Leadership Skills Discussed at April Conference

By Barbara Viniar
Institute for Community College Development
Spring 2008

Leadership was a major theme at the Council for the Study of Community Colleges' (CSCC) annual conference from April 3 to 5 in Philadelphia. The conference focused on graduate education and the American Association for Community Colleges' leadership competencies, which the Institute for Community College Development (ICCD) uses as the framework for its leadership programs and 360° assessment.

In the session "Leadership Programs and Leadership," Art Cohen, University of California at Los Angeles, described the "in-basket" exercise that was the foundation of the sole graduate course on community colleges when he began teaching in the 60's. Noting that this kind of exercise is still popular, he said its drawback is that it is not linked to research and practice. Research on the effectiveness of graduate programs, he added, usually asks "What was useful?" It fails to ask "What wasn't useful?" Like much of the data gathered by colleges to demonstrate institutional effectiveness, it rarely identifies significant weaknesses. Cohen told the researchers that you can’t judge a research product without knowing its intended audience.

Cohen's remarks were followed by questions and comments from three respondents. Barbara Townsend, University of Missouri-Columbia, asked, "How generic is the teaching of leadership, and how specific to community colleges?" Most participants reported that community college courses were part of a larger program in higher education or adult and community education. Therefore, their courses were likely to include students who are not from community colleges. Barbara Viniar, executive director of ICCD, noted that ICCD’s programs attract an almost exclusively community college audience, with some exceptions for programs like "Leadership Tools for Women."

Jan Ignash, University of South Florida, said that graduate programs need to assume that students will be mobile and that changes in the field are inevitable. "Which of the competency domains identified by AACC are enduring?" she asked. "These are the areas that belong in graduate programs. Others are more appropriate to professional development programs." This distinction was reiterated by James Palmer, Illinois State University. Graduate education, he said, properly focuses on the theoretical. The practical and skill-building domains belong in professional development programs.

A survey of doctoral students undertaken by Townsend, Dick Romano, Broome Community College, and Kate Mamiseishvili, University of Missouri, indicated that most students felt they were gaining practical skills in their graduate programs. In their presentation, "Leaders in the Making: Profile and Perceptions of Students in Community College Doctoral Programs, Townsend and Romano shared the results of a study funded by ICCD." The purpose of the study was to develop a portrait of current doctoral students in graduate programs focusing on the community college, including community college leadership. More specifically, the study sought to develop a demographic profile, ascertain influences upon students' perceptions of the community colleges and determine their views about various aspects of the community college and particular leadership competencies." The sample was 18 graduate programs in 13 states.

The majority of the 153 respondents (53.2%) said the reason for enrolling in a doctoral program was "to qualify for an administrative/leadership position." Almost even percentages indicated that their goal was to advance in their current position (21.4%) or to satisfy their own interests rather than job advancement (22.7%) Other responses were "to qualify for a teaching position at a four-year institution" (9.1%) and "to qualify for a teaching position at a community college" (2.6%). A majority of the respondents (87%) said that their graduate training had strengthened their belief that leadership skills can be learned. While 91% said that their training had improved their leadership skills, only 74% said that their programs taught them practical skills relevant to working in a community college.   

While 146 respondents (96%) indicated that their program included one or more courses in leadership, slightly fewer, 133 (88.1%) indicated that leadership skills were part of their graduate education, and only 82 (53.6%) said that developing leadership competencies was the primary reason for doing graduate work. The majority of respondents indicated that their current graduate training was "moderately/extremely" helpful in developing each of the six competency domains identified by AACC: organizational strategy (82.9%), resource management (59.2%), communication (85.6%), collaboration (89.5%), advocacy (74.6%) and professionalism (88.8%).

There is clearly a need for further research in this area. Several programs are called "community college leadership" programs, but their link to the specific leadership skills needed by community college leaders remains unclear. Further studies might examine the intended learning outcomes of these programs. This study did not include on-line programs, which are growing in number.
 
The lower rankings for resource management and advocacy in Townsend and Romano's survey were consistent with preliminary data from ICCD’s 360° leadership assessment. These data, along with other research presented at the conference, point to a critical need in leadership development for prospective presidents.

Christopher Duree (pictured at left), Iowa State University, presented his findings on leaders and leadership development in "The Challenges of the Community College Presidency in the New Millennium: Pathways, Preparation, Competencies and Leadership Programs Needed to Survive." Two of his research questions — "What are the greatest challenges facing current community college presidents?" and "How well-prepared were current community college presidents to practice the leadership skills embedded in the AACC's competencies for community college leaders?" — showed a potential mismatch between need and preparation.

The greatest challenges in rank order were: fundraising; enrollment; legislative advocacy; economic and workforce development; faculty relations; and diversity. Yet, among the competencies presidents were least prepared for in assuming their first presidency were: taking an entrepreneurial stance in seeking alternative funding sources; working effectively with legislators, board members, business leaders, and accrediting organizations; and valuing and promoting diversity, inclusion, equity, and academic excellence. The last area is the primary component of the AACC advocacy domain.  

Duree recommended that formal programs review their curricula to ensure that AACC’s competencies are addressed. As other presenters made clear, however, there is no consensus that these competencies are the province of graduate programs. Duree's recommendation that individuals seeking presidencies design personal development plans that include "participation in activities specifically targeting the competencies recommended by AACC" is more likely to be adopted. Duree identified several areas for future research, including "identifying which training resources provide the best background in the competency skill sets."

Duree's conclusion that "a well designed leadership development plan must include learning experiences from multiple resources and be carefully created around the competencies recommended by the AACC" is in sync with ICCD's philosophy, and with that of some of the major professional development programs such as AACC's Future Leaders Institute (FLI).

One of the conference roundtables, however, took the discussion a step further. Do the competencies in fact lay out the right path for community college leaders? During a discussion of "Leadership in the Trenches: Trends, Practices and Strategies," led by Pamela Eddy, Central Michigan University, and Marilyn Amey, Michigan State University, a question was raised about how the competencies achieve their stated purpose, which is to foster "transformational" leaders. Where in the competencies would one find the concept of social capital, which is emerging in current leadership thinking? According to Amey, much of leadership is about "making meaning" and "who you are in relation to your leadership position." Can "knowing yourself" be taught?

Since the majority of participants at the conference were faculty and students from graduate programs, the conversation again focused on the role of these programs. Many faculty in these programs have not served as community college leaders. They identify themselves as scholars. There is an assumption that the practical leadership skills are being learned on the job, but that is neither assessed nor intentionally linked to the curriculum. Although community college presidents and other leaders are often brought into the classroom to provide "real world" experience, they are not asked how to make the overall programs more practical or relevant. There are notable exceptions, such as the Community College Leadership Program at the University of Texas at Austin.

Now that the community college leadership competencies have been in use for three years, they are providing fertile ground for research and discussion. ICCD is particularly interested in applying the research to its programs and disseminating it to campuses and systems that have established or are creating grow-your-own programs. 

For more information, contact ICCD@cornell.edu.

Barbara Viniar is executive director of the ICCD.