long range evaluation will provide insight into the efficacy of leadership development

programs to successful performance in a senior administrative position.

CHAPTER 3. METHODOLOGY

Introduction

This body of research studied the barriers and contributors to success for people who

completed one of the annual Florida Division of Community Colleges and Workforce Education

Chancellor’s Leadership Seminars (CLS) and were subsequently promoted into positions of

greater responsibility and/or authority within the same institution in which they were employed

prior to completion of the Seminar, and sought their recommendations for future CLS programs.

Chapter Three details the justification for the selection of qualitative design, and specifically,

phenomenology as the methodology best suited for the study; the methods used for data

collection; the selection of research participants; and the process to be undertaken in conducting

the research.

Qualitative Research/Phenomenological Design

“Purpose is the controlling force in research. Decisions about design, measurement,

analysis, and reporting all flow from purpose” (Patton, 1990, p. 150). “…the most important

criterion is that the chosen method best suits the problem” (Capella University, 2006, p. 66).

This study will employed qualitative research, specifically utilizing phenomenology. “[The]

essence of qualitative inquiry is paying attention, being open to what the world has to show us,

and thinking about what it means” (Patton, 1990, p. 140). Qualitative researchers seek to find

understanding within the meaning people have constructed, specifically how people make sense

of their world and their experiences (Merriam, 1998). For this qualitative study, phenomenology

was used to identify the contributors and barriers to success for people who completed one of the

annual Chancellor’s Leadership Seminar (CLS) of the Florida Division of Community Colleges

and Workforce Education and who had been promoted to a senior administrative position within

the same institution in which they were employed prior to participating in the CLS.

Phenomenological research describes rather than explains and is initiated without a

hypotheses or preconceived outcome (Husserl, 1970). A phenomenological study – studying the

lived experiences of people who have been promoted to a senior administrative position within

the same institution in which they were employed prior to participating in one of the annual CLS

was analyzed to discern what aspects of their experiences proved beneficial or detrimental in

preparing them for the positions they now hold.

A fundamental epistemological premise of phenomenology is that knowledge is

constructed and understood in the lifeworld – the daily lived experiences of people (Dilthey,

1991). Phenomenologists explore and describe the perceptions and experiences of individuals.

The qualitative methodology of phenomenology captures the richness of individual experience.

It engages people as they study the world “as it appears to the individuals when they place

themselves in a state of consciousness that reflects an effort to be free of everyday biases and

beliefs” (Gall et al., 2003, p.481). According to Welman and Kruger (1999, p. 189),

“phenomenologists are concerned with understanding social and psychological phenomena from

the perspectives of people involved.”

A second fundamental epistemological premise of phenomenology is that meaning occurs

in the reflection of the lived experiences of the individual (Husserl, 1970). Phenomenologists are

able to co-construct meaning by reviewing the detailed descriptions of the human experiences of

the people being studied (Creswell, 2003; Crotty, 1998).

Phenomenological research provides an impetus for individuals to be receptive to what

the world reveals to them and think about the meanings associated with those revelations (Dilthy,

1991). Through phenomenological research, the researcher, and indeed the participants

themselves, seek to understand the subjective experiences of the individual to determine the

meaning or essence of the phenomenon under study (Creswell, 2003; Merriam, 1998; Patton,

1990). The meanings gleaned from those revelations may enable individuals and researchers to

utilize those meanings and deeper understandings to further understandings and as a foundation

for more meaningful future experiences.

Population Selection, Data Collection and Analysis

Phenomenologists use creativity and open-ended approaches when gathering data

(Hycner, 1999; Holloway, 1997). The researcher used a brief questionnaire, a survey, and a

semi-structured telephone interview to study the efficacy of the CLS from the perspectives of

past participants.

On June 19, 2007, the researcher telephoned the Office of the Chancellor at the Florida

Division of Community Colleges and Workforce Education to inquire as to who would be the

appropriate person or office to submit a request for permission to use the Chancellor’s

Leadership Seminar in the study. In a telephone conversation with Ms. Brooke Hobbs,

Communications Director with the Florida Division of Community Colleges, the researcher

explained the purpose of the study. Ms. Hobbs informed the researcher that the Office of the

Chancellor would support the study. On June 21, 2007, Chancellor David Armstrong sent an

email to past Chancellor’s Leadership Seminar participants informing them of the study and

encouraging them to contact the researcher if they wished to volunteer to participate. Thirty past

Chancellor’s Leadership Seminar participants immediately contacted the researcher to volunteer

to participate in the study.

Although thirty CLS past participants volunteered to participate in the study, the

researcher anticipated that some may not have met the criteria for inclusion in the study. The

researcher used a purposeful, criterion sampling strategy. Such a strategy would allow the

researcher to uncover issues of significant importance to the purpose of the research from select

information-rich participants (Merriam, 1998; Patton, 1990; Strauss, 1987). For quality assurance

purposes, all participants met the following specific criterion:

1. Must be an administrator in a public Florida Community College;

2. Must have completed one of the annual Florida Division of Community Colleges and

Workforce Education Chancellor’s Leadership Seminars (CLS);

3. Must have been promoted to a senior administrative position within the same

community college in which he/she was employed prior to participation in the CLS;

4. Must have been in the new position for at least one year.

The use of a brief questionnaire enabled the researcher to reach a large number of

volunteers (Gall et al.,2003). (See Appendix A.) According to McMillan & Schumacher (1997),

questionnaires should be developed for a specific reason. Volunteers were asked to complete a

questionnaire that was specifically designed to determine if they were promoted after

participating in the CLS. They were also asked to name the position they were in prior to

completing the CLS, the position they were promoted into after completing the CLS, and their

current position. The responses received would determine whether the volunteer met the criteria

for being a study participant. Those that did not meet the study criteria would be asked to pre-

test the survey instrument. They were informed that their responses to the pre-test would be

included in aggregate form in the research summary to the chancellor.

The survey instrument was distributed to those volunteers who met the criteria for

inclusion in the study and they became the participants for the study. (See Appendix B.) The

survey enabled the researcher to further confirm that the participants did in fact complete a CLS

and were subsequently promoted. Surveys are particularly useful “where in-depth interviewing

cannot be carried out for all respondents” (Gall et al., 2003, pg. 238). The responses would be

used to create a topology of the perceptions of the participants regarding the efficacy of the CLS

in preparing them for more responsible leadership roles (Gall et al., 2003).

Finally, the researcher would select one participant from each of the five regions in

Florida as defined by the Florida Association of Community Colleges (2007) to participate in a

semi-structured telephone interview. Region One consists of Chipola College, Gulf Coast

Community College, Okaloosa-Walton College, Pensacola College, and Tallahassee Community

College. Region Two consists of Florida Community College at Jacksonville, Lake City

Community College, North Florida Community College, St. John’s River Community College,

and Santa Fe Community College. Region Three consists of Brevard Community College,

Central Florida Community College, Daytona Beach Community College, Lake-Sumter

Community College, Seminole Community College, and Valencia Community College. Region

Four consists of Edison College, Hillsborough Community College, Manatee Community

College, Pasco-Hernando Community College, Polk Community College, St. Petersburg

College, and South Florida Community College. Region Five consists of Broward Community

College, Florida Keys Community College, Indian River Community College, Miami Dade

College, and Palm Beach Community College.

If the researcher would be unable to secure a participant from each of the five regions to

agree to participation in a telephone interview, she would select two male and two female from

among those who had indicated that they would be willing to participate in a telephone

interview.

In a semi-structured interview, the researcher prepares interview guides that consist of a

set of questions and which will allow the researcher to ask additional questions based on items of

interest revealed during the interview (Flick, 1998; McMillan & Schumacher, 1997). Such a

data collection method would provide the researcher with the flexibility to ask follow-up

questions for the purpose of clarifying important aspects of the leadership development program

participant experience within the context of the topic under study. The researcher would conduct

the interviews by telephone.

Member checking would be used to strengthen the interpretive validity of the telephone

interviews. The telephone interviews would be followed up with member checks to ensure that

the researcher had accurately depicted the experiences of the participants (Bloor, 1997).

Member checking would provide participants with the opportunity to correct errors or to

challenge what they perceived to be inaccurate interpretations. This process may also stimulate

participants to volunteer additional information that they may have inadvertently omitted during

the interview (Creswell, 1998; Morse, 1994).

The responses from the questionnaire would determine which volunteers met the criteria

for inclusion in the study. The use of the survey would provide the researcher with the

perceptions of past CLS participants regarding their experiences with the program. The use of

semi-structured telephone interviews and member checking would involve direct researcher

interaction with the select participants for more in-depth study. Initial questions as well as

follow-up clarifications would facilitate the scope of the research allowing the researcher the

opportunity to guide and adjust the questioning as necessary so that the study might be

thoroughly addressed.

Data Collection Process and Data Analysis

The researcher specified information about the study, informed the participants of their

confidentiality rights, and answered any questions about the written informed consent form. All

volunteers were emailed a questionnaire. (See Appendix A.) The responses from the four-

question questionnaire would enable the researcher to determine if the volunteer met the criteria

for inclusion in the study. Volunteers who did not meet the criteria would be asked to complete

the draft survey (See Appendix B) which will be used as a pre-test of the survey instrument.

After reviewing the responses from the volunteers and in concurrence with the Dissertation

Committee Chair of the researcher, modifications would be made if necessary and the survey

would be sent to those who met the criteria for inclusion, hereafter known as participants.

The responses from each participant would be reviewed by the researcher to discover and

code broad themes linked with completing one of the annual CLS and being promoted within the

same institution in which one was employed prior to completing the Seminar. Coding would

assist with the connection of data fragments with common elements of the experiences of

participants (Coffey & Atkinson, 1996). To describe the lived experiences from the perspectives

of Florida Community College System senior administrators who have completed one of the

annual CLS and been promoted within the same institution in which they were employed prior to

participating in the Seminar, the researcher would seek to identify and integrate theme

categories, label subcategories, and to interpret and synthesize core categories.

Finally, the researcher would endeavor to contact up to five participants to further

participate in a telephone interview. Each telephone interview would be summarized and

transcribed. The researcher would perform an in-depth review of the summaries. The telephone

interviews would be followed up with member checks. Participants would be asked to review

the transcriptions of the researcher, offer corrections to errors, and provide clarification to what

they perceived to be inaccurate interpretations. Participants would also be asked to include any

information that they may have inadvertently omitted during the interview process (Creswell,

1998; Morse, 1994).

The researcher would again, perform an in-depth review of the data for the purpose of

determining the contributors and barriers to success for senior administrators in the Florida

Community College System who had completed one of the annual CLS and who had been

promoted to a senior administrative position within the same institution in which they were

employed prior to completing the Seminar. It was expected that this study would provide

valuable information to future developers of leadership development programs for community

college senior administrators.

Ethical Issues

This phenomenological study was undertaken so that lived experiences of past

participants of the Chancellor’s Leadership Seminars (CLS), a leadership development program,

would be revealed. To be included in the study, individuals must have completed a CLS

program and been promoted after the completion of the program within the same institution they

were employed prior to their participation in the CLS. The researcher endeavored to accurately

depict the feelings and experiences of the participants regarding their participation in the CLS.

The researcher however, completed leadership development programs and had been promoted

within the same institution she was employed prior to her participation in those studies. In an

effort to mitigate the inclusion of personal bias in the study, the researcher included member

checks as part of the process of inquiry. Member checking provided participants with the

opportunity to correct errors or to challenge what they perceived to be inaccurate interpretations.

To explain the study processes and receive their agreement to participate in the study,

participants were emailed consent forms which required their digital signatures signifying their

agreement to participate in the study. Participation in the study was completely voluntary and

any participant was informed of their right to withdraw from the study at any time without

penalty or loss. Other than the benefits of working with a more developed and prepared future

administration, there were no personal risks or benefits to participants for participating in the

study. Participants were provided with contact information for the researcher, the dissertation

committee chair, the university review board reviewer, as well as the university itself.

Participants were invited to contact the person or office of their choice if they had any concerns

about the study.

Anytime that a researcher studies human participants, ethical guidelines must be

followed. The researcher of this study followed the guidelines as determined by the Institutional

Review Board (IRB). The purpose of the IRB review and approval process is to ensure ethical

treatment and protection of human research participants and/or their records. A copy of the

research plan was submitted for approval to the IRB. Once approval was received, the

researcher commenced with the study. At all times – before, during, and after the study, the

confidentiality of the research participants was maintained. Individual participants were

assigned numbers and referred to as Participant 1, Participant 2, etc. Collected data was stored in

a locked filing cabinet and/or on a password-protected computer accessible only by the

researcher. All collected data will be personally destroyed seven years after completion of the

dissertation. Computer files will be deleted. Any hard-copy documents will be cross-cut

shredded.

The rights and welfare of all research participants is paramount. The researcher is

committed to following the guidelines as set forth by the Institutional Review Board.

CHAPTER 4. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Introduction

The purpose of the study was to determine the efficacy of the Florida Division of

Community Colleges and Workforce Education Chancellor’s Leadership Seminars (CLS). The

study was a phenomenological study – studying the lived experiences of people who completed

one of the CLS. Phenomenological research is initiated without a preconceived outcome or

hypothesis. In this study the participants described their experiences with the CLS. The

responses of the participants were coded into themes so that understanding could be derived from

the social and psychological phenomena from the perspectives of the participants.

In addition to having completed one of the CLS, participants had been promoted to a

senior administrative position within the same institution in which they were employed prior to

participating in the CLS. The purpose of the study was to analyze the experiences of past CLS

participants to discern what aspects of their experiences proved beneficial or detrimental in

preparing them for their current positions.

Data Gathering

Using a purposeful, criterion sampling strategy, the researcher sought to identify any

contributors or barriers to success that the participants though the CLS provided. Such a strategy

allowed the identification of themes of importance or significance from the perspectives of past

participants of the CLS. At the time of the study, each participant was an administrator in one of

the twenty-eight public Florida community colleges. Each participant had completed one of the

annual CLS. The participants had been promoted to a senior administrative position within the

same community college in which he/she was employed prior to participation in the CLS. And

finally, each participant had been in their new position for at least one year.

On June 21, 2007 the Florida Chancellor of Community Colleges, Dr. David Armstrong

sent an email to past Chancellor’s Leadership Seminar participants which provided a brief

explanation of the study. Chancellor Armstrong asked the past participants to contact the

researcher if they were interested in participating in the study. Thirty individuals responded to

the email from Chancellor Armstrong and volunteered to participate in the study. Three

respondents were from Region 1 as determined by the Florida Association of Community

Colleges (2007). Region 1 includes Chipola College, Gulf Coast Community College,

Okaloosa-Walton College, Pensacola College, and Tallahassee Community College. One

respondent was from Region 2 which includes Florida Community College at Jacksonville, Lake

City Community College, North Florida Community College, St. John’s River Community

College, and Santa Fe Community College. Nine respondents were from Region 3 which

includes Brevard Community College, Central Florida Community College, Daytona Beach

Community College, Lake-Sumter Community College, Seminole Community College, and

Valencia Community College. Ten respondents were from Region 4 which includes Edison

College, Hillsborough Community College, Manatee Community College, Pasco-Hernando

Community College, Polk Community College, and St. Petersburg College. And seven

respondents were from Region 5 which includes Broward Community College, Florida Keys

Community College, Indian River Community College, Miami Dade College, and Palm Beach

Community College.

Of the thirty individuals who responded to the email from Chancellor Armstrong and

who volunteered to participate in the study, 22 returned the consent form. Two respondents were

from Region 1. One respondent was from Region 2. Seven respondents were from Region 3.

Six respondents were from Region 4 and six were from Region 5.

Of the 22 individuals that completed and returned the consent form, 13 completed and

returned the questionnaire. Question 1 from the questionnaire asked, “Were you promoted

AFTER you completed the Chancellor’s Leadership Seminar (CLS)?” The purpose of this

question was to establish whether the respondent met the criteria for inclusion in the study. To

meet the criteria for inclusion in the study, the respondent must have been promoted after

completing the Chancellor’s Leadership Seminar.

Of the 13 respondents who returned the questionnaire, nine had not been promoted after

completing the Chancellor’s Leadership Seminar and therefore did not meet the criteria for

inclusion in the study. Four respondents had been promoted after completing the Chancellor’s

Leadership Seminar thereby meeting the criteria for inclusion in the study. These four

respondents were then classified as participants in the study. Of the four participants, two were

from Region 3 and two were from Region 5. One participant from Region 3 declined to

participate in the telephone interview.

During this time, the Florida Community College System was experiencing a leadership

change. Dr. David Armstrong left the position of chancellor and a search for a new chancellor

ensued. After an extensive search, Dr. Willis N. Holcombe was selected to be the chancellor of

the Division of Community Colleges. The researcher called the Division of Community

Colleges in an attempt to gain the approval and support of the new chancellor, Dr. Holcombe and

was asked to contact Dr. Judith Bilsky, Executive Vice Chancellor. The researcher explained the

purpose of the study and asked for permission to attend the next Chancellor’s Leadership

Seminar. In a January 30, 2008 email, Dr. Bilsky denied the request to participate in the next

Chancellor’s Leadership Seminar. Dr. Bilsky informed the researcher that Chancellor Holcombe

would send an email to past Chancellor’s Leadership Seminar participants. On February 14,

2008, Dr. Holcombe sent an email to past CLS participants encouraging them to contact the

researcher if they were willing to participate.

Fourteen individuals responded to the email from Chancellor Holcombe. Because of the

apparent frustration from the respondents of the email from Dr. Armstrong, the respondents to

the email from Dr. Holcombe received the consent form, questionnaire, and survey as one

document. Of the 14 respondents to the email from Dr. Holcombe, eight returned the

documents. Of the eight participants who returned the documents, three had been promoted after

completing the CLS. Of the three who had been promoted after completing the CLS, one

consented to participating in the telephone interview. The consenting participant was from

Region 5.

Of the four participants who consented to participating in a telephone interview, one was

from Region 3 and three were from Region 5. The original plan for the study was to select one

participant from each of the five regions in Florida as defined by the Florida Association of

Community Colleges (2007) to participate in a semi-structured telephone interview however

there was not at least one participant from each of the five regions to agree to participation in a

telephone interview. The alternative plan was to secure two male and two female participants

from among those who had indicated that they would be willing to participate in a telephone

interview however of the four individuals who consented to participation in the telephone

interview, one was male and three were females.

Each telephone interview lasted approximately 20 minutes. The interviews were

summarized, transcribed, and emailed to the participants. The participants were asked to perform

member checks. The member checks included reviewing the transcribed summaries, responding

with any corrections to errors, and providing clarification to what the participants perceived to be

inaccurate interpretations. Participants were also asked to provide any information that they may

have inadvertently omitted during the telephone interview. After receiving the member checks

from the participants, the researcher performed an in-depth review and analysis of the member

checked summaries.

Analysis

The data were reviewed for the purpose of determining the contributors and barriers to

success for senior administrators in the Florida Community College System who had completed

one of the annual CLS and who had been promoted to a senior administrative position within the

same institution in which they were employed prior to completing the Seminar.

Included in the survey were the three research questions:

1. What issues that were addressed in the CLS had the most impact on the success of

program completers who are Florida Community College System senior administrators?

2. What issues during their participation were barriers to the success of CLS completers

who are Florida Community College System senior administrators?

3. What do CLS completers who are Florida Community College System senior

administrators recommend to improve future programs?

Participant Responses

With the ongoing and impending retirements of Florida community college presidents

and senior administrators, it is imperative that the Florida Community College System provide

developmental opportunities to prepare future leaders of the System. Included in this preparation

should be opportunities for growth professionally and personally. Communications skills, job

competencies, and leadership development must also be included.

Part 1 of the Survey

To gather the perceptions of the participants regarding the effectiveness of the

Chancellor’s Leadership Seminars in meeting these goals, participants were asked to indicate

how they felt about the statements below. In Part 1 of the survey, participants were asked to rate

each statement using the following scale:

Strongly Neutral Strongly Disagree Agree

1 2 3 4 5 1. The program assisted in my professional development.

Participant 1: 5

Participant 2: 4

Participant 3: 3

Participant 4: 5

Participant 5: 5

Participant 6: 4

Participant 7: 4

Average Rating: 4.28

All but one of the seven participants either agreed or strongly agreed that the

Chancellor’s Leadership Seminar assisted with their professional development. One participant

remained neutral regarding this statement.

2. The program assisted in my personal development.

Participant 1: 5

Participant 2: 3

Participant 3: 2

Participant 4: 4

Participant 5: 3

Participant 6: 4

Participant 7: 4

Average Rating: 3.5

Four of the seven participants either agreed or strongly agreed that the Chancellor’s

Leadership Seminar assisted in their personal development. Two participants remained neutral

regarding this statement while one participant disagreed with the statement.

3. The program develops specific job competencies useful in leadership positions.

Participant 1: 4

Participant 2: 4

Participant 3: 4

Participant 4: 4

Participant 5: 4

Participant 6: 4

Participant 7: 5

Average Rating: 4.14

Six of the seven participants agreed that the Chancellor’s Leadership Seminar developed

specific job competencies that are useful in leadership positions. One participant strongly agreed

with this statement.

4. The program substantially improved my communication skills.

Participant 1: 3

Participant 2: 2

Participant 3: 2

Participant 4: 3

Participant 5: 3

Participant 6: 3

Participant 7: 3

Average Rating: 2.71

While three participants remained neutral regarding the statement that the Chancellor’s

Leadership Seminar substantially improved their communication skills, two participants

disagreed with the statement.

5. The program significantly improved my skills for assuming positions of greater leadership and

responsibility.

Participant 1: 4

Participant 2: 4

Participant 3: 3

Participant 4: 4

Participant 5: 3

Participant 6: 4

Participant 7: 4

Average Rating: 3.71

Five of the participants agreed that the Chancellor’s Leadership Seminar significantly

improved their skills for assuming positions of greater leadership and responsibility. Two of the

participants remained neutral regarding this statement.

6. I am satisfied with the leadership preparation I received from this program.

Participant 1: 5

Participant 2: 4

Participant 3: 3

Participant 4: 4

Participant 5: 4

Participant 6: 4

Participant 7: 4

Average Rating: 4

Five participants were satisfied with the leadership preparation they received from the

Chancellor’s Leadership Seminar. One participant strongly agreed with the statement while one

participant remained neutral.

7. I would recommend CLS to others.

Participant 1: 5

Participant 2: 5

Participant 3: 4

Participant 4: 5

Participant 5: 5

Participant 6: 5

Participant 7: 5

Average Rating: 4.85

Six of the participants strongly agreed with the statement that they would recommend the

Chancellor’s Leadership Seminar to others. One participant agreed with the statement.

Participant Responses

Part 2 of the Survey

To receive more in-depth responses regarding the lived experiences of the participants,

Part 2 of the survey sought written responses from the participants. The participants were asked

to respond to the 11 questions below and to base their responses on their lived experiences while

attending the CLS:

1. What specific components of the CLS do you perceive to be most useful in your present

position?

Participant 1: “Contacts made, knowledge re legislative processes, and where education

fits in, hearing others experiences, potential contacts for similar issues”

Participant 2: “Networking”

Participant 3: “Presentations by a broad spectrum of speakers and presidents.”

Participant 4: “The portions that dealt with employee relations, conflict resolution,

understanding all sides of a situation before making a decision, etc.”

Participant 5: “The networking opportunities with other community college leaders, the

candor and advice of current community college presidents in preparing for higher leadership

positions, the opportunity to learn more about the Florida community college system.”

Participant 6: “Networking with folks across the state”

Participant 7: “Networking with presidents and learning about higher education law”

From the responses, it is apparent that networking was the most highly valued attribute of

the Chancellor’s Leadership Seminar. Also valued were the opportunities the participants had to

hear the lived experiences of currently seated presidents.

2. What specific components of the CLS do you perceive to be least useful in your present

position?

Participant 1: “Communication for health care providers is an emphasis all through

education, so not much was new”

Participant 2: “none”

Participant 3: “Book referrals and too much wasted time”

Participant 4: “None- all components were highly valuable.”

Participant 5: ‘The session I attended placed very little emphasis on the development of

specific leadership skills necessary to move from senior-level administration to presidential-level

administration. This would have been helpful.”

Participant 6: “None that I can recall”

Participant 7: “None”

Four of the seven participants did not identify any specific component of the Chancellor’s

Leadership Seminar as being least useful to them in the positions they hold. One participant

responded that the no new insight was received from the component regarding communication.

One participant identified the component regarding book referrals as being least useful. Finally,

one participant did not list any specific component that was least useful however the participant

responded that too little emphasis was placed on specific skills needed to move from senior-level

administration to the presidential-level of administration.

3. What future trend(s) – demographic, technology, social, etc. – are likely to influence the future

of community colleges?

Participant 1: “ Budget cuts: pay as you go, increased minority students, retiring current

faculty and faculty replacement, student lacking positive attitude to assist others”

Participant 2: “ Demand for technology training in all areas; immigration patterns;

increasing higher education costs and making CC more accessible, affordable option; demand for

IHE accountability; globalization”

Participant 3: “The academic delivery trend toward e-learning could prove to be

detrimental to student’s communication and social skills and therefore influence planning. What

is the future of the ‘faculty member’ as we know it today. It appears that we (CC) are adding and

increasing E-learning opportunities for students because “that’s what they want” without much

thought or research as to the best way to learn. Everybody wants to be on the cutting edge,

sometimes too fast.”

Participant 4: “Technology – communication via email, web conferencing, text, etc.

Learning Environments: such as online and blended teaching. Increased partnerships with

businesses due to funding shortages, education is becoming and (sic) increasing expensive

proposition. A more focused approach to learning through Career Pathways. An increase in

interdisciplinary majors to meet the needs of a 21st century workforce. Consider bioethics

programs coupled with technology, Business degrees coupled with linguistics and nonwestern

economics, or genetics coupled with a communications and/or business degrees. In Florida I

would expect the emergence of a strong state wide college system that replaces the community

college system by offering 4-year degrees and is non-research based. It would not be a stretch to

imagine, over the next couple of decades, high school graduates attend the state colleges and

attend the universities primarily for graduate work.”

Participant 5: “Increasingly diverse student population, many of whom are academically

unprepared for college and/or first-generation colleges students; increasing reliance on

community colleges to provide a well-trained workforce; challenges related to increased

governmental regulation and oversight, along with rigorous competition for public funds; focus

on accountability and learning outcomes; full integration of technology throughout the learning

process.”

Participant 6: “Students will still be very underprepared; state money will continue to

decrease”

Participant 7: “Demographic trends towards minority populations, loss of high-

skill/high-wage jobs”

Florida and the United States are experiencing the growth of the foreign-born population,

the increasing number of people of Hispanic descent pursuing higher education, globalization

and the growing number of adult students (Collis, 2004; Swenson, 1998; Fallows &

Ganeshananthan, 2004; Eddy, Murphy, Spaulding, & Chandras, 1997). Demographic trends,

increased minority students, immigration patterns, and a diversified student population were

identified by four of the participants as being a trend that is likely to influence the future of the

community college system.

The use and influence of technology is pervasive throughout every sector of the

community college (Phillippe, 2000; Duderstadt, 1999; Van Houweling, 2003). Distance

learning, virtual colleges, as well as the technological systems required for use in student,

academic, and administrative systems will increasingly impact community colleges. Technology

was identified as a trend by four of the seven participants. Three saw the integration of

technology as a positive trend while one expressed strong reservations about the increasingly

large role technology will play in the future of communication and social skills among students.

In an uncertain economy, funding deficits and budget constraints are having a more

significant impact higher education. Operating costs are challenging administrators while the

cost of living is challenging employees and students. Four of the seven participants identified

budgetary constraints related to the increasing cost of delivering higher education due to funding

shortages and stiff competition for state monies. One participant identified increased

partnerships with businesses as a way to assuage budget constraints. Also identified was the

increased cost of education to students.

Two of the seven participants identified a focus on accountability as a trend that

community college presidents and administrators will continue to face. One participant

identified increased governmental regulation and oversight as a trend likely to influence

community colleges. And, one participant identified the loss of high skill/high wage jobs while

another identified providing a well-trained workforce as trends likely to influence community

colleges. Whether it is the government, accrediting bodies, students, parents, employers, the

community, or other constituents, community colleges are being held accountable and this

accountability will continue into the future.

There have been numerous reports about the impending retirement of community college

presidents (Shults, 2001; Kelly, 2002; Boggs, 2002). One participant identified retiring faculty

as a trend that is likely to influence community colleges in the future.

One participant identified the possibility of a statewide (Florida) college system replacing

community colleges and offering 4-year degrees. The same participant also identified an

increase in interdisciplinary majors to meet the needs of the twenty-first century student.

Two participants identified academically under-prepared students as a trend that is likely

to influence community colleges in the future.

4. Do you perceive that the CLS prepared you for the future in community college leadership? If

yes, how? If no, why not?

Participant 1: “Somewhat. Could have been more specific in budgeting practices in the

community college system”

Participant 2: “Yes. Broader picture nationally and state-wide regarding CC issues and

challenges for leadership.”

Participant 3: “Not to (sic) much. I was in the first class and much of what we did was

redundant from other leadership activities. We were the trial and error group. Networking and

experiencing the big picture from the speakers were the highlights of my experience.”

Participant 4: “Yes – in some ways such as recommended reading and networking

opportunities. It could have done more through discussions of the state’s political and economic

systems and how they impact education – future trends and challenges.”

Participant 5: “Yes, it provided me with a very clear concept of what it would be like to

lead a community college, providing a full picture of both the challenges and rewards. It also

provided me with a lasting network of senior management-level colleagues throughout the state

who have become wonderful resources and mentors.”

Participant 6: “Yes, as I think it helped me see what leadership entails, and I learned

some excellent problem solving approaches from existing leaders”

Participant 7: “Yes – although a short courses (sic) it was intensive and provided a lot of

information for reflection”

Five of the seven participants perceived that the Chancellor’s Leadership Seminar

prepared them for the future in community college leadership while two participants did not

perceive a significant benefit from the program with regard to preparation for the future in

community college leadership.

5. What is your ultimate professional/career goal?

Participant 1: “Start an educational instruction from the ground up”

Participant 2: “CC President”

Participant 3: “To be a senior level administrator or president at a community college.”

Participant 4: “CC President”

Participant 5: “At the time I participated in the CLS, I aspired to become a community

college president. However, I currently hold a very rewarding and challenging vice presidential

position in a growing and dynamic a community college. I am very happy in this position, and

there are few presidential opportunities that could lure me away. I would also like to carve out

time in the future to teach classes again at the community college level.”

Participant 6: “A VP position (but not President!)”

Participant 7: “Community College Presidency”

Four of the seven participants identified a community college presidency as their ultimate

professional or career goal. Two participants identified a vice presidency as their ultimate

professional or career goal. And one participant identified the ultimate professional or career

goal as starting an educational instruction from the ground up.

6. Do you perceive that the CLS was helpful in the attainment of that goal? If yes, how. If no,

why not?

Participant 1: “Yes. This is America. You are rewarded for hard work and there is

nothing that you cannot attain with an education, caring heart, strategic planning and drive.”

Participant 2: “Yes. See #1 and #4”

Participant 3: “Not really, I think our session provided a great overview but helped little

on achieving goals.”

Participant 4: “Yes - as a starting point. The CLS did spend time looking at

demographics of CC Presidents, challenges they face and future opportunities.”

Participant 5: “Yes, I believe my participation in the CLS helped me to prepare for my

current position and also helped me to become prepared for a presidential position should I opt to

move in that direction.”

Participant 6: “Yes, in that it helped me to see how exisiting (sic) VPs think/act and

handle multiple issues”

Participant 7: “Yes - having the opportunity to interact with presidents who were willing

to share their story helped me define my goals.”

Six of the seven participants perceived that the Chancellor’s Leadership Seminar was

helpful in attaining their goals. One participant did not perceive any real significance in the role

that the Chancellor’s Leadership Seminar had in the attainment of their ultimate professional or

career goal.

7. What topics or issues that were addressed in the CLS do you perceive to have had the most

positive impact on you and the attainment of your goals?

Participant 1: “Stick to it no matter what, use strategic planning to the max, hold people

accountable, be honest”

Participant 2: “All”

Participant 3: “Focusing on specific topics or activities helped us to focus on our goals.”

Participant 4: “Discussion of employee relations; Discussion of outstanding leadership

qualities to strive for; Discussion of goal setting and attainment strategies”

Participant 5: “Same answer as Question 1”

Participant 6: “Meeting with existing college presidents was great.”

Participant 7: “All were valuable”

Two participants perceived that all of the topics or issues that were addressed in the

Chancellor’s Leadership Seminar had positive impacts on them and the attainment of their goals.

Two participants perceived that the activities that helped them focus their goals and attainment

strategies had the most positive impact on them. Two participants perceived that meeting the

existing community college presidents had the most positive impact on them. One participant

perceived that the discussions regarding employee relations had the most positive impact on

them. One participant perceived that networking and the opportunity to learn more about the

Florida Community College System had the most positive impact on them. And one participant

perceived that topics covering strategic planning, honesty, perseverance, and accountability held

the most positive impact on them.

8. Do you perceive that your participation in the CLS presented any barriers or negative

impacts(s) on you and the attainment of your goals? If yes, please explain.

Participant 1: “None”

Participant 2: “Not at all.”

Participant 3: “No”

Participant 4: “No negative barriers”

Participant 5: “No, none at all. The experience was completely positive.”

Participant 6: “No”

Participant 7: “No”

None of the participants perceived any barriers or negative impacts on them and the

attainment of their goals as a result of participating in the Chancellor’s Leadership Seminar.

9. What topics or issues do you recommend for inclusion in future Chancellor’s Leadership

Seminars?

Participant 1: “More on strategic planning and budgeting”

Participant 2: “Meeting the needs of a techno-driven society, market-place and student

population”

Participant 3: “Help people to understand the interview and selection process for

different level positions. Most people talk over dinner about ‘what is required for a specific type

of position’. What type of leadership experience or work experience is required for various

positions.”

Participant 4: “State political system and economics – how it works, challenges,

opportunities, success stories, etc. And why future leaders should know these things- how we can

create a positive impact, etc”

Participant 5: “Organizational culture, leading organizational change, resource

development and state funding, effective legislative relations.”

Participant 6: “Situations shared by both Presidents and VPs. To hear real situations and

to see how it was handled is a great learning tool.”

Participant 7: “Interviewing skills/use of role play and scenarios; Managing a campus

emergency”

Two participants recommended including information and activities about selection

criteria and interviewing in future Chancellor’s Leadership Seminars. Two participants

recommended including information about the state political system and economies, and

effective legislative relations. One participant recommended the inclusion of strategic planning

and budgeting while another recommended resource development, state funding, organizational

culture, and leading organizational change. One participant recommended including meeting the

needs of techno driven constituents. One participant recommended including more stories about

real situations experienced by vice presidents and presidents while another recommended

including managing a campus emergency.

10. What do you recommend to be done differently with future Chancellor’s Leadership

Seminars?

Participant 1: “Nothing”

Participant 2: No response provided

Participant 3: “My understanding is that they have improved a great deal since I attended

the class.”

Participant 4: “See above. Also, they should be a full week. There is so much to cover.

As is, it is more of an introduction than an in-depth understanding of leadership. Consider the

Leadership Academy for some ideas.”

Participant 5: “It has been quite a few years since I participated in the CLS, so the

program has probably evolved considerably since then. The best parts of the session I attended

involved interaction and presentations by current community college presidents regarding

various aspects of their positions and the challenges they face, both professionally and

personally. It was also helpful to hear how they prepared themselves to attain their first

presidential position, and what they learned from the experience. If this type of

presentation/interaction is not emphasized in the current programs, I suggest it be incorporated

into future programs.”

Participant 6: “The one I attended was 7 years ago, but the format was excellent.”

Participant 7: “None”

Five of the seven participants did not recommend anything to be done differently in

future Chancellor’s Leadership Seminars. One participant recommended extending the program

to a full week to facilitate a more in-depth understanding of leadership. One participant

recommended the inclusion of an emphasis on the preparation for a first community college

presidency.

11. Would you be willing to participate in a 20-minute telephone interview?

Three of the seven participants declined to participate in the telephone interview while

four of the participants agreed.

Telephone interviews

The researcher anticipated that the responses to the survey would lack the in-depth

responses that would provide more meaning to the study. Therefore the telephone interview

questions mimicked those in the survey, providing the opportunity to probe for more meaningful

responses and to identify recurring themes that the participants, through their responses felt were

important aspects of the Chancellor’s Leadership Seminar. Participants 1, 2, 4, and 5 agreed to

participate in the telephone interview. The summaries of the telephone interviews by participant

have been paraphrased below. (Information that would compromise the anonymity of the

participant was omitted.)

Participant 1

Participant 1 (P1) perceived that the Chancellor’s Leadership Seminar widened their

critical thinking skills. P1 also perceived a benefit from the discussions regarding effective

communication and negotiation, ethics and ethical applications, priority setting skills, and

networking in a variety of fields. P1 has been able to apply the skills that were newly honed at

the Chancellor’s Leadership Seminar. P1 recommended that a 90- or 180-day mentorship

program be added to the curriculum of the Chancellor’s Leadership Seminar. P1 also

recommended that mentoring participants should be paired with someone identified by the

Chancellor’s Leadership Seminar administrators. The mentors should be carefully selected –

someone at the next level and matched with CLS participants. P1 further recommended that a

mentoring program model should be followed.

P1 believes that the 4-year option for community colleges will move forward. P1

perceives that the financial situation five to ten years from now may create tension between 2-

year colleges and universities. P1 is concerned for the mission of the community college

especially with regard to the population to be served. P1 believes the span of control will change

for the community college president as a result of the 4-year option and the political arena as

well as the constituency will expand and the mission of the community college will be

questioned.

Participant 2

Participant 2 (P2) perceives the role of the community college to be important. P2

identifies the community college as a first safety net for students who require remediation or

English as a second language. P2 believes that the onus will fall on 2-year colleges to offer 4-

year programs as a primary matter of access. P2 believes that the move to 4-year programs will

provide a great exercise for leadership – an opportunity to have an impact on industry and

business. Four-year programs will present challenges for budgeting and funding governance,

and an expanded scope of leadership for community college presidents.

P2 would have appreciated being offered a session(s) regarding education providing

individual empowerment through technology and the importance of delivering education

virtually or in ways that students would be able to work at their own pace. P2 would also have

liked for there to have been more coverage and information about accountability and

performance-based outcomes. And, P2 would like to have been given an opportunity to

participate in Chancellor’s Leadership Seminar mentoring program.

P2 perceived the Chancellor’s Leadership Seminar to be a program of high caliber. P2

cited the opportunity to network and interface with colleagues as amazing. P2 attained “real

insight” into the real workings of the position of community college president.

Participant 4

Participant 4 (P4) stated that while the community college system is growing up and

evolving, the Chancellor’s Leadership Seminar did not prepare participants for this. P4

perceived that the Chancellor’s Leadership Seminar trained more broadly – providing the key

components of a strong leader. P4 perceived that the principles presented at the Chancellor’s

Leadership Seminar were valuable and could be applied anywhere.

P4 recommended increasing the length of the Chancellor’s Leadership Seminar and

facilitating natural mentoring arrangements rather than creating a program with assigned

mentors. Also recommended was the inclusion of more state political system and economics to

answer the questions: “How does the legislature work with the Department of Education?” “How

does FACC work with the Florida legislature?” “What is the role of the Chancellor, Commission,

and key leaders and what do they do?” “How is FTE recorded and what does it mean

economically?” “How does accountability in the State of Florida mean to lawmakers?”

P4 believes that the trend of 2-year colleges going to four years is a trend that will

continue. P4 envisions an educational environment that would support the current mission of

community colleges while offering more 4-year programs.

P4 felt positively impacted when the topic of the importance of teaching experience was

discussed. P4 was also positively impacted while participating in problem-solving exercises, and

listening to the real-world perspectives of the presidents that participated in the Chancellor’s

Leadership Seminar.

Participant 5 Participant 5 (P5) perceived the Chancellor’s Leadership Seminar as a very worthwhile

professional activity. P5 reported that the program content was beneficial especially the

networking opportunities. P5 has gained a mutual support network of peers which continues to

be helpful. P5 also reported benefiting from the candid presentations of the community college

presidents who described in very open terms their experiences both in their professional and

personal lives related to being a community college president. P5 reported that the Chancellor’s

Leadership Seminar was beneficial because it was practical and applied in nature rather than

offering a theoretical study of leadership.

Although already involved in a strong mentoring relationship, P5 believes that a

mentoring program offered by the Chancellor’s Leadership Seminar could benefit others.

P5 acknowledged the growing trend of 2-year colleges moving to four years and believes

this trend will expand the role and mission of the community college. It will also expand the

scope of responsibility of the community college president.

P5 recommended that the Chancellor’s Leadership Seminar provide more emphasis on

effective legislative relations, helping participants to thoroughly understand the legislative and

appropriations processes. Participants should know the sources of State revenues, the

implications of changes in the tax structure on State funding, and the impact these changes in

terms of providing adequate and equitable funding for community colleges.

Finally, P5 believes that information on organizational culture should be included in

future Chancellor’s Leadership Seminar offers. P5 stated that the development and maintenance

of culture is a significant portion of the job of a leader. The effectiveness of the community

college and the ability of the institution to fulfill the community college mission relates in many

ways to the strength and vitality of the culture of the organization.

Themes

Networking

Networking enables business people to build new professional and sometimes personal

relationships that could assist in the generation of future business opportunities (Merriam-

Webster, 2008). Today many networking liaisons are done online. Before online networking

however, people networked face-to-face via such activities known as “schmoozing," "rubbing

elbows," or hobnobbing. These expressions were often used among business professionals as

they referred to introducing and meeting one another and establishing rapport. This rapport

could lead to many business opportunities. Four of the seven participants felt that the

opportunity to network with their peers and with seated community college presidents was most

useful to them.

P1 felt that rather than just maintaining a network within her field, it was important to

broaden her network and network across a variety of fields. She felt that the CLS awakened her

to that knowledge and afforded her the opportunity to begin to broaden her network.

The CLS gave P2 the opportunity to have face-to-face interaction with other participants

and she was elated with the connections she was able to develop with other CLS participants as a

result of the program. She stated that she felt that the opportunity to network and interface with

colleagues was an amazing experience.

P5 felt that opportunity to network with colleagues helped to prepare her for the future in

community college leadership. She was grateful to the CLS for providing her with a lasting

network of senior management-level colleagues throughout the state who have become

“wonderful” resources and mentors to her.

P4 felt that the networking opportunities helped prepare him for the future in community

college leadership however he felt he benefited more from the sessions with seated presidents.

He stated that experiencing the big picture from the speakers was the highlight of his experience

at the CLS.

The transfer of knowledge

Diamond (2002) says that the key to success of leadership development is in the

identification of the knowledge and skills needed during the period of transition. Apparently the

League for Innovation in the Community College, the American Association of Community

Colleges, Cornell University, and The University of Texas at Austin agree. In their joint

program, The Executive Leadership Institute (ELI), they offer their participants the opportunity

to dialog with well-respected community college leaders as they review their interests and

abilities, refine their skills, and discuss matters relating to leadership (League for Innovation in

the Community College, 2007). These well-respected community college leaders are very open

in their discussions regarding choices they made, mistakes they made, their career paths, and

issues they believe are important to the position of community college president. This transfer of

knowledge is what P4 stated was the highlight of his experience with the CLS. He felt that the

community college presidents who participated in the panel discussions at the CLS were

generous in answering the many questions and that they offered a real-world prospective as to

what the job of a community college president entails. These feelings are shared by P1 who, in

addition to networking, listed hearing the experiences that the panel of presidents shared as one

of the most useful aspects of the CLS.

The panel of presidents sharing their experiences and knowledge was meaningful to P5.

She participated in another leadership program several years ago and compared to that program,

the CLS, and particularly the panel of presidents, offered a more practical and applied study of

leadership rather than a program that is more theoretical in nature. She was pleased with and

believes that it was very beneficial to hear the presentations of the community college presidents

whom she described as being very open. She was particularly impressed that the panel of

presidents shared their professional and personal experiences related to being a community

college president.

P3 was impressed by the presentations provided by the presidents. He felt that their

openness and presentations afforded him the opportunity to experience the “big picture”

regarding a community college presidency. He was so impressed with the panel of presidents

that he deemed their contributions the highlight of his experience.

Goal setting

Crews and Weakley (1996) identify goal-setting as the first of four separate but

interdependent strategies that an effective leadership program should employ. They also state

that goal-setting should be linked with interactive training seminars which they believe can help

aspiring leaders to identify their strengths and weaknesses. Once their strengths and weaknesses

have been identified, aspiring leaders are then able to set goals to further enhance their strengths

and to overcome their weaknesses.

Both P3 and P4 felt the positive impact of the discussions regarding goal setting.

According to P3, specific topics were discussed and helpful activities facilitated the

understanding of the importance of identifying meaningful and attainable goals, and how to align

career paths and choices with those goals at the center or core of those choices. P4 was also

impacted by the goal setting discussion and particularly the emphasis on strategies to attain those

goals. He felt that out of all of the sessions and dialogs, the goal setting discussion had the most

positive impact on him.

Disappointments and/or Unmet Expectations

Three participants expressed profound disappointment about one aspect of the CLS that

did not meet their expectations. Each participant went into their session of the CLS with

preconceived expectations which were not met. For each of these three participants, the unmet

expectation was something different.

For P1, the emphasis placed on communication was surprising. She was disappointed

that the CLS program developers would think that participants, who were community college

administrators at the time of inclusion in the program, would require such an emphasis on

communication.

P4 went to the CLS looking forward to learning more about the political and economic

systems in the state of Florida. He expected there to be discussions focusing on the future trends

and challenges of the political and economic systems and how those systems would impact

education. He was disappointed that the discussions did not cover how the legislature works

with the Department of Education, how the Florida Association of Community Colleges works

with the Florida legislature, how FTE is recorded and what it means from an economical

standpoint, what accountability within the community college system means to Florida

lawmakers, and what the roles of the chancellor, commission, and key leaders in community

colleges are.

P5 had hoped that the CLS would emphasize specific leadership skills required for an

individual to move from the senior-level of administration to the presidential-level of

administration. She had hoped that her participation in the CLS would provide her with the

knowledge of those needed skills, enabling her to either hone them or acquire them as

appropriate.

Summary

The purpose of this study was to complete a formal evaluation and follow up of the

Chancellor’s Leadership Seminar from the perspectives of past participants who have been

promoted since completing the program. The effectiveness of the program must be evaluated to

determine if the goals and objectives were met. The study sought information from past

Chancellor’s Leadership Seminar participants to identify aspects of the program that were

irrelevant or that were neglected as well as aspects of the program that should be continued

and/or expanded.

Overall, the most greatly valued attributes of the Chancellor’s Leadership Seminar were

the opportunities to network and establish working relationships with colleagues, the

opportunities to hear the community college presidents present their lived experiences, and the

discussions regarding goal-setting. Although the participants identified several deficiencies in

the Chancellor’s Leadership Seminar, all but one of the seven reported satisfaction with the

program.

CHAPTER 5. RESULTS, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Introduction

To determine if learning objectives had been met and thereby judging the efficacy of the

Florida Division of Community Colleges and Workforce Education Chancellor’s Leadership

Seminars (CLS), program completers who met the criteria for inclusion in the study provided

their evaluations based on their lived experiences (Kirkpatrick, 1984). Meaningful and useful

data was studied from the follow-up post-program evaluations provided via this study and

completed after participants had assumed new positions and had time to reflect on the impact of

the CLS. This data provided insight into what issues or topics that were addressed during the

CLS were most useful to the participants. The data also provided insight into what topics and

issues were not addressed but should be included in future CLS programs (Kirkpatrick, 1984;

Royse, Thyer, Padgett, & Logan, 2005; Sanders & The Joint Committee on Standards for

Educational Evaluation, 1994).

According to researchers and experts, there are three categories of trends affecting the

community college and are going to affect the system in the future. They are demographics,

technology and society (including issues such as the economy, healthcare and family issues, and

changes in the workforce) (Executive Leadership Institute, 2005). The participant responses

supported this data. They added, however that increased networking opportunities, having

greater opportunities for exposure to current and/or past community college presidents, and a

program of longer duration would have provided greater benefits in the preparation and

development of future community college presidents.

Results and Conclusions

Although the past participants of the CLS expressed overall satisfaction with their

experiences with the CLS, it is clear from their comments that the CLS is not as effective as it

could be. Not all participants were satisfied with how time was utilized. Even though

participants expressed dissatisfaction with the utilization of time, they felt that more time – more

than one week – was needed. Overall, there was not enough time to allow for a broader

exploration of valued topics.

The past participants desired more interaction with people that had lived experiences.

They also expressed that there were topics that were deemed less than useful as well as topics

that were felt to have been excluded.

From the viewpoint of past participants, being able to network with their peers as well as

with seasoned community college presidents provided a unique insight into what the future will

hold for them as community college presidents. Hearing from seasoned presidents who shared

their lived experiences with the participants provided the participants with a phenomenological

view of the true meaning of what it means to be a community college president.

The CLS provided some developmental opportunities in that the seminars addressed

societal, demographic, and technological trends relevant to the future of community colleges.

Societal

One of the most significant trends community colleges are facing now and will continue

to address in the future is the growth and expansion of workforce development programs. In

their efforts to maintain a vital workforce, business, industry, and educational systems are

turning to community colleges. These business, industry, and educational leaders identify the

knowledge and skills their workers require and look to community colleges to provide the

appropriate education to develop the workers (Vaughn, 2000).

In response to these requests and to relieve some of the burden being experienced by the

State University System, some Florida community colleges are transitioning to 4-year, non-

research state colleges. According to the Florida Association of Community Colleges (FACC,

2008), approximately one third of the 28 community colleges have completed the transition.

These transitions will further challenge future developers of the Chancellor’s Leadership

Seminars as they strive to prepare community college presidents for the dynamic issues to be

faced from demographic, technological, societal, and other pertinent standpoints.

The state of the economy has a direct impact on community colleges. Funding must be

identified to address the upward spiraling costs of materials, equipment, energy, and healthcare.

Community college presidents must be comfortable with the identification of funding sources,

the formulas utilized by the State to distribute funds, and the rules pertaining to the use of funds.

Participants in the CLS did not feel that enough emphasis was placed on these topics.

Demographics

Florida and the United States are experiencing the growth of the foreign-born population,

the increasing number of people of Hispanic descent pursuing higher education, globalization

and the growing number of adult students (Collis, 2004; Swenson, 1998; Fallows &

Ganeshananthan, 2004; Eddy, Murphy, Spaulding, & Chandras, 1997). Demographic trends,

increased minority students, immigration patterns, and a diversified student population were

identified by four of the participants as being a trend that is likely to influence the future of the

community college system.

Across the United States, an increasing number of people of Hispanic descent are

pursuing higher education (Fallows & Ganeshananthan, 2004). The growing foreign-born

population in the United States has added to the demand for community college education.

According to the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR), “about one in every

eleven immigrants in the United States lives in Florida” (FAIR, 2008). With Florida having the

third largest immigration population in the United States (FAIR, 2008), it is vitally important for

community college presidents to lead by example in mastering the ability to negotiate the

multicultural environment that will continue to grow (Eddy, Murphy, Spaulding, & Chandras,

1997). Florida community college presidents must take the lead in supporting multinational and

multicultural students as they balance their assimilation into the Florida culture while embracing

their national and/or cultural diversity.

According to the past participants of the Chancellor’s Leadership Seminars, the topic of

demographics was covered but was not given the prominence that should have been warranted

given the vast and growing diversity within the State.

Technology

Technology was identified as a trend by four of the seven participants. Three participants

saw the integration of technology as a positive trend while one expressed strong reservations

about the increasingly large role technology will play in the future of communication and social

skills among students. The use and influence of technology is pervasive throughout every sector

of the community college. It is a “factor in most of the demographic, economic, and academic

challenges confronting community colleges as they plan for the future” (Phillippe, 2000, pg. 140;

Duderstadt, 1999; Van Houweling, 2003). “Information technology eliminates the barriers of

space and time,” and introduces “new competitive forces such as virtual colleges and

universities, and for-profit education providers” (Duderstadt, 1999). Distance learning, virtual

colleges, as well as the technological systems required for use in student, academic, and

administrative systems will increasingly impact community colleges.

One study participant recommended that future Chancellor’s Leadership Seminars

address the issue of “meeting the needs of a techno-driven society, marketplace, and student

population.” The pervasive use and influence of technology throughout every sector of the

community college supports the recommendation. Students of today are more technologically

savvy than ever and this trend will undoubtedly continue in the future. It is vital to find the right

blend of technology that will facilitate the teaching and learning process (Eddy, Murphy,

Spaulding, & Chandras, 1997) as well as the business and financial operations of the institution

(Olson, 2001).

Limitations of the Study

This study was limited to the participants of the CLS and only included Florida

Community College System senior administrators from the 28 Florida public community

colleges who had completed a CLS, were subsequently promoted to a senior administrative

position within their same college, and who had been in their new positions for at least one year.

Some CLS participants may have left the Florida System for presidencies or other positions

outside of the state and may not have received the invitation to participate.

The study sought those who had continued within their institutions after completion of

the CLS, therefore if a past CLS participant had accepted a presidency at an institution other than

the one in which he or she was employed while participating in the CLS, they were excluded

from the study and therefore unable to contribute information-rich perceptions of their lived

experiences with regard to the CLS.

Not all of the people who volunteered to participate in the study met the criteria for

inclusion in the study. Those volunteers may have been able to contribute pertinent information

regarding the efficacy of the CLS as it pertained to their current positions. This information may

have provided insight to CLS developers as they plan future sessions of the CLS.

The findings from this study may not be able to be generalized to community colleges

outside of the state of Florida because each institution has unique internal and external

institutional and leadership needs. Additionally, this study may not be able to be generalized to

individual Florida community colleges leadership development programs for the same reasons.

The design of the study did not allow for the measurement of changes in perceptions over

time or for the establishment of causal relationships. Also, the study researcher completed

leadership development programs and was promoted to a senior administrative position and may

have inadvertently introduced personal bias to the study.

Due to significant time lags, considerable difficulty was experienced in the process of

maintaining interest from volunteers who initially volunteered to participate in the study. A

miscommunication between the researcher and the staff of Chancellor Armstrong resulting in the

initial request for volunteers being sent from the Office of the Chancellor prior to the researcher

having received IRB authorization to interact with study participants; the resignation and

subsequent search for a replacement for Chancellor Armstrong; the hiring of the new chancellor,

Willis Holcombe; and the holiday and vacation schedules of the Division of Community College

staff members all contributed to an almost insurmountable amount of time passing before the

study actually began.

The Chancellor’s Leadership Seminar was developed for the purpose of the preparing

future community college presidents. The intent of this study was to determine the efficacy of

the CLS from the perspectives of past CLS participants. Study participants provided their input

regarding what they felt was beneficial to them in the positions they hold since completing the

CLS. Although all of the study participants met the criteria of having been promoted since

completing the CLS, none had been promoted to the position of community college president

and therefore have not been able to evaluate the effectiveness of the CLS from a presidential

viewpoint.

Recommendations

Past Chancellor’s Leadership Seminars have been effective but, could have been more

effective. A process of ongoing research and evaluation of future CLS sessions must be

instituted to investigate how demographics, technology and society will impact community

colleges of the future. In addition to these trends, this study further supports the inclusion of a

greater quantity of networking opportunities, the addition of mentoring programs, and sessions

regarding legislative relations and the impact that government has on the community college

system. Future CLS sessions should also include up-to-date insight regarding the effective use

of technology throughout every sector of the community college, the importance of valuing and

managing diverse populations, and the impact of the transitions to 4-year, non-research state

colleges. Business, industry, and education are all facing many challenges. As such, future

community college presidents must be well-versed in funding sources, formulas, and rules; the

economy and the impact it has on the community college, as well as the importance of

accountability and ethical leadership.

I further recommend that the Chancellor’s Leadership Seminars should be a 1-year,

bimonthly program with a curriculum determined and developed by a team with membership

including community college trustees, representatives from the FACC Council of Presidents

(currently seated presidents), past CLS participants, a community college leadership consultant

and/or a member of the American Association of Community Colleges, and a human resources

facilitator. Bringing together this group of CLS developers would provide greater opportunities

for more effective Chancellor’s Leadership Seminar sessions.

Additionally, the Chancellor’s Leadership Seminars should include visioning exercises as

well as mentoring and coaching experiences. Participants should be involved in cross training

programs wherein they will work closely with administrators in other areas of the community

college.

Finally, in an effort to mitigate potential problems attaining participation in future studies, I

make the following recommendations. Future researchers should strive for complete clarity in

all correspondence. Clarifying conversations or written documents should be utilized in an effort

to eliminate the threat of any miscommunications. CLS participants should be tracked for a

minimum of five years after completion of the Seminar in which they participated. And as a

term of acceptance into the CLS program, participants should be required to agree to being

included in Florida Division of Community College-sanctioned research studies for up five years

after completion of the Seminar in which they participated.

Summary

A common theme among business models for leadership development is the need for the

perpetual evaluation of leadership programs. McDade (1987) states that there is a large gap in

knowledge with regard to the efficacy of leadership development programs. Kirkpatrick (1984)

states that evaluations must go beyond attaining reactions from participants at the conclusion of

their leadership development programs. To garner a learning-centered determination of the

effectiveness of a leadership development program, evaluators must learn from program

completers which aspects of the programs proved effective during their first year after the

conclusion of the program (MetrixGlobal, 2007). This study addressed the effectiveness of the

Chancellor’s Leadership Seminars in the Florida Community College system from the

perspectives of program participants who had been promoted into or had changed leadership

positions within their same institutions and who have been in their new positions for at least one

year.

Because of the dynamic nature of demographic, societal, and technological trends

community college leadership developers and succession planners must stay abreast of current

issues while looking toward the future with all of its opportunities and threats. Community

college presidents must diligently monitor both the current and future institutional environments

and develop strategies for meeting the threats and opportunities associated with both

environments. Providing the appropriate content in future Chancellor’s Leadership Seminars will

challenge program developers however, accepting the challenge will produce enormous

dividends to future Florida community college presidents, administrators, faculty, staff, students,

communities, the State, and perhaps the nation.

The effectiveness of the study was established through the collection of information-rich

data gathered from a diverse representation of past participants of the CLS. Past Chancellor’s

Leadership Seminars have been effective but, according to past participants, could have been

more effective. Following up with past Chancellor’s Leadership Seminar participants after they

have had an opportunity to assimilate the training and development received at the CLS into their

work lives will provide meaningful and useful data to be employed in the development of future

sessions.

REFERENCES

Albertson, H.T. (2002). Chronological history of the Florida community college system. Retrieved December 21, 2006 from http://www.facc.org/chronolofccsys.asof9-24- 02wpd.pdf.

Albertson, H. & Wattenbarger, J. (1998). A short history of Florida’s community colleges.

Retrieved December 21, 2006 from http://www.facc.org/history.pdf. Alfred, R.L. (2001 Dec/2002 Jan). The future: mastering the contradiction. Community College

Journal, 10-14. American Association of Community Colleges (2007a). Competencies for community college

leaders. Retrieved January 2, 2007 from http://dbtext.aacc.nche.edu/dbtw- wpd/data/CompentenciesForLeaders.pdf.

American Association of Community Colleges (2007b). Leading forward: the community

college opportunity. Retrieved February 12, 2007 from http://www.ccleadership.org/resource_center/leadership.asp.

Amey, M.J. & VanDerLinden, K.E. (2002). Career paths for community college leaders.

Washington, D.C.: Community College Press. Angelo, J.M. (2004, February). The $250 million pie. University Business. Retrieved December

11, 2005 from http://www.highbeam.com. Association of Community College Trustees (2007). The Thomas Lakin Institute for Mentored

Leadership. Retrieved February 13, 2006 from http://www.acct.org/Template3.asp?bid=3598.

Barwick, J. (2002). Pathways to the presidency: same trail, new vistas. Community College

Journal, August/September, p. 6-11. Becker, G.S. (1994). Human capital: a theoretical and empirical analysis, with special reference

to education (3rd ed.). Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Bellanca, R.B. (2002). Professional development for a new age. In N. Thomas (Ed.),

Perspectives on the community college. Phoenix, AZ: League for Innovation in the Community College and Macomb Community College.

Belcher, J.M. & Montgomery, P.D. (2002). Leadership team selection and development. In D.F. Campbell (Ed.), The leadership gap: model strategies for leadership development. (pp. 15-24). Washington, D.C.: Community College Press.

Bloor, M. (1997). Techniques of validation in qualitative research: a critical commentary. In G.

Miller & R. Dingwall (Eds.), Context and method in qualitative research, (pp. 37-50). London: Sage Publications.

Boggs, G.R. (2002). Forward. In D.F. Campbell (Ed.), The leadership gap: model strategies for

leadership development (pp. vii-viii). Washington, DC: Community College Press. Boggs, G.R. (2003). Leadership context for the twenty-first century. In W. Piland & D. Wolf

(Eds.), New directions for community colleges, No. 123, (pp. 15-25). San Francisco, C.A.: Jossey-Bass.

Bollag, B. (1998, October 23). World’s higher-education leaders map strategies for the 21st

century. The Chronicle of Higher Education, 45(9), A61. Byham, W.C., Smith, A., & Paese, M. (2002). Grow your own leaders: how to identify, develop,

and retain leadership talent. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall. Campbell, D.F. & Kachik, C. (2002). Leadership profile research and consortium. In D.F.

Campbell (Ed.), The leadership gap: model strategies for leadership development (pp. 3- 14). Washington, D.C.: Community College Press.

Campbell, D. & Zeiss, T. (2005, January). Executive succession planning, selection and

development. Workshop presented within 2005 Community College Futures Assembly workshop: National Policy Summit in Orlando, Florida.

Capella University, (2006). Dissertation manual. Minneapolis, MN: Capella University. Carroll, C. (2004). Succession planning: developing leaders for the future of the organization

[Electronic version]. Leadership Abstracts, 17(2). Carroll, C. & Phillips, L. (2004). Succession planning: Daytona beach community college

prepared tomorrow’s leaders. The Bottomline Newsletter of Community College Business Officers, Summer 2004. Retrieved August 20, 2007 from http://www.ccbo.org/communication/bottomline/issues/tblsummer04.pdf.

Caudron, S. (1996). Plan today for an unexpected tomorrow [succession planning]. Personnel

Journal, September 1996, 75(9), pp. 40-45.

Caudron, S. (1999). The looming leadership crisis. Workforce, September 1999, 72-79. Chase, H. (2000, September). Miles to go, promises to keep; Higher education in the 21st

century. Business Officer, 28-37. Cleveland, H. (2002). Nobody in charge: essays on the future of leadership. San Francisco, CA:

Jossey-Bass. Coffey, A.J. & Atkinson, P.A. (1996). Concepts and coding. In Making sense of qualitative data

(pp. 26-53). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Cohen, A.M., & Brawer, F.B. (2003). The American community college (4th ed.). San Francisco:

Jossey-Bass. Collis, D. (2004). The paradox of scope: a challenge to the governance of higher education.

Futures Forum 2004, 61-64. Council for the Study of Community Colleges. (2007). Graduate studies in the community

college field. Retrieved February 12, 2007 from http://www.cscconline.org/gradprogs.htm.

Creswell, J.W. (1998). Qualitative inquiry and research design: choosing among five traditions.

Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Creswell, J.W. (2003). Research design: qualitative and quantitative and mixed methods

approaches. (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Crews, A.C. & Weakley, S. (1996). Making leadership happen: the southern regional education

board model for leadership development. Atlanta, GA: Southern Regional Education Board.

Crotty, M. (1998). The foundations of social research: meaning and perspective in the research

process. London: Sage Publications. Desjardins, C., & Huff, S. (2001). The leading edge: competencies for community college

leadership in the new millennium. Phoenix, AZ: National Institute for Leadership Development.

Diamond, R.M. (Ed.) (2002). Field guide to academic leadership. San Francisco, C.A.: Jossey-

Bass.

Dilthey, W. (1991). Introduction to the human sciences. R.A. Makkreel & F. Rodi (Eds.).

Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Dougherty, K.J. & Bakia, M.F. (1999). The new economic development role of community

colleges. New York: Community College Research Center, Teachers College, Columbia University.

Doyle, M., Clayton, T., & Buchanan, D. (2000). Mixed results, lousy process: the management

experience of organizational change. British Journal of Management, 11(3), s59. Drucker, P.F. (1994, November). The age of transformation. The Atlantic Monthly, 53-80. Drucker, P.F. (1996, Summer). The shape of things to come: an interview with Peter F. Drucker.

Leader to Leader, 1. Retrieved August 3, 2004 from http://www.pfdf.org. Duderstadt, J.J. (1999). New roles for the 21st century university. Issues in Science and

Technology Online. Retrieved June 15, 2003 from http://www.nap.edu/issues/16.2/duderstadt.htm.

Eddy, J.P., Murphy, S.D., Spaulding, D.J., & Chandras, K.V. (1997, Spring). 21st century

leadership practices needed for higher education. Education, 117(3), 1-4. [Electronic version]. Retrieved December 11, 2005 from http://parentsurf.com.

Elsner, P. (2001). Convening our partners: AACC summit on workforce development.

Community College Journal, June/July, p. 19-23. Evelyn, J. (2004, April 30). Community colleges at a crossroads. The Chronicle of Higher

Education, p. A20. Executive Leadership Institute (2005). League for Innovation in the Community College.

Retrieved December 15, 2005 from ttp://www.league.org/conferences/eli/eli_details.htm. Fallows, J. & Ganeshananthan, V.V. (2004, October). The big picture. The Atlantic Monthly,

294(3), 120-128. Federation for American Immigration Reform (2008). Extended immigration data for florida.

Retrieved October 3, 2008 from http://www.fairus.org/site/PageServer?pagename=research_research0a12.

Flick, U. (1998). An introduction to qualitative research. London: Sage Publications.

100

Florida Association of Community Colleges (2007). Regions. Retrieved January 31, 2007 from

http://www.facc.org/region2.htm. Florida Association of Community Colleges (2008). Regions. Retrieved October 3, 2008 from

http://www.facc.org/facc/Regions.asp?SnID=364885222. Florida Community Colleges (2005). Fact book. Retrieved December 14, 2006 from

http://www.firn.edu/doe/arm/cctcmis/pubs/factbook/fb2005/factbk05.pdf. Florida Department of Education (2006). Bureau of education information & accountability

services statistical brief. Series 2007-06B. Membership in Florida’s public schools Fall 2006. Retrieved January 5, 2007 from http://www.firn.edu/doe/eias/eiaspubs/pdf/pk- 12mbrship.pdf.

Florida Department of Education (2007a). Changing Tides: Florida’s Future Leaders. Retrieved

February 13, 2007 from http://www.fldoe.org/cc/docs/program.pdf. Florida Department of Education (2007b). State board of administration administrative rule 6H-

1.017: Area served. Retrieved January 2, 2007 from http://www.fldoe.org/cc/rules/ch6H- 1_FAC.asp.

Florida Department of Education (2007c). State board of administration administrative rule 6H-

1.040: Campus, center, special purpose center and instructional site designations. Retrieved December 21, 2006 from http://www.fldoe.org/cc/rules/ch6H-1_FAC.asp.

Florida Department of Education (2007d). Division of community colleges and workforce

education. Sixth annual chancellor’s leadership seminar expands think tank of future community college leaders. Retrieved June 25, 2007 from http://www.firn.edu/doe/workforce/cc_leadership.htm.

Florida Statutes. (2006). Community colleges: definition, mission, and responsibilities,

§§1004.65. Retrieved December 21, 2006, from http://www.flsenate.gov/Statutes/index.cfm?mode=View%20Statutes&SubMenu=1&Ap p_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=community+college+mission&URL=CH1004/ Sec65.HTM.

Gall, M.D., Gall, J.P. & Borg, W.R. (2003). Educational research: an introduction. (7th ed.).

Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.

101

Gay, L.R. & Airasian, P. (2003). Educational research: competencies for analysis and application (7th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Gerald, D.E. & Hussar, W.J. (2000). Projections of education statistics to 2010. Washington,

D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office. Gleazer, E.J., Jr. (2000). Reflections on values, vision, and vitality: perspectives for the 21st

century. Community College Journal of Research and Practice, 24(1), pp. 7-18. Harris, Z. (2002). Commitment to leadership development begins with the CEO. In D.F.

Campbell (Ed.), The leadership gap: model strategies for leadership development (pp. 25-34). Washington, DC: Community College Press.

Holloway, I. (1997). Basic concepts for qualitative research. Oxford, Blackwell Science. Husserl, E. (1970). The idea of phenomenology. Hardy, L. & Hardy, L (Translators, 1999).

Boston, MA: Kluwer Academic Publishers. Hycner, R.H. (1999). Some guidelines for the phenomenological analysis for interview data. In

Bryman, A. & Burgess, R.G. (Eds.) Qualitative Research. (Vol. 3, (pp. 143-164). London: Sage.

Katsinas, S.G. & Kempner, K. (2005). Strengthening the capacity to lead in the community

college: the role of university-based leadership programs. Retrieved January 3, 2007 from http://ncia.unl.edu/docs/strengthening_capacity_to_lead.pdf.

Kelly, E. (May 27, 2002). The changing of the guard. Community College Week, 14 (6-9). Kezar, A. & Eckel, P.D. (2004 July/August). Meeting today’s governance challenges: a synthesis

of the literature and examination of a future agenda for scholarship. The Journal of Higher Education, 75(4).

Kirkpatrick, D.L. (1984). Evaluating training program: the four levels. San Francisco: Berrett-

Kohler. Koltai, L. (1983). Community colleges: making winners out of ordinary people. In A. Levine

(Ed.), Higher learning in america: 1980-2000 (pp. 100-113). Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.

Kotter, J.P. (1996). Leading change. Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press.

102

Langenbach, M., Vaughn, C, & Aagaard, L. (1994). An introduction to educational research. Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.

Lawson, R.B. & Ventriss, C.L. (1992). Organizational change: the role of organizational culture

and organizational learning. Psychological Record, 42, pp. 205-219. League for innovation in the community college (2007). 2007 Executive Leadership Institute

program. Retrieved August 20, 2007 from http://www.league.org/2/conferences/eli/2007/program.cfm.

Little, G.W. (2002). Resolving the leadership crisis. Community College Journal,

August/September 2002. Lorenzo, A. & DeMarte, D. (2002). Recruiting and developing leaders for the 21st century. In

D.F. Campbell (Ed.), The leadership gap: model strategies for leadership development. Washington, D.C.: Community College Press.

McDade, S.A. (1987). Higher education leadership: enhancing skills through professional

development programs. Washington, D.C.: Association for the Study of Higher Education

McKlenney, K.M. (2001). Converting crisis to opportunity: the AACC community college

leadership summit. Community College Journal, June/July, p. 24-27. McMillan, J.H. & Schumacher, S. (1997). Research in education: a conceptual introduction. (4th

ed.). New York, NY: Addison-Wesley Educational Publishers, Inc. Merriam, S.B. (1998). Qualitative research and case study applications in education. San

Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Merriam-Webster (2008). Networking. Retrieved September 3, 2008 from http://www.merriam-

webster.com/dictionary/networking. MetrixGlobal (2007). ROI evaluations and scorecards. Retrieved January 10, 2007 from

http://www.metrixglobal.net/roi_leadershipevaluations_scorecards.php. Morrison, J.L. (1995). Critical trends and events affecting the future of community colleges.

Retrieved November 8, 2005 from http://www.horizon.unc.edu. Morse, J. (1994). Designing qualitative research. In N.K. Denzin & Y.S.Lincoln (Eds.),

Handbook of qualitative research, (pp.220-235). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

103

Myran, G., Zeiss, T., & Howdyshell, L. (1995). Community college leadership in the new

century. Washington, D.C.: The Community College Press. National Institute for Leadership Development (2007). Leaders. Retrieved February 13, 2007

from http://www.pc.maricopa.edu/nild/leaders/html. Noel-Levitz (2005-06). National research report: Five-year trend study: National student

satisfaction report. Retrieved December 2, 2005 from http://www.noellevitz.com. O’Banion, T., & Kaplan, J. (2003). A learning centered Ph.D. for community college leaders

[Electronic version]. Leadership Abstracts, 16(9). Olson, M.A. (2001, April). E-business: The business officer’s business. Business Officer, pp. 35-

38. Patton, M. (2004). Initiative seeks to inform and prepare new leaders. Community College

Times, January 20, 2004. Patton, M.Q. (1990). Qualitative evaluation and research methods (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks,

CA: Sage Publications. Patton, M.Q. (1997). Utilization-focused evaluation. (3rd ed.) Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage

Publications. Perin, D. (2002, Summer). The location of developmental education in community colleges: A

discussion of the merits of mainstreaming vs. centralization. Community College Review. Retrieved November 31, 2005 from http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0HCZ/is_1_30/ai_90983754.

Pfau, B.N. & Kay, I.T. (2002). The human capital edge: 21 people management practices your

company must implement (or avoid) to maximize shareholder value. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Phillippe, K.A. (Ed.). (2000). National profile of community colleges: Trends and statistics

1997-1998. Washington, D.C.: Community College Press. Pomeroy, A. (July, 2004). Great places, inspired employees. HR Magazine, Vol. 49, No. 7. Quigley, M.S., & Bailey, T.W. (2003). Community college movement in perspective: teachers

college responds to the Truman Commission. Lanham, MD: Scarecrow Press.

104

Romano, G. (2001, November). Keeping the madness at bay. Business Officer, pp. 22-28. Romero, M. (2004). Who will lead our community colleges? Change, 36, 6, pp. 30-34. Ross, M. & Green, M.F. (2000). The American college president. Washington, DC: American

Council of Education. Rothwell, W.J. (2002). Higher education may be losing its top officials sooner than expected. HR

on Campus, August, Vol. 5, Issue 8. Rothwell, W.J. (2005). Effective succession planning: ensuring leadership continuity and

building talent from within. New York: American Management Association. Rothwell, W.J., Jackson, R.D., Knight, S.C., Lindholm, J.E., Wang, W.A., Payne, T.D. (2005).

Career planning and succession management: Developing your organization’s talent – for today and tomorrow. Westport, CT: Praeger Publishers.

Rouche, J.E., Baker, G.A., & Rose, R.R. (2002). Shared vision: transformational leadership in

American community colleges. Washington, DC: Community College Press Royse, D., Thyer, B.A., Padgett, D.K., & Logan T.K. (2005). Program evaluation: an

introduction (4th ed.). Bibra Lake, WA, Australia: Wadsworth Publishing. Rudestam, K.E. & Newton, R.R. (2001). Surviving your dissertation: a comprehensive guide to

content and process (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Sanders, J.R. & The Joint Committee on Standards for Educational Evaluation. (1994). The

program evaluation standards: how to assess evaluations of educational programs. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Sharples, R.H. (2002). The importance of leadership competencies: Perceptions of North

Carolina Community College Presidents. Doctoral Dissertation, North Carolina State University, 2002. Dissertation Abstracts International, 63, 4A.

Sharples, D.K. & Carroll, C. (2002). Beacon leadership program. In D.F. Campbell (Ed.), The

leadership gap: model strategies for leadership development (pp. 35-44). Washington, D.C.: Community College Press.

Sherman, V.A. (1999). Essentials of good board/CEO relations. Washington, D.C.: Association

of Community College Trustees.

105

Shields, J. (2001, December). Stargazing: Future trends in higher education. Business Officer,

pp. 31-33. Shults, C. (2001). The critical impact of impending retirements on community college leadership.

Washington, D.C.: American Association of Community Colleges. ED451833. Strauss, A. (1987). Qualitative research for social scientists. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge

University Press. Strauss, A. & Corbin, J. (1998). Ground theory methodology: an overview. In Norman K.

Denzin & Yvonna S. Lincoln (Eds.), Strategies of qualitative inquiry (pp. 158-183). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Swenson, C. (1998). Customers and markets: the cuss words of academe. Change, Vol. 30, No.

5, September/October. United States Department of Transportation (2007). The future of workforce and succession

planning in FHWA. Retrieved February 2, 2007 from http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/reports/workforce/chapter4.htm.

Van Houweling, D. (2003). Prospects for the internet. Future Forum, pp. 13-16. Vaughn, G.B. (2000). The community college story. Washington, DC: Community College Press. Vaughn, G.B. & Weisman, I.M. (1998). The community college presidency at the millennium.

Washington, DC: Community College Press. Villadsen, A. (2002). Collective wisdom, clones, and new creations. Community College

Journal, August/September, p. 38-41. Weisman, I.B. & Vaughn, G.B. (2002). The community college presidency: 2001. Washington,

D.C.: Community College Press. Welman, J.C. & Kruger, S.J. (1999). Research methodology for the business and administrative

sciences. Johannesburg: International Thompson. Wheatley, M.J. (2001, Spring). Innovation means relying on everyone’s creativity. Leader to

Leader, 20, pp. 14-20. New York: The Drucker Foundation.

106

Williams, Y. & Moyer, J. (1995). Leadership diversity: a business necessity for bell atlantic. Journal of Education for Business, 71, (1)14.

Witherspoon, P.D. (1997). Communicating leadership: an organizational perspective. Needham

Heights, M.A.: Allyn & Bacon. Witt, A.A., Wattenbarger, J.L., Gollattschek, J.F., & Suppiger, J.E. (1994). America’s community

colleges: the first century. Washington, DC: Community College Press. Yarrington, R. (Ed.). (1969). Junior colleges: 50 states/50 years. Washington, DC: American

Association of Junior Colleges. Zeiss, T. (2004b). Attracting, developing, and retaining peak performers. Community College

Journal, February/March, 2004. Zeiss, T. (2005). Get ‘em while they’re hot: how to attract, develop and retain peak performers

in the coming labor shortage. Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson, Inc. Zey, M.G. (1984). The mentor connection. Homewood, IL: Dow Jones-Irwin.

107

APPENDIX A

Questionnaire of Past Participants of The Division of Community Colleges and Workforce Education

Chancellor’s Leadership Seminar

1. Were you promoted AFTER you completed the Chancellor’s Leadership Seminar (CLS)?

No ______ Yes ______

2. If yes, what was your position prior to completing the CLS?

3. Into what position were you promoted?

4. What is your current position?

_____________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________

Thank you for completing this questionnaire. A survey will be sent to you soon. Your participation will provide valuable information. It is hoped that the information received from you will enable the Florida Community College System to enrich the professional development of future participants of the Chancellor's Leadership Seminars.

If you have any questions, please contact me at <email address>. Joni F. Oglesby, M.A., SPHR Doctoral Candidate Capella University

108

APPENDIX B

Survey of Past Participants of The Division of Community Colleges and Workforce Education

Chancellor’s Leadership Seminar

The purpose of this survey is to follow-up on the participants’ perceptions of the Chancellor’s Leadership Seminar. Before you begin the survey, please take a moment to reflect on the Chancellor’s Leadership Seminar you completed, see what that reflection shows you, and really think – meditate on the meanings therein as you perceive them. Thank you for volunteering to participate in this study. Your identity will be kept confidential. Your input will be used for the purpose of this study and also, in aggregate form, in a summary to the Chancellor of Community Colleges and Workforce Education. The survey should take approximately thirty minutes to complete. Part I: Perceptions of the Quality of the Division of Community Colleges and Workforce

Education Chancellor’s Leadership Seminar (CLS) Please indicate how you feel about the following statements in terms of your own experiences with the CLS. Circle one response for each item. Strongly Neutral Strongly Disagree Agree 1. The program assisted in my professional 1 2 3 4 5 development. 2. The program assisted in my personal 1 2 3 4 5 development. 3. The program develops specific job 1 2 3 4 5 competencies useful in leadership positions. 4. The program substantially improved my 1 2 3 4 5 communication skills. 5. The program significantly improved my 1 2 3 4 5 skills for assuming positions of greater leadership and responsibility.

109

6. I am satisfied with the leadership 1 2 3 4 5 preparation I received from this program. 7. I would recommend the CLS to others. 1 2 3 4 5 Part II: Participant Perceptions Please respond to the four questions below based on your experience in the CLS. Your comments will be kept strictly confidential.

1. What specific components of the CLS do you perceive to be most useful in your present position?

___________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________ 2. What specific components of the CLS do you perceive to be least useful in your present

position? ___________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________ 3. What future trend(s) – demographic, technology, social, etc. – are likely to influence the

future of community colleges? ___________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________ 4. Do you perceive that the CLS prepared you for the future in community college

leadership? If yes, how? If no, why not? ___________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________ 5. What is your ultimate professional/career goal?

110

___________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________ 6. Do you perceive that the CLS was helpful in the attainment of that goal? If yes, how? If

no, why not? ___________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________ 7. What topics or issues that were addressed in the CLS do you perceive to have had the

most positive impact on you and the attainment of your goals? ___________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________ 8. Do you perceive that your participation in the CLS presented any barriers or negative

impact(s) on you and the attainment of your goals? If yes, please explain. ___________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________ 9. What topics or issues do you recommend for inclusion in future Chancellor’s Leadership

Seminars? ___________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________ 10. What do recommend to be done differently with future Chancellor’s Leadership

Seminars? ___________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________________ 11. Would you be willing to participate in a 20 minute telephone interview?

111

No _____________

Yes ____________ Telephone Number: _________________________

Best day(s) of the week to call: ______________________________________________ Best time(s) to call: _______________________________________________________

Thank you for your completing the previous Questionnaire and this survey. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at <telephone number> or by email at <email address>. Please complete and return the survey by email to <email address> no later than <date>. Joni F. Oglesby, M.A., SPHR Telephone Number Email Address

112

APPENDIX C

Telephone Interview Questions for Past Participants of The Division of Community Colleges and Workforce Education

Chancellor’s Leadership Seminar

1. What is your ultimate professional/career goal? 2. Do you perceive that the CLS was or will be helpful in the attainment of that goal? If

yes, how? If no, why not?

3. What topics or issues that were addressed in the CLS do you perceive to have had the

most positive impact on you and the attainment of your goals?

4. Do you perceive that your participation in the CLS presented any barriers or negative

impact(s) on you and the attainment of your goals? If yes, please explain.

5. Do you have any additional comments? 6. Do you have any questions?

Thank you for completing the Questionnaire, the Survey, and for your participation in this telephone interview. Your participation will provide valuable information. It is hoped that the information received from you will enable the Florida Community College System to enrich the professional development of future participants of the Chancellor's Leadership Seminars. A summary of your responses will be sent for your review within two weeks. Please review the summary. If no revisions are necessary, please return the summary to me via email at <email address>. If revisions are necessary, please make them as you deem appropriate and then return the summary to me via email at <email address>. Thank you again! Joni F. Oglesby, M.A., SPHR Telephone Number Email Address