INFORMATION TO USERS The m ost advanced technology h as been used to photo­ graph and reproduce th is m anuscript from the microfilm m aster. UM I film s th e te x t d irec tly from th e o rig in al or copy subm itted. Thus, some th esis and dissertation copies are in typew riter face, w hile others may be from any type of com puter printer. The q u a lity of th is re p ro d u ctio n is dependent upon th e quality of th e copy subm itted. Broken or indistinct print, colored or poor q u a lity illu stra tio n s an d photographs, p rin t bleedthrough, su b stan d ard m argins, and im proper alignm ent can adversely affect reproduction. In the unlikely event th a t the author did not send UMI a complete m anuscript an d there are m issing pages, these will be noted. Also, if u n a u th o riz e d copyright m a te ria l had to be removed, a note will indicate th e deletion. Oversize m aterials (e.g., maps, drawings, charts) are re ­ produced by sectio n in g th e o rig in al, b eg in n in g a t th e upper left-hand corner a n d continuing from left to rig h t in equal sections w ith sm all overlaps. Each original is also photographed in one exposure and is included in reduced form at th e back of the book. These are also available as one exposure on a stan d ard 35mm slide or as a 17" x 23" black a n d w h ite p h o to g ra p h ic p rin t for a n a d d itio n a l charge. P hotographs included in th e o rig in al m a n u sc rip t have been reproduced x ero g rap h ically in th is copy. H ig h er q u ality 6" x 9" black a n d w hite photographic p rin ts are available for any photographs or illustrations appearing in this copy for an additional charge. Contact UMI directly to order. UMI U n iversity M icro film s International A Bell & H o w ell Inform ation C o m pa ny 300 N orth Zeeb R oad, Ann Arbor, M l 48106-1346 USA 3 1 3 /7 6 1 -4 7 0 0 8 0 0 /5 2 1 -0 6 0 0 O rder N u m b e r 8923847 S ele ctio n p ro cesses an d career p a th s o f ch ief academ ic officers in M ich ig a n co m m u n ity colleges E sm ond, Patricia A nn, P h .D . Michigan State University, 1989 UMI 300 N. ZeebRd. Ann Arbor, MI 48106 SELECTION PROCESSES AND CAREER PATHS OF CHIEF ACADEMIC OFFICERS IN MICHIGAN COMMUNITY COLLEGES By P a t r i c i a Ann Esmond A DISSERTATION Sub mi tt ed t o Michigan S t a t e U n i v e r s i t y in p a r t i a l f u l f i l l m e n t o f t h e r e q u i r e m e n t s fo r the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Department o f C o l l e g e and U n i v e r s i t y A d m i n i s t r a t i o n 1989 ABSTRACT SELECTION PROCESSES AND CAREER PATHS OF CHIEF ACADEMIC OFFICERS IN MICHIGAN COMMUNITY COLLEGES By P a t r i c i a Ann Esmond Thi s study was designed to identify and analyze selected f a c t o r s r e l a t e d t o t h e c a r e e r p a t h s and s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s e s o f c h i e f academic officers factors were s t u d i e d f o r t h e i r process and compared o v e r two t i m e p e r i o d s - - 1 9 6 0 t o 1974 and the present. 1. in Michigan public community colleges. The p e r c e i v e d im p o r t a n c e in t h e s e l e c t i o n 1975 t o The c o m p ar is o ns we re: Perceptions of c h ie f academic o f f i c e r s employed 1960 to 1974 and 1975 t o t h e p r e s e n t . 2. P e r c e p t i o n s o f p u b l i c community c o l l e g e p r e s i d e n t s employed 1960 t o 1974 and 1975 t o t h e p r e s e n t . 3. Perceptions of c h ie f academic o f f i c e r s employed 1960 to 1974 w it h p r e s i d e n t s employed d u r i n g t h e same p e r i o d . 4. P e r c e p t i o n s o f c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s employed 1975 t o t h e p r e s e n t w it h p r e s i d e n t s employed d u r i n g t h e same p e r i o d . 5. Career paths o f c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s employed 1960 t o 1974 and 1975 t o t h e p r e s e n t . The comparison developing in the was made selectio n to determine process and whether career trends paths. were A ll P a t r i c i a Ann Esmond i n d i v i d u a l s (92 c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s / 8 2 p r e s i d e n t s ) who have been ( s i n c e 1966) o r a r e now a p r e s i d e n t o r c h i e f aca dem ic o f f i c e r a t one o f the The 29 Michigan community return rate of colleges com plete d academic officers employed officers employed a f t e r were questionnaires b e f o r e 19 7 4 , 1974, sent 61% f o r a was questionnaire. 71.9% f o r 76.3% f o r presidents chief c h i e f academic employed before 1974, and 97% f o r p r e s i d e n t s employed a f t e r 1974. Thirty-tw o fa c to rs r e l a t i n g to the c a r e e r - p a t h models were used on t h e deemed i m p o r t a n t / n o t presidents important employed b e f o r e officers employed m ajority s ta r te d m ajority after of the before questionnaire. by t h e chief by t h o s e ca re e r paths 1974 in the model the between and a f t e r 1974 of factors and same f a c t o r s employed a f t e r in a K-12 s e t t i n g o r a s f a c u l t y 1974 were Those academic o f f i c e r s 1974 w er e e s s e n t i a l l y p e r c e i v e d as i m p o r t a n t / n o t i m p o r t a n t A com parison s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s and seven 1974. c h i e f academic indicated th a t the b e f o r e 1974. The full-tim e d e p a r t m e n t / d i v i s i o n c h a i r , t o dean or v i c e - p r e s i d e n t . faculty, to ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I am e s p e c i a l l y assistance, in terest, indebted to and a d v i c e . Eldon Nonnamaker for his A p p recia tio n is a l s o extended to t h e o t h e r members o f my co m m it te e: Hek hu is, and Dean James Rain ey. Dr. Dr. Marvin G r a n d s t a f f , Dr. Louis S p e c i a l t h a n k s t o Dr. Gene Packwood f o r h is advice concerning the a n a l y s i s of th e d a ta . TABLE OF CONTENTS Page LIST OF T A B L E S ...................................................................................................... viii Cha pt er I. II. III. INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY............................................................. 1 Introduction .................................................................................... S t a t e m e n t o f t h e Problem ........................................................ Pu rp o se o f t h e S t u d y ................................................................. R e s e a r c h Q u e s t i o n s ...................................................................... Methodology ......................................................................................... P o p u l a t i o n .................................................................................... Research Hypotheses ................................................................. C o l l e c t i o n o f t h e D a t a ........................................................ Methods o f A n a l y s i s ................................................................. I m p o r t an ce o f t h e S t u d y ............................................................. D e l i m i t a t i o n s , L i m i t a t i o n s , and G e n e r a l i z a b i l i t y . D e f i n i t i o n s o f Terms ................................................................. The Study S e t t i n g .......................................................................... O r g a n i z a t i o n o f t h e S t u d y ........................................................ 1 2 3 3 5 5 5 6 7 7 9 9 11 12 REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE .................................................... 13 R e l a t e d H i s t o r y o f Community C o l l e g e s ............................. B r i e f H i s t o r y ............................................................................... A dm inistration in a S ta b le or D eclining Period . The C h ie f Academic O f f i c e r P o s i t i o n ................................. D e s c r i p t i o n and F u n c t i o n ................................................... C a r e e r P r e p a r a t i o n and Q u a l i f i c a t i o n s f o r t h e P o s i t i o n o f C h i e f Academic O f f i c e r ........................ C a r e e r P a t h s t o t h e P o s i t i o n o f C h i e f Academic O f f i c e r ......................................................................................... Methods o f R e cr u i tm e n t ............................................................. Methods o f S e l e c t i o n ................................................................. 13 13 17 19 19 33 39 43 METHODOLOGY............................................................................................. 60 H y p o t h e s e s ......................................................................................... R e s ea r c h P o p u l a t i o n ...................................................................... 61 61 v 22 Page IV. V. Data C o l l e c t i o n ................................................................................ M a il in g L i s t ................................................................................ Q u e s t i o n n a i r e Design ............................................................. P i l o t T e s t .................................................................................... Questionnaire D is trib u tio n ............................................... Methods o f A n a l y s i s ...................................................................... P r o c e s s i n g o f t h e D a t a ........................................................ S t a t i s t i c a l T re a tm e n t ............................................................. C o n f i d e n t i a l i t y ........................................................................... The Problem o f B i a s .................................................................. S u m m a r y .................................................................................................. 63 63 63 65 67 69 69 69 70 71 72 RESULTS OF THE DATA A N A L Y S I S .................................................... 73 Introduction ..................................................................................... R e s u l t s o f t h e S t u d y .................................................................. S e l e c t i o n - P r o c e s s F a c t o r s : C h i e f Academic O f f i c e r P o s i t i o n ......................................................................................... F a c t o r s Used in t h e S e l e c t i o n P r o c e s s as P e r c e i v e d by C h i e f Academic O f f i c e r s Employed Pr e-1974 and Those Employed P o s t- 1 9 7 4 ................... F a c t o r s Used in t h e S e l e c t i o n P r o c e s s as P e r c e i v e d by P r e s i d e n t s Employed a t P u b l i c Community C o l l e g e s P re -1 974 and Those Employed P o s t - 1 9 7 4 F a c t o r s Used in t h e S e l e c t i o n P r o c e s s as P e r c e i v e d by C h i e f Academic O f f i c e r s and P r e s i d e n t s Employed B ef o r e 1974 and Those Employed A f t e r 1974 a t P u b l i c Community C o l l e g e s .................................................................................... C a r e e r P at h s o f C h i e f Academic O f f i c e r s ................... 73 74 118 151 SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE . 155 S u m m a r y .................................................................................................. C o n c l u s i o n s ......................................................................................... I m p o r t a n c e / U n i m p o rt a n c e o f F a c t o r s in t h e S e l e c t i o n P r o c e s s .................................................................. Comparison o f S e l e c t i o n F a c t o r s Between Pre- 197 4 and P o s t- 1 9 7 4 Groups ........................................................ Comparison o f C a r e e r P a th s o f C h i e f Academic O f f i c e r s P r e-1 97 4 t o P o s t- 1 9 7 4 I m p l i c a t i o n s f o r P r a c t i c e ........................................................ I m p l i c a t i o n s f o r F u r t h e r Re s ea r c h ...................................... 155 156 vi 80 80 101 156 160 161 162 163 Page APPENDICES A. POSITION VACANCY DESCRIPTION SUMMARIES .............................. 165 B. COLLEGES INVOLVED IN THE S T U D Y ................................................ 179 C. LETTER TO COLLEGES TO OBTAIN MAILING L I S T ......................... 184 D. QUESTIONNAIRES..................................................................................... 185 E. LETTERS SENT TO PRESIDENTS AND CHIEF ACADEMIC OFFICERS TO PILOT TEST THE QUESTIONNAIRES ........................ 189 PERMISSION LETTER FROM UNIVERSITY COMMITTEE ON RESEARCH INVOLVING HUMAN SUBJECTS .......................................... 191 LETTERS SENT TO PRESIDENTS AND CHIEF ACADEMIC O F F I C E R S .................................................................................................. 192 FOLLOW-UP LETTERS TO CHIEF ACADEMIC OFFICERS AND PR ES ID ENT S.................................................................................... 194 I. IMPORTANCE OF FACTORS IN THE SELECTION PROCESS 196 J. RESPONSES TO OPEN-ENDED QUESTIONS ........................................... F. G. H. BIBLIOGRAPHY . . . ........................................................................................................... vi i 234 247 L IS T OF TABLES Numbers o f P u b l i c and P r i v a t e Two-Year C o l l e g e s , 1900-01 Through 1980-81 ............................................................. 16 Items in t h e A d m i n i s t r a t i v e S k i l l s R a t i n g Form . . . . 34 Ranking o f P r o f e s s i o n a l E x p e r i e n c e s in Terms o f I m p or ta n ce f o r S e l e c t i o n and F u n c t i o n i n g ....................... 34 H i g h e s t - and Lowest-Ranked C r i t e r i a f o r E d u c a ti o n C h a i r s and Deans ............................................................................... 35 C a r e e r Models o f C h i e f Academic O f f i c e r s i n Community Colleges ............................................................................................. 38 T ren ds in Dean P o s i t i o n s ................................................................. 48 Tren ds i n V i c e - P r e s i d e n t i a l ................................. 48 D em ons tra te d S k i l l s ( G e n e r a l ) ................................................... 53 D em ons tra te d S k i l l s (F ocused) ................................................... 53 ...................................................................................................... 54 Personal P ositions ........................................................ 54 ............................................................. 55 E x t e r n a l and I n t e r n a l S ou r ce s o f New P r o v o s t s (ViceP residents) ......................................................................................... 56 E x t e r n a l and I n t e r n a l S ou r ce s o f New Deans ....................... 57 Moves From O u t s i d e Academia 58 P r o f e s s i o n a l Commitment ( t o ) Professional S e n s itiv itie s ........................................................ Breakdown o f t h e S tud y P o p u l a t i o n .......................................... 62 Response Rate o f C h i e f Academic O f f i c e r s t o t h e Su rvey : F i r s t M a i l i n g ................................................................. 76 viii Page Response Rate o f P r e s i d e n t s t o t h e S ur vey : F irst M a i l i n g .................................................................................................. 76 Response Rate o f C h i e f Academic O f f i c e r s t o t h e S ur vey : Second M ai li n g ............................................................. 77 Response Rate o f P r e s i d e n t s t o t h e S urv ey: Second M a i l i n g .................................................................................................. 77 Cum ul ati ve Response Rate o f C h i e f Academic O f f i c e r s t o t h e S u r v e y ..................................................................... . . . 78 Cum ul ati ve Response Rate o f P r e s i d e n t s t o t h e Survey . 78 Pooled V a ri a n c e E s t i m a t e : Pre-1974 C h i e f Academic O f f i c e r s Versus Po st- 19 74 C h i e f Academic O f f i c e r s . 81 Pooled V a ri a n c e E s t i m a t e : Pre-1974 P r e s i d e n t s .................................................... Versus Po st- 1 97 4 P r e s i d e n t s 101 Pooled V a r ia n c e E s t i m a t e : Pre-1974 P r e s i d e n t s Versus Pre-1974 C h i e f Academic O f f i c e r s ........................ 118 Pooled V a r ia n c e E s t i m a t e : Po st- 1 97 4 P r e s i d e n t s Versus P o s t- 1 97 4 C h i e f Academic O f f i c e r s ........................ 122 C a r e e r Path M o d e l s ................................ .............................................. 152 I m p or ta n ce o f t h e D o c t o r a t e in t h e S e l e c t i o n P r o c e s s , as P e r c e i v e d by C h i e f Academic O f f i c e r s ........................ 196 Im p o r t an ce o f t h e M a s t e r ’ s Degree in t h e S e l e c t i o n P r o c e s s , a s P e r c e i v e d by C h i e f Academic O f f i c e r s . . 196 I m p or ta n ce o f t h e Major D i s c i p l i n e Area o f t h e M a s t e r ’ s o r D o c t o r a t e in t h e S e l e c t i o n P r o c e s s , a s P e r c e i v e d by C h i e f Academic O f f i c e r s ........................ 196 Im po rt an ce o f P u b l i c School Teaching E x p e r i e n c e i n t h e S e l e c t i o n P r o c e s s , as P e r c e i v e d by C h i e f Academic O f f i c e r s .......................................................................... 197 Im p o r t an ce o f Community C o l l e g e Te ac hin g E x p e r i e n c e i n t h e S e l e c t i o n P r o c e s s , as P e r c e i v e d by C h i e f Academic O f f i c e r s .......................................................................... 197 Im p o r t an ce o f A d m i n i s t r a t i v e Ex p e r i e n c e O t h e r Than Community C o l l e g e in t h e S e l e c t i o n P r o c e s s , as P e r c e i v e d by C h i e f Academic O f f i c e r s ................................. 197 ix Page Imp or ta nce o f P u b l i c School A d m i n i s t r a t i v e E x p e r i e n c e in t h e S e l e c t i o n P r o c e s s , as P e r c e i v e d by C h i e f Academic O f f i c e r s ........................................................................... 198 Im por ta nce o f B u s i n e s s / I n d u s t r y E x p e r i e n c e in t h e S e l e c t i o n P r o c e s s , as P e r c e i v e d by C h i e f Academic O f f i c e r s .................................................................................................. 198 Im por ta nce o f Community C o l l e g e A d m i n i s t r a t i v e E x p e r i e n c e in t h e S e l e c t i o n P r o c e s s , as P e r c e i v e d by C h i e f Academic O f f i c e r s ........................................................ 198 I mp o rt an ce o f D i v i s i o n / D e p a r t m e n t C h a i r E x p e r i e n c e in t h e S e l e c t i o n P r o c e s s , as P e r c e i v e d by C h i e f Academic O f f i c e r s . . . . ........................................................ 199 Imp or ta nce o f A s s o c i a t e / A s s i s t a n t Dean E x p e r i e n c e in t h e S e l e c t i o n P r o c e s s , as P e r c e i v e d by C h i e f Academic O f f i c e r s .......................................................................... 199 Imp or ta nce o f Dean E x p e r i e n c e in t h e S e l e c t i o n P r o c e s s , as P e r c e i v e d by C h i e f Academic O f f i c e r s . . 199 Imp or ta nce o f V i c e - P r e s i d e n t E x p e r i e n c e in t h e S e l e c t i o n P r o c e s s , as P e r c e i v e d by C h i e f Academic O f f i c e r s .................................................................................................. 200 Imp or ta nce o f No ned uca ti on E x p e r i e n c e in t h e S e l e c t i o n P r o c e s s , as P e r c e i v e d by C h i e f Academic O f f i c e r s .................................................................................................. 200 Imp or ta nce o f S c h o l a r l y A c t i v i t y - - P u b l i c a t i o n s i n t h e S e l e c t i o n P r o c e s s , as P e r c e i v e d by C h i e f Academic O f f i c e r s .................................................................................................. 200 Imp or ta nce o f O f f i c e s Held in S t a t e / N a t i o n a l O r g a n i z a t i o n s in t h e S e l e c t i o n P r o c e s s , as P e r c e i v e d by C h i e f Academic O f f i c e r s ................................. 201 Import anc e o f S o u r c e s in t h e S e l e c t i o n P r o c e s s , as P e r c e i v e d by C h i e f Academic O f f i c e r s ................................. 201 Imp or ta nce Process, o f I n t e r n a l C a n d i d a t e in t h e S e l e c t i o n as P e r c e i v e d by C h i e f Academic O f f i c e r s . . 201 I mp or ta nce Process, o f E x t e r n a l C a n d i d a t e in t h e S e l e c t i o n as P e r c e i v e d by C h i e f Academic O f f i c e r s . . 202 x Page Imp or ta n ce o f Age in t h e S e l e c t i o n P r o c e s s , as P e r c e i v e d by C h i e f Academic O f f i c e r s ................................. 202 I mp o rt an ce o f Gender i n t h e S e l e c t i o n P r o c e s s , as P e r c e i v e d by C h i e f Academic O f f i c e r s ................................. 202 I mp o rt an ce o f Race in t h e S e l e c t i o n P r o c e s s , as P e r c e i v e d by C h i e f Academic O f f i c e r s ................................. 203 I mp o rt an ce Process, o f Being M ar r ie d in t h e S e l e c t i o n as P e r c e i v e d by C h i e f Academic O f f i c e r s . . 203 I mp o rt an ce Process, o f Being S i n g l e in t h e S e l e c t i o n as P e r c e i v e d by C h i e f Academic O f f i c e r s . . 203 Imp or ta nce Process, o f Being Divorced in t h e S e l e c t i o n as P e r c e i v e d by C h i e f Academic O f f i c e r s . . 204 Imp or ta nce Process, o f C h i l d r e n in t h e S e l e c t i o n as P e r c e i v e d by C h i e f Academic O f f i c e r s . . 204 Imp or ta nce o f Communication S k i l l s in t h e S e l e c t i o n Process, as P e r c e i v e d by C h i e f Academic O f f i c e r s . . 204 I mp or ta nc e o f L e a d e r s h i p in t h e S e l e c t i o n P r o c e s s , as P e r c e i v e d by C h i e f Academic O f f i c e r s ........................ 205 Im por ta nce o f M a t u r i t y in t h e S e l e c t i o n P r o c e s s , as P e r c e i v e d by C h i e f Academic O f f i c e r s ................................. 205 Im por ta nce o f B e l i e f in t h e Community C o l l e g e P h il o s o p h y in t h e S e l e c t i o n P r o c e s s , as P e r c e i v e d by C h i e f Academic O f f i c e r s ................................. 205 Im por ta nce o f A t t i t u d e in t h e S e l e c t i o n P r o c e s s , as P e r c e i v e d by C h i e f Academic O f f i c e r s ................................. 206 I mp or ta nc e o f t h e A b i l i t y t o Work With O t h e r s in t h e S e l e c t i o n P r o c e s s , as P e r c e i v e d by C h i e f Academic O f f i c e r s ........................................................................... 206 Im por ta nce o f t h e D o c t o r a t e in t h e S e l e c t i o n P r o c e s s , as P e r c e i v e d by P r e s i d e n t s ........................................................ 206 Imp or ta nce o f t h e M a s t e r ’ s Degree in t h e S e l e c t i o n P r o c e s s , as P e r c e i v e d by P r e s i d e n t s ................................. 207 xi Page Im po rt an ce o f t h e Major D i s c i p l i n e Area o f t h e M aster’ s or D octorate in th e S e le c tio n Process, as P e r c e i v e d by P r e s i d e n t s ........................................................ 207 I m p o r t an ce o f P u b l i c School Teaching Ex p e r i e n c e i n t h e S e l e c t i o n P r o c e s s , as P e r c e i v e d by P r e s i d e n t s ............................................................................................. 207 I m p o r t an ce o f Community C o l l e g e Te ac hin g E x p e r i e n c e i n t h e S e l e c t i o n P r o c e s s , as P e r c e i v e d by P r e s i d e n t s ............................................................................................. 208 I m p o r t an ce o f A d m i n i s t r a t i v e E x p e r i e n c e O th e r Than Community C o l l e g e in t h e S e l e c t i o n P r o c e s s , as P e r c e i v e d by P r e s i d e n t s ........................................................ 208 I m p or ta n ce o f Publ i c School Admini s t r a t i v e E x p e r i e n c e i n t h e S e l e c t i o n P r o c e s s , as P e r c e i v e d by P r e s i d e n t s ............................................................................................. 208 I m p o rt an ce o f B u s i n e s s / I n d u s t r y E x p e r i e n c e i n t h e S e l e c t i o n P r o c e s s , a s P e r c e i v e d by P r e s i d e n t s . . . 209 I m p o rt an ce o f Community Col l e g e A d m i n i s t r a t i v e E x p e r i e n c e in t h e S e l e c t i o n P r o c e s s , a s P e r c e i v e d by P r e s i d e n t s .................................................................................... 209 I m p o rt an ce o f D i v i s i o n / D e p a r t m e n t C h a i r E x p e r i e n c e i n t h e S e l e c t i o n P r o c e s s , as P e r c e i v e d by P r e s i d e n t s ............................................................................................. 209 I m p or ta n ce o f A s s o c i a t e / A s s i s t a n t Dean E x p e r i e n c e in t h e S e l e c t i o n P r o c e s s , as P e r c e i v e d by P r e s i d e n t s ............................................................................................. 210 I m p or ta n ce o f Dean E x p e r i e n c e i n t h e S e l e c t i o n P r o c e s s , as P e r c e i v e d by P r e s i d e n t s ................................. 210 I m p or ta n ce o f V i c e - P r e s i d e n t Ex p er i en ce in t h e S e l e c t i o n P r o c e s s , a s P e r c e i v e d by P r e s i d e n t s . . . 210 I m p or ta n ce o f N on ed uc at io n E x p e r i e n c e in t h e S e l e c t i o n P r o c e s s , a s P e r c e i v e d by P r e s i d e n t s . . . 211 I m p o rt an ce o f S c h o l a r l y A c t i v i t y - - P u b l i c a t i o n s in t h e S e l e c t i o n P r o c e s s , a s P e r c e i v e d by P r e s i d e n t s . . . 211 xii Page I mp o rt an ce o f O f f i c e s Held in S t a t e / N a t i o n a l O r g a n i z a t i o n s i n t h e S e l e c t i o n P r o c e s s , as P e r c e i v e d by P r e s i d e n t s ........................................................ 211 Imp or ta nce o f So ur ces in t h e S e l e c t i o n P r o c e s s , as P e r c e i v e d by P r e s i d e n t s ........................................................ 212 I mp o rt an ce o f I n t e r n a l C a n d i d a t e in t h e S e l e c t i o n P r o c e s s , as P e r c e i v e d by P r e s i d e n t s ............................ 212 Im po rt an ce o f E x t e r n a l C a n d i d a t e in t h e S e l e c t i o n ............................ P r o c e s s , as P e r c e i v e d by P r e s i d e n t s 212 Im po rt an ce o f Age in t h e S e l e c t i o n P r o c e s s , as P e r c e i v e d by P r e s i d e n t s ........................................................ 213 Im po rt an ce o f Gender in t h e S e l e c t i o n P r o c e s s , as P e r c e i v e d by P r e s i d e n t s ................................................... 213 Im po rt an ce of Race in t h e S e l e c t i o n P r o c e s s , as P e r c e i v e d by P r e s i d e n t s ........................................................ 213 Imp or ta nce o f Being M arr ied in t h e S e l e c t i o n P r o c e s s , as P e r c e i v e d by P r e s i d e n t s ................................................... 214 Imp or ta n ce o f Being S i n g l e in t h e S e l e c t i o n P r o c e s s , as P e r c e i v e d by P r e s i d e n t s ................................................... 214 Imp or ta n ce o f Being Divorced in t h e S e l e c t i o n P r o c e s s , as P e r c e i v e d by P r e s i d e n t s ............................ 214 Imp or ta n ce of C h i l d r e n in t h e S e l e c t i o n P r o c e s s , as P e r c e i v e d by P r e s i d e n t s ................................................... 215 Imp or ta nce of Communication S k i l l s in t h e S e l e c t i o n P r o c e s s , as P e r c e i v e d by P r e s i d e n t s ............................ 215 Imp or ta nce of L e a d e r s h i p in t h e S e l e c t i o n P r o c e s s , as P e r c e i v e d by P r e s i d e n t s ................................................... 215 Im po rt an ce of M a t u r i t y in t h e S e l e c t i o n P r o c e s s , as P e r c e i v e d by P r e s i d e n t s ................................................... 216 Im po rt an ce of B e l i e f in Community C o l l e g e P h i l o s o p h y in t h e S e l e c t i o n P r o c e s s , as P e r c e i v e d by P r e s i d e n t s ........................................................................................ 216 Imp or ta nce o f A t t i t u d e in t h e S e l e c t i o n P r o c e s s , as P e r c e i v e d by P r e s i d e n t s ................................................... 216 xiii Page 1.64 1.65 1. 66 1.67 1.68 1.69 1.70 1.71 1.72 1.73 1.74 1.7 5 Imp or ta nce o f A b i l i t y t o Work With O t h e r s in t h e S e l e c t i o n P r o c e s s , as P e r c e i v e d by P r e s i d e n t s . . . 217 Imp ortan ce o f t h e D o c t o r a t e in t h e S e l e c t i o n P r o c e s s , as P e r c e i v e d by C h i e f Academic O f f i c e r s and Presidents ................................ 217 Imp or ta nce o f t h e M a s t e r ’ s Degree in t h e S e l e c t i o n P r o c e s s , as P e r c e i v e d by C h i e f Academic O f f i c e r s and P r e s i d e n t s .................................................................................... 218 Import anc e o f t h e Major D i s c i p l i n e Area o f t h e M a s t e r ’ s o r D o c t o r a t e Degree in t h e S e l e c t i o n P r o c e s s , as P e r c e i v e d by C h i e f Academic O f f i c e r s and P r e s i d e n t s .................................................................................... 218 Imp or ta nce o f P u b l i c School Teaching E x p e r i e n c e in t h e S e l e c t i o n P r o c e s s , as P e r c e i v e d by C h i e f Academic O f f i c e r s and P r e s i d e n t s ............................................ 219 Im por ta nce o f Community C o ll e g e Teaching E x p e r i e n c e in t h e S e l e c t i o n P r o c e s s , as P e r c e i v e d by C h i e f Academic O f f i c e r s and P r e s i d e n t s ............................................ 219 Im por ta nce o f A d m i n i s t r a t i v e E xp er i en ce O th e r Than Community C o l l e g e in t h e S e l e c t i o n P r o c e s s , as P e r c e i v e d by C h i e f Academic O f f i c e r s and P r e s i d e n t s ............................................................................................. 220 Im por ta nce o f P u b l i c School A d m i n i s t r a t i v e E x p e r i e n c e in t h e S e l e c t i o n P r o c e s s , as P e r c e i v e d by C h i e f Academic O f f i c e r s and P r e s i d e n t s ............................................ 220 Imp or ta nce o f B u s i n e s s / I n d u s t r y E x p e r i e n c e in t h e S e l e c t i o n P r o c e s s , as P e r c e i v e d by C h i e f Academic O f f i c e r s and P r e s i d e n t s ............................................................ 221 Imp or ta nce o f Community C o l l e g e A d m i n i s t r a t i v e E x p e r i e n c e i n t h e S e l e c t i o n P r o c e s s , as P e r c e i v e d by C h i e f Academic O f f i c e r s and P r e s i d e n t s .................. 221 I mp o rt an ce o f D i v i s i o n / D e p a r t m e n t C h a i r E x p e r i e n c e in t h e S e l e c t i o n P r o c e s s , as P e r c e i v e d by C h i e f Academic O f f i c e r s and P r e s i d e n t s . ..................................... 222 Im po rt anc e o f A s s o c i a t e / A s s i s t a n t Dean E x p e r i e n c e in t h e S e l e c t i o n P r o c e s s , as P e r c e i v e d by C h i e f Academic O f f i c e r s and P r e s i d e n t s ......................................... 222 x iv Page Importance o f Dean E x p e r i e n c e in t h e S e l e c t i o n P r o c e s s , as P e r c e i v e d by C h i e f Academic O f f i c e r s and P r e s i d e n t s ................................................................................ 223 Importance o f V i c e - P r e s i d e n t E x p e r i e n c e in t h e S e l e c t i o n P r o c e s s , as P e r c e i v e d by C h i e f Academic O f f i c e r s and P r e s i d e n t s ........................................................ 223 Importance o f N one duc at ion E x p e r i e n c e in t h e S e l e c t i o n P r o c e s s , as P e r c e i v e d by C h i e f Academic O f f i c e r s and P r e s i d e n t s ........................................................ 224 Importance o f S c h o l a r l y A c t i v i t y - - P u b l i c a t i o n s in t h e S e l e c t i o n P r o c e s s , as P e r c e i v e d by C h i e f Academic O f f i c e r s and P r e s i d e n t s ...................................... 224 Importance o f O f f i c e s Held in S t a t e / N a t i o n a l O r g a n i z a t i o n s in t h e S e l e c t i o n P r o c e s s , as P e r c e i v e d by C h i e f Academic O f f i c e r s and P r e s i d e n t s .......................................... .... .......................................... 225 Importance o f So ur ce s in t h e S e l e c t i o n P r o c e s s , as P e r c e i v e d by C h i e f Academic O f f i c e r s and P r e s i d e n t s ......................................................................................... 225 Importance o f I n t e r n a l C a n d i d a t e in t h e S e l e c t i o n P r o c e s s , as P e r c e i v e d by C h i e f Academic O f f i c e r s and P r e s i d e n t s ................................................................................ 226 Importance o f E x t e r n a l C a n d i d a t e in t h e S e l e c t i o n P r o c e s s , as P e r c e i v e d by C h i e f Academic O f f i c e r s and P r e s i d e n t s ................................................................................ 226 Importance o f Age in t h e S e l e c t i o n P r o c e s s , as P e r c e i v e d by C h i e f Academic O f f i c e r s and P r e s i d e n t s ......................................................................................... 227 I mpo rtance o f Gender in t h e S e l e c t i o n P r o c e s s , as P e r c e i v e d by C h i e f Academic O f f i c e r s and P r e s i d e n t s ......................................................................................... 227 I mpo rtance o f Race i n t h e S e l e c t i o n P r o c e s s , as P e r c e i v e d by C h i e f Academic O f f i c e r s and P r e s i d e n t s ......................................................................................... 228 I mportance o f Being M a r r ie d i n t h e S e l e c t i o n P r o c e s s , as P e r c e i v e d by C h i e f Academic O f f i c e r s and P r e s i d e n t s ......................................................................................... 228 xv Page 1.8 8 1. 89 1. 90 1.91 1.92 1.93 1.94 1.95 1.95 I m p or ta n ce o f Being S i n g l e in t h e S e l e c t i o n P r o c e s s , as P e r c e i v e d by C h i e f Academic O f f i c e r s and P r e s i d e n t s ............................................................................................. 229 I m p o r t an ce o f Being Divo rced i n t h e S e l e c t i o n P r o c e s s , as P e r c e i v e d by C h i e f Academic O f f i c e r s and P r e s i d e n t s ................................................................................... 229 I m p o r t an ce o f Having C h i l d r e n in t h e S e l e c t i o n P r o c e s s , as P e r c e i v e d by C h i e f Academic O f f i c e r s and P r e s i d e n t s ................................................................................... 230 I m p o r t an ce o f Communication S k i l l s i n t h e S e l e c t i o n P r o c e s s , as P e r c e i v e d by C h i e f Academic O f f i c e r s and P r e s i d e n t s ................................................................................... 230 I m p o r t an ce o f L e a d e r s h i p in t h e S e l e c t i o n P r o c e s s , as P e r c e i v e d by C h i e f Academic O f f i c e r s and P r e s i d e n t s ............................................................................................. 231 I m p or ta n ce o f M a t u r i t y in t h e S e l e c t i o n P r o c e s s , as P e r c e i v e d by C h i e f Academic O f f i c e r s and P r e s i d e n t s ............................................................................................. 231 I m p or ta n ce o f B e l i e f in t h e Community C o l l e g e P h i l o s o p h y in t h e S e l e c t i o n P r o c e s s , as P e r c e i v e d by C h i e f Academic O f f i c e r s and P r e s i d e n t s ............................................................................................. 232 I m p or ta n ce o f A t t i t u d e in t h e S e l e c t i o n P r o c e s s , a s P e r c e i v e d by C h ie f Academic O f f i c e r s and P r e s i d e n t s ............................................................................................. 232 I m p o r t an ce o f A b i l i t y t o Work With O t h e r s in t h e S e l e c t i o n P r o c e s s , as P e r c e i v e d by C h i e f Academic O f f i c e r s and P r e s i d e n t s ............................................................. 233 xvi CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY Introduction As t h e t u r n o v e r o f top-management p e r s o n n e l in p u b l i c community colleges achieve increases, their candidates. the positions means is by which chief assuming more Many a d m i n i s t r a t o r s academic i m p o r ta n c e who s t a r t e d officers to potential in p u b l i c community co lleg es during th e expansion y e a rs r e t i r e m e n t a g e. To add t o t h i s a l r e a d y l a r g e t u r n o v e r , Michigan has added i n c e n t i v e s to its retirem ent o f t h e 1960s a r e pac kage so t h a t now r e a c h i n g adm inistrators and f a c u l t y may o p t f o r e a r l y r e t i r e m e n t . C u r r e n t l y , v e ry l i t t l e c o m m u n it y M arlier, co llege chief inform ation is a v a i l a b l e concerning the academic o fficer. Moore, S alim bere, and Bragg (1983) summarized t h e s t a t e o f t h e l i t e r a t u r e on t h e p o s i t i o n o f dean in c o l l e g e s and u n i v e r s i t i e s a s : The l i t e r a t u r e on t h e a c a d e m i c d e a n p o s i t i o n i s e q u a l l y encumbered w i t h a l a r g e number o f p e r s o n a l o r p r e s c r i p t i v e a c c o u n t s . The dem ographic o r a n a l y t i c a l a c c o u n t s t h a t do e x i s t a r e d a t e d , n a r r o w l y f o c u s e d on a s i n g l e k in d ( e . g . , e d u c a t i o n d e a n s , de an s o f g r a d u a t e s c h o o l s ) , o r em p ha siz e t h e r o l e dilemmas and p r a c t i c a l t a s k s o f d e a n s . Few works a t t e m p t t o d e s c r i b e o r a n a l y z e t h e academic dean p o s i t i o n as p a r t o f t h e l a r g e r a d m i n i s t r a t i v e c a r e e r s t r u c t u r e o r t o p l a c e i t w i t h i n an o c c u p a t i o n a l o r academic l a b o r m a rk e t c o n t e x t , (p. 504) In turnover view o f in both the likelihood academic and that there w ill adm inistrative 1 be a significant personnel in the 2 p u b l i c community c o l l e g e s potential candidates accurate inform ation in t h e n e a r f u t u r e , for chief on academic the it is im portant t h a t officer sk ills, positions knowledge, and have career e x p e r i e n c e s t h a t a r e viewed as i m p o r t a n t in t h e i r s e l e c t i o n . S t a t e m e n t o f t h e Problem With t h e need f o r t h e r e p l a c e m e n t o f a number o f c h i e f academic officers in public community colleges r e t i r e m e n t s in t h e n e x t few y e a r s , associated studied. w ith their This criteria study career was (qualifications it a result of projected is important t h a t th e f a c t o r s paths designed as and to selection provide processes inform ation and c a r e e r p r e p a r a t i o n ) used be on the by Michigan p u b l i c community c o l l e g e s t o h i r e t h e i r c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s , mode of recruitm ent openings), position. and the (the selection used to processes dissem inate used in hiring position for the The a r e a s bei ng examined in t h e s t u d y - - t h e c h i e f academic o ffic e rs ’ career paths im portance/unimportance w h et he r sources the over and selection-process of time--1960 factors to 1974 in and the 1975 factors--analyze selection to the the process and present--these f a c t o r s have cha nged. One o f t h e as s u m p ti o n s u n d e r l y i n g t h i s s t u d y was t h a t t h e r e i s a relationship have o c c u r r e d between the many s o c i a l and s i n c e t h e mid-1970s and t h e economic current means of s e l e c t i o n o f c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s . fact, surveyed in the study because that preparation The y e a r 1974, was ch os en as t h e p o i n t s e p a r a t i n g t h e o l d e r adm inistrators ch ang es and in from t h e newer of the federal 3 legislation re la te d to d iscrim in atio n . Michigan e x p e r i e n c e d l o s s o f rev en u e t o a recession its at I t was a l s o that ti m e community c o l l e g e s chosen bec au se that resulted in a and c a u s e d them t o move from a p e r i o d o f r a p i d growth t o a p e r i o d o f s t a b i l i z a t i o n and, in s t u d y was t o d e t e r m i n e t h e p e r c e p t i o n s of some c a s e s , a p e r i o d o f d e c l i n e . Pu rp o se o f t h e Study The p u rp o s e o f t h i s p u b l i c community c o l l e g e p r e s i d e n t s and c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s w ith respect selection to the processes officers. aspiring factors associated used in the appointment Such f i n d i n g s would be p a r t i c u l a r l y to achieve the position p u b l i c community c o l l e g e . to d ate; the w ith therefore, of chief career of paths chief helpful academic and academic to persons officer in a A p au city o f rese arch e x i s t s in t h i s area the fin d in g s of th is study w ill be h e l p f u l in d e l i n e a t i n g both s u c c e s s f u l c a r e e r p a t h s and s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s e s as viewed by c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s and p r e s i d e n t s . Th is s t u d y w i l l a l s o a s s i s t in t h e u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f w h e t h e r and how c a r e e r p a t h s and s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s e s have changed o v e r time by comparing and c o n t r a s t i n g the perceptions of presidents and c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s . Re s ea rc h Q u e s t i o n s A number o f research questions were posed to assist in the development o f t h i s s t u d y . 1. factors Do c h i e f influential in academic the officers selection of perceive chief a difference aca dem ic in officers the 4 before 1974 as compared t o after 1974, and what are the factors p e r c e i v e d as i m p o r t a n t / n o t i m p o r t a n t in t h e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s ? 2. Do p u b l i c community c o l l e g e p r e s i d e n t s ence in t h e f a c t o r s influential perceive a d i f f e r ­ in t h e s e l e c t i o n o f c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s b e f o r e 1974 as compared w it h a f t e r 1974, factors perceived as im portant/not. im portant and what a r e t h e in the selectio n process? 3. demic I s t h e r e a d i f f e r e n c e between t h e p e r c e p t i o n s o f c h i e f a c a ­ officers employed before influential 4. demic and public 1974 community w ith respect college to the presidents factors who that were were in t h e s e l e c t i o n o f c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s ? Is t h e r e a d i f f e r e n c e between t h e p e r c e p t i o n s o f c h i e f a c a ­ officers employed after influential 5. officers and public 1974 community w ith respect college to the presidents factors who th at were were in t h e s e l e c t i o n o f c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s ? I s t h e r e a d i f f e r e n c e in t h e c a r e e r p a t h s o f c h i e f academic employed b e f o r e 1974 and a f t e r 1974, as reported by t h e c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s ? F actors adm inistrative a g e, internal th at were experience, candidate, considered include noneducational external degree, experience, candidate, teaching previous sex, race, experience, s c h o l a r l y a c t i v i t y , and community c o l l e g e e x p e r i e n c e ( s e e Appendix A f o r p o s i t i o n vac ancy d e s c r i p t i o n s u m m a r i e s ) . 5 Methodology Population The p o p u l a t i o n held or o fficer are now for th is holding or president in s t u d y co m pri se d a l l the position of a Michigan p u b l i c persons either who have chief academic community c o l l e g e since 1960 ( s e e Appendix B f o r a l i s t o f c o l l e g e s i n v o l v e d i n t h e s t u d y ) . T h i s p o p u l a t i o n c o n s i s t e d o f 218 i n d i v i d u a l s , and f o r t h e p u r p o s e s o f t h i s s t u d y , t h e s e i n d i v i d u a l s were d i v i d e d i n t o f o u r g r o u p s : (a) t h o s e c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s employed between 1960 and 1974, which i n c l u d e d 34 i n d i v i d u a l s ; employed after 1974, (b) t h o s e c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s who were which included 58 individuals; (c) those p r e s i d e n t s who were employed between 1960 and 1974, which in c l u d e d 42 employed individuals; and (d) those presidents 1974, which i n c l u d e d 40 i n d i v i d u a l s . before 1974 and are stil1 public who were after (Th ree p r e s i d e n t s were h i r e d community college presidents. These i n d i v i d u a l s were i n c l u d e d in t h e group o f p r e s i d e n t s employed a f t e r 1974 b ec a u se i t i s l i k e l y t h a t t h e y w i l l have employed a c h i e f academic chief officer academic addresses of since that o fficers 12 p u b l i c tim e.) were Eleven deceased, community c o l l e g e presidents and the presidents and statu s and three and/or 18 c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s were unknown ( s e e Appendix C f o r l e t t e r s t o o b t a i n m ailing 1i s t s ) . R es ea rc h Hypoth es es The r e s e a r c h q u e s t i o n s were f o r m u l a t e d i n t o r e s e a r c h h y p o t h e s e s for purposes of determining if, in fact, there were differences 6 between the perceptions of chief academic officers and public community c o l l e g e p r e s i d e n t s i n t h e a r e a s un d er s c r u t i n y . Hypothesis 1: T he re w i l l be no s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t difference (p < .0 5) in t h e f a c t o r s th a t influenced the s e l e c t i o n o f c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s p r e - 1 9 7 4 compared t o p o s t 1974, as p e r c e i v e d by c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s . Hypothesis 2: T he re w i l l be no s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t difference (p < .0 5) in t h e f a c t o r s th a t influenced the s e l e c t i o n o f c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s p r e - 1 9 7 4 compared t o p o s t 1974, as p e r c e i v e d by c o l l e g e p r e s i d e n t s . Hypothesis 3: Th ere w i l l be no s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t difference (p < .05) in t h e f a c t o r s t h a t influenced the s e l e c t i o n o f c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s as p e r c e i v e d by community c o l l e g e p r e s i d e n t s employed p r e- 19 74 and by c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s employed p r e - 1 9 7 4 . H ypothesis 4: Th ere w i l l be no s ta tis tic a lly significant difference (p < .05) in t h e f a c t o r s th a t influenced the s e l e c t i o n o f c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s as p e r c e i v e d by community c o l l e g e p r e s i d e n t s employed p o s t - 1 9 7 4 and by c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s employed p o s t - 1 9 7 4 . Hypothesi s 5 : There w i l l be no d i f f e r e n c e in t h e c a r e e r p a t h s o f t h e c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s s e l e c t e d p r e- 1 9 74 and p o s t - 1 9 7 4 , as r e p o r t e d by t h e c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s . C o l l e c t i o n o f t h e Data To collect data on the perceptions of the chief academic o f f i c e r s and t h e p u b l i c community c o l l e g e p r e s i d e n t s , t h e r e s e a r c h e r d e v e l o p e d two q u e s t i o n n a i r e s t o e l i c i t r e s p o n s e s from t h e two g r o u p s for the model areas un de r s t u d y . (modified to questionnaire to fit this investigate The r e s e a r c h e r study) that also used by Arman part of c a r e e r p a t h s o f t h e c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s . the incorporated (1985) study into dealing the the with 7 Methods o f A n a l y s i s The d a t a obtained descriptively, from the q uestionnaires were i n te rm s o f f r e q u e n c y and p e r c e n t a g e s . h y p o t h e s e s were t e s t e d statistically reported The r e s e a r c h by t h e use o f t h e t - t e s t for in d e p e n d e n t means a n d / o r f r e q u e n c y and p e r c e n t a g e s . I m p or ta n ce o f t h e Study In 1982, studied of Bowker w r o t e t h a t t h e academic d e a n s h i p i s t h e l e a s t all the m a jo r academic positions. Enarson (1962) p r e p a r e d a d e s c r i p t i o n o f academic de an s based on a r e v ie w o f t h e l i m i t e d l i t e r a t u r e and p e r s o n a l o b s e r v a t i o n . He c o n c l u d e d : The academic dean i s n o t " t r a i n e d " in any s e n s e o f t h e j o b . He may h a v e s e r v e d an a p p r e n t i c e s h i p a s a s s i s t a n t t o t h e p r e s i d e n t ; more commonly he w i l l h a v e b e e n a s u c c e s s f u l d e p a r t m e n t a l chai rman o r dean o f t h e c o l l e g e . In any e v e n t , he i s p ic k e d b e c a u s e i t i s f e l t , always on t h e b a s i s o f t o o l i t t l e e v i d e n c e , t h a t he has a d m i n i s t r a t i v e a b i l i t y . ( p. 122) The l i t e r a t u r e c o n t a i n s few s t u d i e s t h a t have been co n d u ct ed in the areas of recruitm ent academic o f f i c e r position in type o f c a r e e r p re p a ra tio n position. and selection public methods for community c o l l e g e s the or chief on the i n d i v i d u a l s need t o be h i r e d f o r such a The a b s en ce o f a h ig h p r i o r i t y on r e s e a r c h and w r i t i n g f o r p u b l i c a t i o n a t community c o l l e g e s has c o n t r i b u t e d t o t h e l a c k o f data these in this areas area. for However, four-year there colleges has and been lim ited research universities, and in their s t u d i e s a r e d u l y n o te d in t h e r e v ie w o f 1 i t e r a t u r e in C h a p t e r I I . The r e s u l t s o f t h i s s t u d y and t h e d i s s e m i n a t i o n o f t h e r e s u l t s w i l l p r o v i d e i n f o r m a t i o n on t h e c r i t e r i a preparation) u se d by Michigan public (qualifications community and c a r e e r colleges to hire 8 t h e i r c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s , t h e mode o f r e c r u i t m e n t ( t h e s o u r c e s used t o d i s s e m i n a t e p o s i t i o n o p e n i n g s ) , and t h e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s e s used in h i r i n g f o r t h e p o s i t i o n . Improved u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f t h e c a r e e r l a d d e r w i l l be h e l p f u l to g r a d u a t e s t u d e n t s who a r e i n t e r e s t e d in c o l l e g e a d m i n i s t r a t i o n a s a career and t o m i d d l e - m a n a g e m e n t col le g es These who have individuals the goal of need to have recruitm ent/selection process personnel becoming an in chief public community ac ad em ic o fficers. understanding t o make t h e m s e l v e s of as the current marketable as possible. The s t u d y f i n d i n g s programs sponsored associations skills will by to a s s i s t also public be c o m m u n it y individuals needed f o r h i g h - l e v e l useful in in planning colleges acquiring and the training related knowledge and adm inistrative p o s itio n s . It is also i m p o r t a n t t o t h e f a c u l t y members o f p u b l i c community c o l l e g e s and to members of selection co m mi tt ees to know what bei ng used t o h i r e i n d i v i d u a l s who w i l l qualifications are be p r o v i d i n g t h e l e a d e r s h i p and d i r e c t i o n f o r t h e academic a r e a s o f t h e i r c o l l e g e s . In a prelim inary analysis p u b l i c community c o l l e g e s changes a r e o c c u r r i n g individuals position b ei ng of the throughout in t h e s k i l l s , hired for vacancy d e s c r i p t i o n this qualifications the country, knowledge, position. summaries.) and appears by that experience of (See Appendix A f o r College g r a d u a t e programs w i l l be a b l e t o use t h e r e s u l t s ongoing and f u t u r e g r a d u a t e c u r r i c u l a . it required and university of th i s s tu d y in 9 D e l i m i t a t i o n s , L i m i t a t i o n s , and G e n e r a l i z a b i l i t v T h i s s t u d y was d e l i m i t e d to t h e 29 p u b l i c community c o l l e g e s in M ic hi ga n. It was f u r t h e r delim ited to only th o s e chief academic o f f i c e r s and p r e s i d e n t s who were h o ld i n g or had held t h e s e p o s i t i o n s a t some p o i n t from 1960 t o 1987. Every e f f o r t was made t o c o n t a c t t o become i n v o l v e d in t h e s t u d y . that some officers questionnaire questionnaire. several declined despite a of the o f f ic e r s However, t h e to participate second Also due t o t h e and e n c o u r a g e m ailing study was 1 i m i t e d in by not with a extensive period had d i e d , these o f f i c e r s whereas t h e returning reminder and the a of time i n v o l v e d , addresses of others were l o s t b e c a u s e o f ch ang es i n employment p o s i t i o n s . The r e s u l t s o f t h i s s t u d y were a l s o l i m i t e d i n t h a t i n a c c u r a t e r e s p o n s e s t o t h e q u e s t i o n s on t h e q u e s t i o n n a i r e may have been g iv e n b e c a u s e , o v e r t i m e , memories m ig h t hav e become un ci e a r . T her e is no r e a s o n to assume that Michigan public community col l e g e s a r e a t y p i c a l o f o t h e r p u b l i c community c o l l e g e s t h r o u g h o u t t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s t h a t have s i m i l a r governance s ys te m s . 1ik e ly , but not conclusive, that I t is thus t h e f i n d i n g s o f t h i s s t u d y can be g e n e r a l i z e d t o o t h e r p u b l i c community col 1 eges. D e f i n i t i o n s of Terms The f o l l o w i n g te r m s a r e d e f i n e d in the context in which t h e y a r e used in t h i s d i s s e r t a t i o n . Academic a r e a r e f e r s t o t h e a r e a of t h e c o l l e g e t h a t p r o v i d e s i n s t r u c t i o n and l e a r n i n g s e r v i c e s . 10 Chief academi c officer refers to the senior administrative o f f i c e r r e s p o n s i b l e f o r t h e d i r e c t i o n o f t h e academi c progr am o f t h e institution. d e pe ndi ng He/ s he u s u a l l y r e p o r t s d i r e c t l y t o t h e p r e s i d e n t and, on t h e size of the college and its structure, may be c a l l e d by a v a r i e t y o f t i t l e s . Community, . j u n i o r , and t e c h n i c a l c o l l e g e s a r e i n s t i t u t i o n s t h a t offer associate students. degrees and occupational certificates They a r e u s u a l l y t w o - y e a r i n s t i t u t i o n s . institutions are located in Mi chi gan, with to their T w e n t y - n i n e such approximately 1, 250 t h r o u g h o u t t h e Uni t e d S t a t e s . Fe de r a l guidelines are the legal requirements governing the r e c r u i t m e n t and s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s . P o s i t i o n vacancy n o t i c e s are the advertisements colleges send o u t t o f i 11 open p o s i t i o n s w i t h i n t h e c o l l e g e . Preparation refers to the skills, knowl edge, and experience n e c e s s a r y t o be h i r e d f o r a p o s i t i o n . President is that individual who is responsible for the o p e r a t i o n o f t h e c o l l e g e and who i s a p p o i n t e d by and r e s p o n s i b l e t o t h e boar d o f t r u s t e e s . P u b l i c community c o l l e g e s a r e t h o s e c o l l e g e s s u p p o r t e d by s t a t e and l o c a l mi 11 age, as wel l as f e d e r a l and p r i v a t e f u n d s . R e c r u i t me n t r e f e r s t o t h e s t r a t e g i e s an i n s t i t u t i o n employs t o s e c u r e a p p l i c a n t s / c a n d i d a t e s f o r p o s i t i o n s in t h e c o l l e g e . Requi r ed q u a ! i f i c a t i o n s a r e t h e minimum q u a l i f i c a t i o n s to h i r e d f o r a p o s i t i o n , as s p e c i f i e d i n a p o s i t i o n vaca ncy n o t i c e . be 11 S e l e c t i o n r e f e r s t o t h e p r o c e s s o f h i r i n g an i n d i v i d u a l t o f i l l a p o s i t i o n in t h e c o l l e g e . The Study S e t t i n g Community, j u n i o r , and t e c h n i c a l c o l l e g e s a r e i n s t i t u t i o n s t h a t offer associate graduates. degrees They a l s o and offer occupational a variety certificates of other to services their to the communi t i es i n which t h e y a r e l o c a t e d . The 29 p u b l i c community c o l l e g e s in Michi gan r a n g e in s i z e from a p p r o x i m a t e l y 1, 000 t o more t h a n 30, 0 00 The o l d e s t i n s t i t u t i o n established in Appendix B). i s Grand Rapids Community C o l l e g e , which was 1914. Community C o l l e g e , students (see The which most opened recent in 1967 addition and is is West located Shor e in Mason County. this To a i d i n t h e u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f t h e c o l l e g e s t h a t were us ed f o r study, each establishment, is listed i n Appendix B, al ong wi t h the dateof i t s e n r o l l m e n t as s t a t e d i n t h e 1987 Hi g h e r Ed u c a t i o n D i r e c t o r y , i t s l o c a t i o n , and t h e t i t l e o f t h e c h i e f academi c o f f i c e r as d e t e r mi n e d size, location, by each college. Thi s and s t r u c t u r e o f t h e number o f d i f f e r e n t titles, position, college, depe ndi ng on may be c a l l e d the by a i n c l u d i n g v i c e - p r e s i d e n t o f a c a d e mi c s , academi c dean, c h i e f academi c o f f i c e r , v i c e - p r e s i d e n t o f e d u c a t i o n a l p r ogr a ms , vice-president The c o l l e g e s l i s t e d of instruction, and dean of instruction. in Appendix B a r e numbered so t h a t t h e y may be e a s i l y l o c a t e d on t h e map o f Michi gan i n c l u d e d i n t h a t a p p e n d i x . 12 O r g a n i z a t i o n o f t h e St udy Thi s s t u d y i s p r e s e n t e d i n f i v e c h a p t e r s . Chapter I contained t h e s t a t e m e n t o f t h e pr obl em, t h e p u r p o s e o f t h e s t u d y , t h e r e s e a r c h questions, methodology, delimitations study and g e n e r a l i z a b i l i t y , setting. published in importance Chapter areas of II of study, hypotheses, of terms, and of the definitions contains preparation the a of review individuals the 1iterature hired as chief academi c o f f i c e r s and t h e r e c r u i t m e n t and s e l e c t i o n met hods u s e d by public community Ch a p t e r III is colleges a explanation of the analysis. hiring presentation procedures t h e d a t a used i n t h e s t u d y . data in The of a the followed chief academi c research officer. met hods in g a t h e r i n g and of the r ecommendat i ons a r e i n c l u d e d i n C h a p t e r V. study, an analyzing C h a p t e r IV c o n t a i n s t h e r e s u l t s summary and of t h e conclusions, and CHAPTER I I REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE The r e v i e w o f r e l a t e d l i t e r a t u r e i s d i v i d e d i n t o f o u r s e c t i o n s : ( a) a r e l a t e d h i s t o r y o f community c o l l e g e s ; o fficer position description career paths; colleges; and colleges. through (b) t h e c h i e f academi c a nd f u n c t i o n , ( c) recruitment (d) selection qualifications, methods used by public community procedures used by public community Encompassed i n t h e r e v i e w a r e r e l a t e d w r i t i n g s an Ed u c a t i o n Periodical ERIC c o m p u t e r Index. and search, The C h r o n i c l e of D issertation Hi gher A bstracts. Education. I n d e x , and p o s i t i o n vaca ncy n o t i c e s , obtained The as wel l The Bu s i n e s s as books on the various topics. R e l a t e d H i s t o r y o f Community C o l l e g e s Brie f History The principle extend to grades that free public secondary 13 and 14 do mi nat ed t h e r a t i o n a l e and e x t e n d i n g t h e community c o l l e g e s . mid-century, continuous "It education is educational expected process s h a r p b r e a k a t t h e end o f t h e that will As Bogue greater be Accor di ng t o Cohen and B r a u e r ( 198 2) , 13 for organizing (1950) fluidity a c c o mp l i s h e d traditional twelfth s h oul d put and it a without year" ( p. at more the 14). 14 The 1947 P r e s i d e n t ’ s Co mm i s s i o n on H i g h e r E d u c a t i o n a l s o a r t i c u l a t e d t h e v a l u e t o be d e r i v e d from a p o p u l a c e w i t h f r e e a c c e s s t o two y e a r s more o f s t u d y t h a n t h e s e c o n d a r y s c h o o l s could provide. Beca us e , as t h e commi ssi on p u t i t , a bout h a l f t h e young p e o p l e c o u l d b e n e f i t from for mal s t u d i e s t h r o u g h g r a d e 14, t h e community c o l l e g e s had an i m p o r t a n t r o l e t o p l a y . (P. 4) Cohen and Br a u e r (1982) in The American Community College stated: Community c o l l e g e s have e f f e c t e d n o t a b l e ch a ng e s i n American e d u c a t i o n , e s p e c i a l l y by expan di ng a c c e s s . The theme o f t h e community c o l l e g e d u r i n g i t s d o u b l e d eca de o f growt h bet ween 1960 and 1980 was a c c e s s . The community c o l l e g e s r e a c h e d ou t t o a t t r a c t t h o s e who were n o t b e i n g s e r v e d by t r a d i t i o n a l h i g h e r e d u c a t i o n , who c o u l d n o t a f f o r d t h e t u i t i o n , who c o u l d no t t a k e t h e t i me t o a t t e n d c o l l e g e on a f u l l - t i m e b a s i s , whose e t h n i c background had c o n s t r a i n e d them from p a r t i c i p a t i n g , who had i n a d e q u a t e p r e p a r a t i o n i n t h e l o w e r s c h o o l s , wh o s e e d u c a t i o n a l p r o g r e s s had been i n t e r r u p t e d by some t e mp o r a r y c o n d i t i o n , who had become o b s o l e t e i n t h e i r j o b s o r who had n e v e r been t r a i n e d t o work a t any j o b , who needed a c o n n e c t i o n t o o b t a i n a j o b , who were f a c e d w i t h i n c r e a s e d l e i s u r e t i m e , o r who w e r e c o n f i n e d i n p r i s o n s , p h y s i c a l l y h a n d i c a p p e d o r o t h e r w i s e un a b l e t o a t t e n d c l a s s e s on a campus, o r who were f a c e d wi t h i n c r e a s e d l e i s u r e t i m e . ( p. 21) In 1960, the number t w o - y e a r c o l l e g e s e n r o l l e d 800, 000 had increased to expressed the e g a l i t a r i a n American Dream. 4.5 ideal million. of education The students; by 1980 community college as apas s ageway t o t h e The community c o l l e g e removed t r a d i t i o n a l barriers i n o r d e r t o r e a c h ou t t o p e o p l e f o r m e r l y i g n o r e d o r t u r n e d away by colleges and universities. It embraced the policy of open a d m i s s i o n s and c r e a t e d c u r r i c u l a and s u p p o r t s y s t e ms f o r t h e d i v e r s e skills, talents, and i n t e r e s t s o f s t u d e n t s who s a t in i t s c l a s s r o o m s (S a b a ra tta , 1983). 15 Tyr e e (1984) s t a t e d t h a t : Community and j u n i o r c o l l e g e s compr i s e t h e o n l y s e c t o r o f p u b l i c e d u c a t i o n t h a t i s s t i l l r e f e r r e d t o a s a "movement" as opposed t o a " s y s t e m . " Systems a r e c o n s t r u c t e d t o pr oduce t h i n g s t o meet p r e d e t e r m i n e d s p e c i f i c a t i o n s . Movements, on t h e o t h e r hand, a r i s e from c o n f l i c t s and t e n s i o n s . An a i r o f s p o n t a n e i t y a t t e n d s them. They p o s s e s s t h e e x c i t i n g (and intensely human) possibility of exceeding anyone’ s expectations. Many community and j u n i o r c o l l e g e s w i l l be i n t h e i r f o r t i e s by t h e y e a r 2000 and some w i l l be e x p e r i e n c i n g "mi d­ l i f e crises" of sorts. The l a s t t h i n g t h i s c o u n t r y w i l l need from i t s t w o - y e a r i n s t i t u t i o n s w i l l be compl acency. These i n s t i t u t i o n s w i l l have t o be l e a n and f i t , e s p e c i a l l y i n t e r ms o f a d m i n i s t r a t i v e o u t l o o k and a l l o c a t i o n o f r e s o u r c e s . They w i l l have t o be f l e x i b l e and c r e a t i v e i n f or mi ng r e l a t i o n s h i p s w i t h b u s i n e s s and i n d u s t r y , which have a l r e a d y begun r e t r a i n i n g and p r o v i d i n g c r e d e n t i a l s f o r t h e i r empl oyees , ( p. 40) Of t h e approximately 1, 250 community c o l l e g e s located in the U n i t e d S t a t e s , 29 p u b l i c community c o l l e g e s a r e l o c a t e d i n Mi chi gan. In 1909 t h e r e were 20 j u n i o r c o l l e g e s i n t h e Uni t e d S t a t e s , t h e r e were 207, and i n 1960 t h e t o t a l community c o l l e g e s by 1969. early had r e a c h e d 678, number o f p u b l i c and p r i v a t e wi t h t h a t number r i s i n g t o 993 As seen by t h e number o f new c o l l e g e s 1970s , this was a t i me of in 1922 expansion i n t h e 1960s and that led community c o l l e g e s t o t a k e an o b s e s s i v e vi ew o f gr owt h. T a b l e 2.1 shows t h e growt h i n t h e numbers o f p u b l i c and p r i v a t e t w o - y e a r c o l l e g e s from 1900-01 t h r o u g h 1980- 81. 16 Ta bl e 2 . 1 . --Numbers o f p u b l i c and p r i v a t e t w o - y e a r c o l l e g e s , 1900-01 t h r o u g h 1980- 81. Publ i c Year Private To t a l No. 1900-01 1915-16 1921-22 1925-26 1929-30 1933-34 1938-39 1947-48 1952-53 1954-55 1956-57 1958-59 1960-61 1962-63 1964-65 1966-67 1968-69 1970-71 1972-73 1974-75 1976-77 1978-79 1980-81 Sour ce: 0 19 70 136 178 219 258 328 327 336 377 400 405 426 452 565 739 847 910 981 1, 030 1, 047 1, 049 8 74 207 325 436 521 575 650 594 596 652 677 678 704 719 837 993 1,091 1,141 1, 203 1, 233 1, 234 1,231 % No. % 0 26 34 42 41 42 45 50 55 56 58 59 60 61 63 68 74 78 80 82 84 85 85 8 55 137 189 258 302 317 322 267 260 275 277 273 278 267 272 254 244 231 222 203 187 182 100 74 66 58 59 58 55 50 45 44 42 41 40 39 37 32 26 22 20 18 16 15 15 A r t h u r M. Cohen and F l o r e n c e B. Br a u e r , The American Commun i t v C o l l e g e (San F r a n c i s c o : J o s s e y - B a s s , 1 982) , p. 10. Expansion could not continue forever; c o l l e g e s open and t h e 1980s o n l y 16. the 1970s saw 241 Consider t h e f o l l ow i ng : In 1972, Cohen and Br a u e r (1982) t r a c e d t h e r e l a t i o n s among t h e number o f community c o l l e g e s and i t s a r e a . in a s t a t e , the s t a t e ’s population density, They found t h a t community c o l l e g e s t e n d e d t o be b u i l t 17 so t h a t 90% t o 95% o f t h e s t a t e ’ s p o p u l a t i o n l i v e d w i t h i n r e a s o n a b l e commuting d i s t a n c e - - a b o u t 25 m i l e s . ratio, the state additional larger, had colleges When t h e c o l l e g e s r e a c h e d t h i s a ma t ur e community were built. c o l l e g e s ys t e m, As t h a t s t a t e ’ s t h e c o l l e g e s expanded in e n r o l l m e n t s , and population Cohen and Br a u e r i d e n t i f i e d states had ma t ur e Florida, the early Illinois, 1970s that New York, Ohi o, grew bu t i t was no l o n g e r n e c e s s a r y t o add new campuses. in few s y s t e ms : Mi chi gan, seven California, and Was hi ngt on. In these s t a t e s , the denser the population, the smaller the area served by each c o l l e g e , and t h e h i g h e r t h e per - campus e n r o l l m e n t . A d m i n i s t r a t i o n in a S t a b l e o r P e e l i n i n g P e r i od A d m i n i s t r a t i o n , a c c o r d i n g t o McInt osh and Mai er ( 1 9 7 6 ) , becomes more demanding and r e q u i r e s d i f f e r e n t s k i l l s when a c o l l e g e i s in a s t a b l e o r d e c l i n i n g p o s i t i o n t ha n t h o s e r e q u i r e d d u r i n g t h e y e a r s o f rapid expansion. period of economic enrollments. wi t h f i s c a l c o mmu n i t y colleges are with s t a b l e and s e l e c t i v e c u t s experiencing to a decreasing i n p e r s o n n e l , e q u i p me n t , and s e r v i c e s . c o l 1e g e s training are tofunction progr ams need t o effecti vely, be e s t a b l i s h e d (Perkins, A d m i n i s t r a t o r s who have g a i n e d t h e i r e x p e r i e n c e d u r i n g , are conditioned to, t o de a l retrenchment restraints administrative 1980) . community The need i s f o r s k i l l s in d e a l i n g e v e r more f r e q u e n t l y courses, a c t i v i t i e s , If Today, and a t i me o f c o n t i n u o u s gr owt h may be i l l - e q u i p p e d w i t h t h e pr obl ems o f r e t r e n c h m e n t . They must e i t h e r draw 18 upon a hitherto relevant unused reservoir adm inistrative adm inistrators who are of skills, skilled talents, or in be the be trained replaced by m a n a g e me n t i n more academic of decline (McI nt osh & Mai er , 1976) . The 1980s have a l r e a d y shown ample e v i d e n c e t h a t c i r c u m s t a n c e s will be f a r d i f f e r e n t from t h o s e t h a t n o u r i s h e d t h e gr owt h p e r i o d f o r community c o l l e g e s , i mp l y i n g t h a t a d i f f e r e n t k i n d o f l e a d e r s h i p may be r e q u i r e d i n t h e f u t u r e . enrollment arisen, has and stabilized hiring or freezes equ i pment , c o u r s e s , a c t i v i t i e s , C o l l e g e s a r e no l o n g e r b e i n g b u i l t , declined, and pr obl ems selective cuts in funding in have personnel, and s e r v i c e s have been made (Cohen & Br a u e r , 1982) . M i l l e r (1974) s t a t e d : The g r e a t s t u d e n t , f a c u l t y , and b u i l d i n g e x p a n s i o n s o f t h e 1960’ s a r e o v e r , p r o b a b l y f o r a t l e a s t 10 y e a r s , and t h e academi c dean in t h i s c h a ng i ng s c e n e w i l l need t o become more c o n c e r n e d w i t h p r o f e s s i o n a l d e v e l o p m e n t and t h e i n t e r n a l mechani cs o f e f f e c t i v e management, i n c l u d i n g e v a l u a t i o n of academi c p e r f o r ma n c e . F i s c a l i m p l i c a t i o n s o f program d e c i s i o n s w i l l be a d o mi n a t i n g c o n s i d e r a t i o n , and, in many s t a t e s , t h e l e g i s l a t u r e and o t h e r s w i l l be t a k i n g a more a c t i v e and vocal r o l e i n i n t e r n a l management o f s t a t e c o l l e g e s and u n i v e r s i t i e s . I t i s l i k e l y t h a t t h e n e x t d eca de w i l l b r i n g many changes in how academi c de a ns p e r c e i v e t h e i r r o l e s , ( p . 232) McIntosh and Mai er (1976) w r o t e : A d m i n i s t r a t o r s i n t h e 1 9 7 0 s and 1 9 80s a r e f i n d i n g t h a t k n o w l e d g e o f c u r r i c u l u m a nd i n s t r u c t i o n i s n o t e n o u g h . I n c r e a s i n g l y , t h e y a r e be i ng c a l l e d on t o h a n d l e l e g a l i s s u e s , b u d g e t s and f i s c a l responsibilities, less f u n d i n g and i n c r e a s i n g c o s t s , and c o l l e c t i v e b a r g a i n i n g . What a r e needed now a r e p e o p l e who c a n v i e w r e t r e n c h m e n t a s a c r e a t i v e c h a l l e n g e , who can g a i n as much s a t i s f a c t i o n o u t of copi ng wi t h and b a l a n c i n g a b u d g e t a s t h e e n t r e p r e n e u r e n j o y e d fr om expansion. F i n a n c i a l t a l e n t t h u s assumes a h i gh p r i o r i t y - - t h e a b i l i t y t o c u t and t r i m w i t h minimum e f f e c t on p r o g r a ms , t o f i n d ways o f doi ng more wi t h l e s s . ( p. 88) 19 In t h e G o v e r n o r ’ s Commission on t h e F u t u r e of Hi g h e r Educ a t i on i n Mi chi gan (Robi ns on, 1 984) , i t was s t a t e d t h a t : For Mi chi gan t o s u s t a i n a s u p e r i o r s y s t em o f h i g h e r e d u c a t i o n would r e q u i r e over comi ng t h r e e d i f f i c u l t c h a l l e n g e s : (a) o v e r ­ a l l f u n d i n g l i m i t a t i o n s , (b) unf oc us e d r e s o u r c e a l l o c a t i o n s , and ( c ) e n r o l l m e n t d e c r e a s e s . Mi c h i g a n ’ s h i g h e r e d u c a t i o n s y s t e m must a d a p t t o a changed w o r l d . Reduced s t a t e r e v e n u e s and f e d e r a l f u n d i n g , co u p l e d w i t h i n c r e a s e d c l a i m s from o t h e r s e c t o r s f o r s t a t e s u p p o r t , mean t h a t e d u c a t i o n a l r e s o u r c e s w i l l r ema i n c o n s t r a i n e d . Demographic cha nge s mean t h a t Mi c h i g a n ’ s c o l l e g e e n r o l l m e n t w i l l be r e d u c e d f o r y e a r s t o come. Further, t h e ma r ke t demand f o r e d u c a t i o n a l programs w i l l under go s h i f t s into the t w e n t y -f i r s t century. To meet t h e s e c h a l l e n g e s , t h e c o mmi s s i o n ’ s r ecommendat i ons a r e f a r r e a c h i n g and w i l l a f f e c t a l l pha s e s o f t h e community c o l l e g e , from h i r i n g t o pr ogr ams . ( p. 22) M i c h i g a n ’ s s ys t em o f h i g h e r e d u c a t i o n n e e d s a p o l i c y b a s i s on which r e s o u r c e a l l o c a t i o n s can be made and i n s t i t u t i o n a l p e r f o r ma n c e judged. The recommendat i on o f t h e Go v e r n o r ’ s Commission ( Robi ns on, 1984) was t h a t : The o v e r a l l m i s s i o n o f Mi c h i g a n ’ s Hi g h e r E d u c a t i o n System and t h e r o l e o f each i n s t i t u t i o n be c a r e f u l l y and e x p l i c i t l y d e f i n e d ; and t h a t f u t u r e s t a t e d e c i s i o n s t o fund o r n o t fund e d u c a t i o n a l p r o g r a m s be b a s e d on t h e s e r o l e a nd m i s s i o n s t a t e m e n t s and t h a t t h e community c o l l e g e s p r o v i d e b r o a d l y d i s t r i b u t e d c o r e c u r r i c u l u m and l o c a l l y a c c e s s i b l e g e n e r a l and t e c h n i c a l u n d e r g r a d u a t e i n s t r u c t i o n f o r t h e f i r s t two y e a r s p a s t hi gh s c h o o l . Primarily re spon sib le for providing job tra in in g , technical i n s t r u c t i o n and e m p l o y e e u p g r a d i n g . Provide remedial i n s t r u c t i o n f o r a d u l t s la c k in g c o l le g e e n t r a n c e s k i l l s , gat eway a c c e s s t o f o u r - y e a r i n s t i t u t i o n s , and c o n t i n u i n g e d u c a t i o n o p p o r t u n i t i e s f o r a d u l t s , ( p. 23) The C h i e f Academic O f f i c e r P o s i t i o n D e s c r i p t i o n and Fun c t i o n "The academi c d e a n, academic affairs, is educational program, somet imes directly which is called the responsible the raison d ’e t r e vice-president for of the for overall a u n iv e rs ity ’s 20 existence" directs the (Miller, 1974, p. 231) . academi c program o f t h e j o b i n c l u d e s academi c p l a n n i n g , The chief institution. teaching, research, academi c officer Typically, extensions, this and c o o r d i n a t i o n o f i n t e r d e p a r t m e n t a l a f f a i r s (HED, 1 9 8 7 ) . I t ’ s t h e t o u g h e s t j o b i n any c o l l e g e o r u n i v e r s i t y . That’s what a f r i e n d o f mi ne, who has been a c o l l e g e p r e s i d e n t f o r a d e c a d e , s a ys a b o u t t h e p o s i t i o n o f c h i e f academi c o f f i c e r , g e n e r a l l y c a l l e d v i c e p r e s i d e n t f o r academi c a f f a i r s , dean o f f a c u l t y , o r dean o f i n s t r u c t i o n , somet imes p r o v o s t . ( A l l e n , 1984, p. 8) Wisdom, i n t e g r i t y , and hi gh academi c s t a n d a r d s mi g ht have s u f f i c e d i n days p a s t t o e a r n t h e r e s p e c t and s u p p o r t o f c o l l e a g u e s , but t h e p r e s e n t - d a y a d m i n i s t r a t o r , o f whatever r a c e , s e x , o r p o l i t i c a l p e r s u a s i o n , i s l i k e l y t o be c a l l e d r a c i s t , s e x i s t , or r e a c t i o n a r y , o f t e n in combination. A d i f f i c u l t a s p e c t o f t h e j o b i s t h a t one must be so many t h i n g s t o so many p e o p l e . The a d m i n i s t r a t o r must p e r f o r m a l l t y p e s o f f u n c t i o n s , wi t h the expectation th a t his e f f o r t s will be m i s r e p r e s e n t e d o r blown o u t o f p r o p o r t i o n . ( Mo e l l e n b e r g , 1976, p. 19) E h r l e (1979) p r o v i d e d h i s view o f t h e p o s i t i o n as f o l l o w s : Ther e was a t i m e , no t l ong ago, when de a n s were seen as p a t r i a r c h a l o r m a t r i a r c h a l f i g u r e s somewhat removed from t h e academi c " r e a l " w o r l d , t h a t i s , t h e c l a s s r o o m . In some c a s e s t h e y were b e n e v o l e n t c u s t o d i a n s o f t h e p r e v a i l i n g myt hol ogy. In o t h e r s t h e y w e r e m i n o r d e s p o t s f i r m l y i n c o n t r o l o f everything t h a t went on i n and on t h e b o r d e r s o f academe. Today, t h e m y t h o l o g i e s a r e so c o n f u s e d and t h e c o n t r o l s a r e so d i f f u s e d t h a t a new r o l e i s emer gi ng f o r t h e academi c d e a n . At l e a s t , a new emphas i s a p p e a r s t o be c a l l i n g f o r new r e s p o n s e s , many o f which have been l a t e n t f o r some t i m e . The d e a n ’ s j o b to d a y has a t l e a s t t h r e e compo nen ts: adm inistration, management, and l e a d e r s h i p . As a d m i n i s t r a t o r , t h e dean r u n s t h e s hop. As ma nager , t h e dean works c o n s t a n t l y a t t h e r e v i s i o n o f t h e r u l e s , p o l i c i e s , l i m i t a t i o n s , and e x p e c t a t i o n s o f t h e academi c communit y. I t is a s l e a d e r , h o w e v e r , t h a t t h e d e a n ma ke s h i s / h e r m a j o r contribution. L e a d e r s h i p i n t h i s c o n t e x t i s s een as t h e f o r m u l a t i o n and r e f o r m u l a t i o n o f c o a l i t i o n s o f p e r s o n s t h a t make a d m i n i s t r a t i o n and management p o s s i b l e , ( p. 44) 21 Allen (1984) summed up the position with the following statement: Ob v i o u s l y , a c h i e f academi c o f f i c e r i s e x p e c t e d t o be t h e p r i n c i p a l e d u c a t i o n a l l e a d e r on t h e campus and t h e head o f t h e faculty. In addition, the VPAA h a s heavy fiscal r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s , u s u a l l y a p p r o a c h i n g 60 p e r c e n t o f t h e e n t i r e institutional budget; has very significant personnel r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s as t h e employing o f f i c e r f o r t h e e n t i r e f a c u l t y and f o r a s i z a b l e c l a s s i f i e d s t a f f and as a r c h i t e c t o f s t a f f de v e l o p me n t ; and i s n o r ma l l y t h e "second-i n- command" a t t h e i n s t i t u t i o n and t h e a c t i n g p r e s i d e n t i n t h e p r e s i d e n t ’ s a b s e n c e . The b a l a n c e among t h e v a r i o u s f u n c t i o n s o f t h e o f f i c e has been c h a ngi ng i n r e c e n t y e a r s , as e x t e r n a l demands f o r f o r m a l i z e d management and a c c o u n t a b i l i t y i n c r e a s e , and as t h e r e l a t i v e m o b i l i t y o f f a c u l t y members from campus t o campus decreases. Vice p r e s i d e n t s f o r academi c a f f a i r s t h e s e days f i n d t h e m s e l v e s more and more i n vol v e d i n formal p l a n n i n g , in r e a l l o c a t i o n o f r e s o u r c e s ( i n c l u d i n g f a c u l t y p o s i t i o n s ) , and VPAA’ s a r e f i n d i n g t h e ms e l v e s i n c r e a s i n g l y i n v o l v e d i n l e g a l and q u a s i - l e g a l m a t t e r s . And i n i n s t i t u t i o n s where c o l l e c t i v e b a r g a i n i n g i s e s t a b l i s h e d o r c o n t e m p l a t e d , VPAA’ s may be members o f t h e management b a r g a i n i n g team and c e r t a i n l y w i l l p l a y an i m p o r t a n t r o l e i n t h e a d m i n i s t r a t i o n o f t h e c o n t r a c t . With t h e s e new f u n c t i o n s i t mi ght be s a i d t h a t t h e c h i e f academi c o f f i c e r i s becoming more and more o f an o f f i c e r and l e s s o f an aca demi c, a l t h o u g h most o f us would hope t h a t t h i s i s no t t h e c a s e . ( pp. 8- 9) Ther e community is very college little chief information academi c summarized t h e s t a t e o f t h e available officer. literature concerning Moore e t on t h e p o s i t i o n al. the (1983) o f dean in c o l l e g e s and u n i v e r s i t i e s a s : The l i t e r a t u r e on t h e a c a d e m i c d e a n p o s i t i o n i s e q u a l l y encumbered w i t h a l a r g e number o f p e r s o n a l o r p r e s c r i p t i v e accounts. The demogr aphi c o r a n a l y t i c a l a c c o u n t s t h a t do e x i s t a r e d a t e d , n a r r o w l y f o c u s e d on a s i n g l e ki nd ( e . g . , e d u c a t i o n d e a n s , de a ns o f g r a d u a t e schools), or emphas i ze t h e role dil emmas and p r a c t i c a l t a s k s o f d e a n s . Few works a t t e m p t t o d e s c r i b e o r a n a l y z e t h e academi c dean p o s i t i o n as p a r t o f t h e l a r g e r a d m i n i s t r a t i v e c a r e e r s t r u c t u r e o r t o p l a c e i t w i t h i n an o c c u p a t i o n a l o r academi c l a b o r ma r ke t c o n t e x t , ( p. 504) In 1982, Bowker w r o t e t h a t t h e academi c d e a n s h i p i s t h e l e a s t s t u d i e d o f a l l ma j or academi c p o s i t i o n s . Enarson (1962) p r e p a r e d a 22 description of academi c deans bas ed l i t e r a t u r e and p e r s o n a l o b s e r v a t i o n . on a review of the limited He c o n c l u d e d : The academi c dean i s no t " t r a i n e d " i n any s e n s e f o r t h e j o b . He may have s e r v e d an a p p r e n t i c e s h i p as a s s i s t a n t t o t h e p r e s i d e n t ; more commonly he w i l l h a v e b e e n a s u c c e s s f u l d e p a r t m e n t a l chai r man o r dean o f a c o l l e g e . In any e v e n t he i s p i c k e d be c a us e i t i s f e l t , al ways on t h e b a s i s o f t o o l i t t l e e v i d e n c e , t h a t he has a d m i n i s t r a t i v e a b i l i t y . ( p . 122) C a r e e r P r e p a r a t i o n and Q u a l i f i c a t i o n s f o r t h e P o s i t i o n o f Ch i e f Academic O f f i c e r The d e a n ’ s r o l e i s a complex one. He i s t h e "man f o r a l l seasons." He i s t h e o n e who n o t o n l y t r a n s m i t s t h e i n s t i t u t i o n a l ethos of "publish or per is h" but al so enforces t h e c o r r e l a t i v e and no t l e s s i m p o r t a n t mandat e o f " t e a c h o r t r a v e l . " He must b u i l d a f a c u l t y o f t h e g r e a t and he must f i r e t h e d u l l . He must be mi dwi fe f o r new and i m p o r t a n t p r o j e c t s . But he must al so be an a b o r t i o n i s t t o p r e v e n t " e d u c a t i o n a l E d s e l s " from s e e i n g t h e 1 i g h t o f day. (McGannon, 1973, p. 277) Very 1i t t l e research information is available on the career p r e p a r a t i o n needed t o a t t a i n t h e p o s i t i o n o f c h i e f academi c o f f i c e r a t a p u b l i c community col l e g e . Some r e s e a r c h was found on t h e c h i e f academi c o f f i c e r a t f o u r - y e a r c o l l e g e s and u n i v e r s i t i e s , predominantly what is presented in this s t u d i e s on h i g h e r e d u c a t i o n a d m i n i s t r a t o r s review. and t h i s i s Many research have s p e c i f i c a l l y noted t h a t t h e l a r g e number o f community and j u n i o r c o l l e g e s would make a p r o j e c t unwi el dy i f t h o s e c o l l e g e s were i n c l u d e d (Arman, 1986) . A combination of personnel and t h e inadequate preparation of adm inistrative i n a b i l i t y of these persons to adapt to c h a ng i ng t i m e s i s c a u s i n g a c r i s i s o f l e a d e r s h i p i n academi c a d m i n i s t r a t i o n ( Cy p h e r t , 1974) . What ki n d s of skills, knowl edge, w i l l l e a d e r s need t o manage community c o l l e g e s and attitudes in t h e f u t u r e ? What 23 a r e t h e c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f t h e l e a d e r who can a d a p t t h e i n s t i t u t i o n to changing environmental training, What e x p e r i e n c e , a nd s o c i a l i z a t i o n t omor r ow’ s leaders challenges? Will managerial graduate conditions? t o de a l wi t h institutional the mi x of academic processes will prepare changes that face today’s needs f o r l e a d e r s compe t e nt in new t e c h n o l o g i e s exceed t h e s u p p l y a v a i l a b l e from t r a d i t i o n a l progr ams and wor k- bas e d l e a d e r s h i p - d e v e l o p m e n t programs ( E i s n e r , 1984)? Doyle and H a r t l e years, state actors in (1984) stated (1985) s t a t e d , gover nme nt s education that have policy the "The t r u t h quietly making" educational ( p. become is that, the 212 ) . backgr ounds in rece nt most important Epstein of a d m i n i s t r a t o r s a r e i n a r e a s o t h e r t h a n management. and most Wood college Even t h o s e w i t h degrees in educa ti ona l a d m i n i s t r a t i o n o r h i g h e r e d u c a t i o n have had little training or organizing, no formal in the techniques of planning, l e a d i n g , and e v a l u a t i n g . McInt osh and Mai er (1976) wr o t e : Management d u r i n g a growt h s i t u a t i o n i s c l e a r l y s u i t e d t o t h e e n t r e p r e n e u r w i t h a hi gh need f o r achi e ve me nt and mod e r a t e power n e e d s , who must c o n t i n u o u s l y have new g o a l s . He i s t h e one who l i k e s t o gamble and t a k e c h a n c e s ; f o r t u n a t e l y , d u r i n g r a p i d g r o wt h , m i s t a k e s a r e e a s i l y cove r e d o r c o r r e c t e d . The a c t u a l a d m i n i s t r a t i v e s t y l e u s u a l l y i s n o t c r i t i c a l , so t h a t c o n s i d e r a b l e f r eedom i n management s t y l e i s p o s s i b l e i n a cl imate of expansion. As an o r g a n i z a t i o n a p p r o a c h e s a s t e a d y s t a t e , t h e e n t r e p r e n e u r begins t o look f o r o t h e r c h a l l e n g e s . Ret r enchme nt t o t h i s p e r s o n i s anat hema. When b u d g e t s become t i g h t , d e c i s i o n making becomes more c r i t i c a l , m i s t a k e s a r e m a g n i f i e d , and g r e a t e r a c c o u n t a b i l i t y i s r e q u i r e d , (p. 89) 24 Socolow (1978) made t h e f o l l o w i n g r e ma r ks p e r t a i n i n g t o c o l l e g e and u n i v e r s i t y l e a d e r s h i p (community c o l l e g e s were no t included in the s tu d y ) : S e n i o r p o s i t i o n s i n academi c a d m i n i s t r a t i o n have l o n g been t h e a l mo s t e x c l u s i v e p r o v i n c e o f t h o s e who have s e r v e d f o r a s u b s t a n t i a l t i me i n academe, moving from one rung o f t h e l a d d e r t o t h e n e x t - - m o s t o f t e n from p r o f e s s o r t o c ha i r ma n t o dean t o vice president to p resid en t. Appoi nt ment s t o t h e s e p o s t s have t r a d i t i o n a l l y r e q u i r e d b r i l l i a n c e i n t e a c h i n g and s c h o l a r s h i p ( r e q u i s i t e s t h a t t o an o u t s i d e r may a p p e a r c o n t r a d i c t o r y ) . But gi v e n t h e d i f f i c u l t t i m e s w i t h which h i g h e r e d u c a t i o n i s now f a c e d , i t mi ght be e x p e c t e d t h a t some i n s t i t u t i o n s would b r e a k wi t h t r a d i t i o n and be gi n l o o k i n g f o r l e a d e r s w i t h o t h e r ki nds o f e x p e r i e n c e and ba c kgr ou nd. The most s t r i k i n g f i n d i n g o f t h e s t u d y was t h e cl e a r p e r s i s t e n c e o f al 1 t h e i n s t i t u t i o n s i n dr awi ng o n l y f r om a t r a d i t i o n a l pool o f c a n d i d a t e s . All i n s t i t u t i o n s in the sampl e, e x c e p t one, h i r e d i n d i v i d u a l s from w i t h i n academe. The new i ncumbent s a l l had met t h e n e c e s s a r y , t r a d i t i o n a l c r i t e r i a o f f i r s t s e r v i n g i n l owe r s t a t u s academi c a d m i n i s t r a t i v e p o s t s and, in most i n s t a n c e s , a l s o i n p r o f e s s i o n a l p o s i t i o n s . Not on l y were t h e r e no o b s e r v a b l e new p a t t e r n s o f o c c u p a t i o n a l m o b i l i t y but t h e r e was a l s o no marked g e o g r a p h i c a l movement and no s i g n i f i c a n t mobi 1 i t y among t y p e s and c a t e g o r i e s o f h i g h e r i n s t i t u t i o n s , (p. 42) Merk (1986) s t a t e d t h a t : A d m i n i s t r a t o r s in h i g h e r e d u c a t i o n f a c e a p a r t i c u l a r l y c o n f u s i n g e n v i r o n me n t i n which t o manage b e c a u s e o f u n c l e a r and s h i f t i n g g o a l s and p r i o r i t i e s . U s i n g t h e p o s i t i on o f a c a d e mi c d e a n f o r exa mpl e, c o n f l i c t i n g p r e s s u r e s a r e i d e n t i f i e d t h a t f a c e t h e academi c manager . Money, f a c u l t y r e c r u i t m e n t and r e t e n t i o n , h a n d l i n g f a c u l t y demands, s t u d e n t r e c r u i t m e n t , c a p i t a l a s s e t ma i n t e n a n c e and improvement, c u r r i cul urn development, constituency r e l a t i o n s , and c r i s i s s u r v i v a l a r e c i t e d and i l l u s t r a t e d . A c a l l i s made f o r a c l e a r e r s e t o f o b j e c t i v e s w i t h a s h o r t e r and more s t a b l e 1 i s t o f p r i o r i t i e s , ( p. 153) E i s n e r (1984) wr o t e t h a t : A c r i s i s i s d e v e l o p i n g a t t h e l e a d e r s h i p l e v e l o f t h e American community c o l l e g e movement. A c r y s t a l 1ized d e f i n i t i o n is needed o f t h e c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s and s k i l l s t h a t t h e n e x t c r op of l e a d e r s must p o s s e s s . The c r e a t i o n o f c e n t e r s f o r t h e s t u d y o f community c o l l e g e l e a d e r s h i p i s o f p r a c t i c a l and paramount i mp o r t a n c e be c a us e many o f t h e s k i l l s th a t fu tu re leaders will 25 need can be d e v e l o p e d by t r a i n i n g . I f innovation at the community c o l l e g e l e v e l i s t o c o n t i n u e , t h o s e who w i l l br e a k new gr ound must e x c e l in t h e a r e a s o f p o l i t i c s , c o n f l i c t r e s o l u t i o n , m o t i v a t i o n , and r e s p o n s e t o ext r e me c hange , ( p. 39) A l f r e d (1984) b e l i e v e d t h a t l e a d e r s h i p p r e p a r a t i o n a c c o mp l i s h e d through me r ge r of experience and academi c training will provide v a l u a b l e i n s i g h t s i n t o t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p bet ween t h e o r y and a c t i o n . The p o s i t i o n o f [ e d u c a t i o n a l ] a d m i n i s t r a t o r h a s u n d e r g o n e s u b t l e b u t s u b s t a n t i v e changes in t h e l a s t few d e c a d e s . While t h e s e cha nge s have o c c u r r e d , i n some c a s e s , so s l o wl y as t o be a l mo s t i m p e r c e p t i b l e , t h e end r e s u l t has been r e a l change in role responsibilities for adm inistrators. The "new" a d m i n i s t r a t o r i s a d i f f e r e n t k i nd o f p e r s o n , f a r removed from the benevolent educational le ad er of pre-S p u tn ik days. U n f o r t u n a t e l y t h e r e a r e s t i l l some p r a c t i c i n g a d m i n i s t r a t o r s who a r e unaware or u n w i l l i n g t o admi t t o t h e change s i n t h e traditional role. Eq u a l l y u n f o r t u n a t e i s t h e f a c t t h a t many f a c u l t i e s a r e becoming more c r i t i c a l o f a d m i n i s t r a t o r s and a d m i n i s t r a t o r s a r e becoming more f r u s t r a t e d as t h e y t r y t o f u l f i l l bot h t r a d i t i o n a l and new r o l e r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s . ( S c o t t , 1979, p. 40) A l l e n (1984) s t a t e d : A c a r e e r l e a d i n g to major academic o f f i c e a l s o in v o l v e s p r o g r e s s i v e a d m i n i s t r a t i v e r e s p o n s i b i l i t y , which i s t o some e x t e n t i n c o m p a t i b l e wi t h a s c h o l a r l y c a r e e r . T h e r e f o r e some c h o i c e s , c o n s c i o u s o r u n c o n s c i o u s , m u s t be made b e t w e e n c o n v e n t i o n a l s c h o l a r l y r e s e a r c h and a d m i n i s t r a t i o n . Th i s i s n o t t o s ay t h a t t h e academi c a d m i n i s t r a t o r s h o u l d n ’ t be a c o n s t a n t l e a r n e r , b u t o n l y t h a t what i s l e a r n e d w i l l be s u b j e c t t o c ha nge . Budget a n a l y s i s wi 11 r e p l a c e 1 i t e r a t u r e s e a r c h e s ; personnel decisions will replace choice of scholarly h y p o t h e s e s ; and p a p e r s w i l l r e f l e c t management pr obl ems more o f t e n t h a n t h e c u t t i n g edge o f knowledge i n a d i s c i p l i n e . ( p. 13) Ther e is a need f o r s p e c i a l i z e d p r e p a r a t i o n of persons whose c a r e e r i n t e r e s t s i n c l u d e a d m i n i s t r a t i o n as a p r o f e s s i o n a l o b j e c t i v e . It is necessary administrators so to pi an that carefully they the may become preparation skilled in the of future areas of 26 educational management and t h u s be c a p a b l e o f h a n d l i n g t h e demands o f t h e new a d m i n i s t r a t i o n . The altered management by e x t e r n a l declining control. fiscal role resources to the influences, enrollments, Pl a n n i n g of an today college including inflationary requires probl ems postsecondary i n s t i t u t i o n s . administrator budget economy, allocating threatening the has reductions, and g r e a t e r limited future been state human viability and of Planning advocates provide l i t t l e a s s i s t a n c e t o t h e a d m i n i s t r a t o r i n me et i ng t h e s e c h a l l e n g e s (Ringle & S a v i c k a s , 1983) . Laht i (1973) s t a t e d t h a t : I t seems a l mo s t h y p o c r i t i c a l t h a t e d u c a t o r s can t a l k a bout management and management s k i l l s i n t h e i r s c h o o l s o f i n d u s t r i a l r e l a t i o n s and s c h o o l s o f b u s i n e s s b u t seem u n a b l e t o a p p l y t h e p r o c e s s e s t h e y t e a c h t o i n c r e a s e t h e h e a l t h and p r o d u c t i v i t y o f t h e i r own o r g a n i z a t i o n s , ( p. 33) Anderson (1984) wr o t e in a s i m i l a r v e i n : Theory X, Theor y Y, and now Theory Z. The a l p h a b e t soup o f management and a d m i n i s t r a t i o n i d e a s has r e v o l u t i o n i z e d t h e wor l d o f b u s i n e s s and i n d u s t r y d u r i n g t h e p a s t 30 y e a r s . And where d i d t h e s e Big L e t t e r b l o c k b u s t e r t h e o r i e s come from? You guessed i t - - t h e co l le g e s . The ma j or r e s e a r c h f i n d i n g s on human b e h a v i o r , work, and m o t i v a t i o n have n o t been w i d e l y s t u d i e d o r p u t i n t o p r a c t i c e by t h e academi c i n s t i t u t i o n s o f t h e i r b i r t h . In f a c t , we o f t e n seem t o be r u n n i n g o u r c o l l e g e s a c c o r d i n g t o t h e o r i g i n a l ABC’ s . When I p o s e d t h i s p a r a d o x o n e d a y t o a d e a n o f i n s t r u c t i o n , he r e p l i e d r a t h e r p a t i e n t l y , "We’ ve al ways done t h i n g s a c e r t a i n way i n t h e c o l l e g e s . " That o f c o u r s e i s t h e point. Does i t h u r t us? And s h o u l d we do s omet hi ng a b o u t i t ? I f we a s k , Where do academi c a d m i n i s t r a t o r s come from? we soon d i s c o v e r t h a t a l mo s t a l l d e p a r t me n t h e a d s , d e a n s and p r e s i d e n t s s t a r t e d as c o l l e g e p r o f e s s o r s . Their scholarly p u rsu its r e p r e s e n t e v e r y d i s c i p l i n e w i t h i n t h e s c i e n c e s , h u m a n i t i e s , and arts. However, t h e i r p r e p a r a t i o n f o r t h e complex j o b o f a d m inistration bears a s t a r t l i n g resemblance to th a t of becoming a p a r e n t - - a l m o s t n i l ! (p. 20) 27 The business world, in marked contrast, has developed a sound e d u c a t i o n a l appr o a c h t o p r e p a r i n g t h e i r a d m i n i s t r a t o r s and ma nager s . They have p u t t h e e d u c a t o r s ’ i d e a s t o work, concepts developed du ri ng the u s i n g t h e t h e o r i e s and p a s t 30 y e a r s of behavioral science r e s e a r c h ( Ander son, 19 84) . Paul, Sweet , and Brigham (1980) found in their study of a d m i n i s t r a t o r s i n community c o l l e g e s i n M a s s a c h u s e t t s t h a t t h e r e a r e few f e ma l e s colleges. in top-level Ther e i s educational, and administrative positions in community a c o n c o m i t a n t d e a r t h o f d a t a on t h e p e r s o n a l , career characteristics of these female a d m i n i s t r a t o r s and on mal e a d m i n i s t r a t o r s in community c o l l e g e s . S a g a r i a and Moore (1982) s t a t e d t h a t : With t h e change s o c c u r r i n g i n h i g h e r e d u c a t i o n r e c e n t l y , new a t t e n t i o n i s be i ng p a i d t o c a r e e r o p p o r t u n i t i e s and m a r k e t p l a c e ch a ra c te r is tic s for college administrators. Of t e n such s t u d i e s h a v e b e e n m o t i v a t e d by t h e d e s i r e t o a s s e s s how w e l l i n s t i t u t i o n s a r e r e s p o n d i n g t o f e d e r a l mandat es t o i n c r e a s e t h e r e p r e s e n t a t i o n o f women and m i n o r i t i e s . Both Socolow and Di n g e r s o n , Rodman and Wade, f o r exampl e, have a t t e m p t e d t o make t h i s a s s e s s m e n t by exami ni ng t h e p o s i t i o n l i s t i n g s p u b l i s h e d in t h e C h r o n i c l e o f Hi ghe r Ed u c a t i o n and by g a t h e r i n g i n f o r m a t i o n on t h e r e s u l t i n g h i r i n g p r a c t i c e s . But s t u d y i n g c u r r e n t j o b p o s t i n g s i s n o t a t o t a l l y s a t i s f a c t o r y way t o d e t e r m i n e adm in is tra t iv e job o p p o r t u n i t i e s . While such i n f o r m a t i o n i s u s e f u l , a d m i n i s t r a t o r m o b i l i t y n e e d s t o be p u t i n t h e co n t e mp o r a r y c o n t e x t o f academi c o r g a n i z a t i o n s . Unfortunately, we l a c k such an i n t e g r a t i v e a n a l y s i s . The m a j o r i t y o f r e s e a r c h on a d m i n i s t r a t o r s h a s b e e n c o n f i n e d t o a n a l y s e s o f one p o s i t i o n , t h e p r e s i d e n c y , f rom which knowledge c o n c e r n i n g o t h e r a d m i n i s t r a t i v e c a re er s i s then e x t ra p o la t e d . The i mp l i e d a d m i n i s t r a t i v e c a r e e r pa r adi gm i s summarized i n t h e f o l l o w i n g s t a t e m e n t by S o c o l o w : "Senior p o s itio n s in academic a d m i n i s t r a t i o n have l o ng been t h e a l mo s t e x c l u s i v e p r o v i n c e o f t h o s e who s e r v e d a s u b s t a n t i a l t i me in academe, moving from one rung o f t h e l a d d e r t o t h e n e x t - m o s t o f t e n from p r o f e s s o r t o chai r man t o dean t o v i c e p r e s i d e n t t o p r e s i d e n t . " ( p. 501) 28 Just as there is no such thing as an ideal professional backgr ound f o r a c o l l e g e a d m i n i s t r a t o r , so t h e r e i s no such t h i n g as a model o p e r a t i n g g u i d e f o r c a r r y i n g ou t t h e d u t i e s o f t h e o f f i c e . I t would be pr es umpt uous t o s u g g e s t t h a t one method o f c o n d u c t i n g the business of a college will pr oduce r e s u l t s where a n o t h e r w i l l n o t (Goodner, 1974) . A l f r e d (1974) a d d r e s s e d t h e probl em o f l e a d e r s h i p i n community c o l l e g e s through t he f ollowing stat ement : As t h e i d e n t i t y o f community c o l l e g e s has cha nge d, so have t h e i r o p e r a t i n g needs and s t y l e o f l e a d e r s h i p . Not u n t i l recently, however, have t h e l e a d e r s h i p c a p a b i l i t i e s of community c o l l e g e p r e s i d e n t s , d e a n s , and t r u s t e e s been so r i g o r o u s l y and w i d e l y q u e s t i o n e d . Tomorrow’ s l e a d e r s w i l l combine a c o n c e p t u a l u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f t h e dynami cs o f complex o r g a n i z a t i o n s wi t h meani ngf ul and b r o a d - r a n g i n g e x p e r i e n c e - o f t e n t h r o u g h d i r e c t c o n t a c t wi t h s t r o n g r o l e mode l s . They w i l l be a b l e t o f o r g e a s s o c i a t i o n s bet ween complex e v e n t s , such a s t e a c h i n g and l e a r n i n g , c o s t s and b e n e f i t s , p l a n s and a c h i e v e m e n t s , and programs and q u a l i t y . Most i m p o r t a n t , t h e y w i l l r e a l i z e t h a t t h e r e i s no f o r m u l a f o r t r a i n i n g t h e effective leader. I n s t i n c t s a r e o f t e n as i m p o r t a n t as e x p e r i e n c e and formal t r a i n i n g , (p. 17) Eisner knowl edge, (1984) and gave his opinion understanding of change l e a d e r s h i p i n complex o r g a n i z a t i o n s . me ani ngf ul work e x p e r i e n c e , and of is as required more to than provide Br oad- bas ed academi c t r a i n i n g , important such as f l e x i b i l i t y and p e r s i s t e n c e , leadership personality dimensions, are also req uir ed . M i l l e r (1974) s t a t e d t h a t : In c o l l e g e s and u n i v e r s i t i e s t o d a y , many academi c d e a n s a r e immersed in c o l l e c t i v e b a r g a i n i n g . They have become q u a s i l a wy e r s i n some u n i v e r s i t i e s , o r , a t l e a s t , i t seems so t o t h e m , and t h e y s u d d e n l y f i n d t h e m s e l v e s a p p e a r i n g b e f o r e g r i e v a n c e c o mmi t t e e s , and t h e l i k e , wi t h r e s p e c t t o d e c i s i o n s made a bou t c o n t r a c t nonrenewal and t e n u r e and d e a l i n g i n many legalistic m a t t e r s . Academic a c c o u n t a b i l i t y r e q u i r e s t h a t t h e dean become f a m i l i a r wi t h c o s t - e f f e c t i v e n e s s p r o c e d u r e s , such 29 as f a c u l t y wor kl oad c a l c u l a t i o n s , and t h e i r r e l a t e d s u b t l e t i e s and s e n s i t i v i t i e s . Al s o, t h e dean has become more immersed in crisis management t h a n i n l e s s p r e s s u r e d and more r e l a x e d times. He has been a key f i g u r e i n t h e s t u d e n t t r a u m a , r a c i a l t e n s i o n s , and f i s c a l c r i s e s , (p. 232) In d i s c u s s i n g management i n universities), Murphy a d mi n i s t r a t o r s in flexible, and accommodate the (1984) make to education stated twenty-fi r s t precise--able change and higher that century work wi t h decisions" (colleges higher mu s t ( p. education be people, and "dynamic, anticipate 442). He and further emphasi zed t h a t t h e s e e d u c a t i o n a l l e a d e r s s h o u l d be i n d i v i d u a l s "who are no t afraid to take positions, to p o l i c i e s and t o meet needs " (p. 44 2 ) . take risks, to develop new He f u r t h e r b e l i e v e d : How i n s t i t u t i o n s o f h i g h e r e d u c a t i o n r e s p o n d t o advanc es in t e c h n o l o g y , s o c i a l r e f o r m s , demands f o r a c c o u n t a b i l i t y and l i m i t e d gover nment s u p p o r t w i l l be d e t e r m i n e d , t o a s i g n i f i c a n t e x t e n t , by t h e l e a d e r s h i p s t y l e o f s e n i o r a d m i n i s t r a t o r s . H i g h e r e d u c a t i o n a d m i n i s t r a t o r s h a v e t e n d e d , w i t h few exceptions, to be conservative, reactive, conforming educational leaders. Though many o f them have p r o c l a i me d t h e m s e l v e s t o be a s s e r t i v e and i n n o v a t i v e , t h e i r b e h a v i o r has n o t s u b s t a n t i a t e d t h i s c l a i m. For d e c a d e s , h i g h e r e d u c a t i o n a d m i n i s t r a t o r s have been a b l e t o " mu d d l e t h r o u g h " v a r i o u s i n s t i t u t i o n a l c r i s e s by employing in c re m e n ta l p o l i c i e s . T h i s s t r a t e g y has been s u c c e s s f u l be c a u s e i n c r e me n t a l p o l i c i e s mi ni mi ze c o n f l i c t s , m a i n t a i n t h e s t a t u s quo and e n s u r e t h a t t h e e x i s t i n g p o l i t i c a l sys t em i s p r e s e r v e d , (p. 441) In criteria the for following statement, administrative Murphy positions for blamed the lack the of selection qualified administrators: Many e d u c a t i o n a l a d m i n i s t r a t o r s do n o t a p p e a r t o p o s s e s s t h e knowledge, s k i l l s and f o r e s i g h t n e c e s s a r y f o r d i r e c t i n g higher education i n s t i t u t i o n s e f f e c t i v e l y in the t w e n t y - f i r s t century. A m u l t i t u d e o f f a c t o r s have c o n t r i b u t e d t o t h i s c i r c u m s t a n c e and t h e s e have y e t t o be a d e q u a t e l y s t u d i e d . Preliminary analyses suggest t h a t the s e l e c t i o n c r i t e r i a for a d m i n i s t r a t i v e p o s i t i o n s and t h e p r o f e s s i o n a l d e v e l o p m e n t 30 o p p o r t u n i t i e s a v a i l a b l e t o s e n i o r e x e c u t i v e s h a v e had a s i g n i f i c a n t impact on t h i s s i t u a t i o n . Conservative, reactive, conf or mi ng a d m i n i s t r a t o r s were s u c c e s s f u l i n an e r a when t h e s o c i o - e c o n o mi c e n v i r o n m e n t was relatively stable. U s u a l l y , e d u c a t i o n a l c ha nge s and s o c i a l r e f o r m c o u l d e a s i l y be accommodated, as n o t e d p r e v i o u s l y , by i n c r e me n t a l p o l i c i e s . Selection c r i t e r i a for administrative p o sitio n s r e f le c te d the conservative c h a ra c te r of the educational e n t e rp ris e . Many i n d i v i d u a l s who commenced t h e i r p r o f e s s i o n a l c a r e e r s in t h e f i f t i e s , s i x t i e s and e a r l y s e v e n t i e s p r e s e n t l y occupy administrative positions. The l e a d e r s h i p s t y l e s whi ch t h e s e ad m in is tr at or s acquired during the e a r l y years o f t h e i r c ar e er s a r e i n a p p r o p r i a t e f o r d e a l i n g w i t h t h e m a n a g e r i a l and a d m i n i s ­ t r a t i v e pr obl ems g e n e r a t e d by o ur modern s o c i e t y . Of t e n admi n­ i s t r a t o r s f i n d i t d i f f i c u l t t o s i g n i f i c a n t l y change t h e i r b e h a v i o r a f t e r bei ng a s e n i o r e x e c u t i v e f o r so many y e a r s , (p. 441) New t y p e s o f e d u c a t i o n a l l e a d e r s must be r e c r u i t e d for senior a d m in is tr a t iv e p o s it i o n s i f the i n s t i t u t i o n s of highe r education are t o r e s p o n d e f f e c t i v e l y t o t h e new demands o f s o c i e t y . mean that new s e l e c t i o n criteria should be employed require ski 11s different Th i s would to identify t h e s e new e d u c a t o r s . Administrators will from the ones needed t o s t a r t new i n s t i t u t i o n s o r g r e a t l y expand e x i s t i n g ones in t h e 1960s and e a r l y 1970s. d e v e l o p i ng staff than The pr obl ems now emer gi ng c a l l more f o r for building campuses. The external e nvi r onme nt can no l o n g e r be viewed as a s o u r c e o f s u p p o r t t h a t can keep pace wi t h accountable rising for the enrollments. decisions Administrators t h e y make and for the will be held out comes of t h e s e d e c i s i o n s ( R i c h a r d s o n , 1984) . Administration demanding as in colleges severely limited higher and financial education universities has face become increasingly p r o bl e ms r e s o u r c e s a nd m u l t i f a r i o u s pos ed by external 31 pressures. The pr obl ems are so pressing that administration may r e q u i r e a l l - c o n s u m i n g a t t e n t i o n , even from t h o s e who mi g h t p r e f e r t o deal w i t h b r o a d e r i s s u e s ( R e i f , 1977) . W h i l e he f o c u s e s mor e on t h e s t a t u s quo t h a n d o e s t h e e n t r e p r e n e u r , t o d a y ’ s a d m i n i s t r a t o r must p o s s e s s v i s i o n and r e s o u r c e f u l n e s s f a r beyond t h a t a s s o c i a t e d w i t h t h e t r a d i t i o n a l agency manager o r b u r e a u c r a t . The l a t t e r t y p e o f p e r s o n views acc ompl i s hme nt s o l e l y i n t e r ms o f t h e me c ha ni c a l i mp l e me n t a t i o n o f s y s t e m r e g u l a t i o n s and p o l i c y . Such a p e r s o n s h o u l d be a v o i d e d i n t o p e d u c a t i o n a l management be c a u s e t h i s t y p e o f a d m i n i s t r a t o r s t i f l e s i n d i v i d u a l i t y and c r e a t i v i t y . (McInt osh & Ma i e r , 1976, p. 89) Some o f t h e c o m p e t e n c i e s o f t h e similar to the s k i l l s new administrator new a d m i n i s t r a t o r - m a n a g e r used by a d m i n i s t r a t o r s needs different levels in t h e p a s t . of are But t h e expertise and new knowledge and s k i l l s no t r e q u i r e d o f h i s / h e r p r e d e c e s s o r s . A s o l i d backgr ound i n b u s i n e s s p r a c t i c e s i s b a s i c t o t h e p r e p a r a t i o n o f t h e new a d m i n i s t r a t o r - m a n a g e r . Particular e mphas i s s h o u l d be p l a c e d on a t h o r o u g h u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f b u d g e t i n g and f i n a n c i a l management. An u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f t h e p o t e n t i a l a d m i n i s t r a t i v e use o f c o mp u t e r s i s a n o t h e r a r e a needed by t h e a d m i n i s t r a t o r - m a n a g e r . No a d m i n i s t r a t o r - m a n a g e r t o d a y s h o u l d be w i t h o u t t h e knowledge o f c o l l e c t i v e b a r g a i n i n g and t h e s k i l l s needed a t t h e negotiation table. An o t h e r a r e a o f needed e x p e r t i s e f o r t h e a d m i n i s t r a t o r manager i s p u b l i c r e l a t i o n s . ( S c o t t , 1979, p . 41) In t h e s t u d y c o n d u c t e d by Lut z ( 1 9 7 9 ) , were a l s o as ked what qualities they s e a r c h - c o m m i t t e e members valued in a candidate. The c o m m i t t e e ’ s e x p e c t a t i o n s were compared w i t h t h e s e l f - p e r c e p t i o n s t h e de a ns s e l e c t e d . the concerns of More t h a n 75% o f t h e search im portance) were the experience, (b) intellectual ability, committees candidate’s ability (d) to lead ability (a) and (in respondents s t a t e d descending previous initiate, to r e l a t e to order of that of adm inistrative (c) energy the f i e l d , and and (e) 32 personal appearance. A s econd s e t o f c r i t e r i a was c l a s s i f i e d by 52% t o 62% as h i g h l y t o v e r y h i g h l y i m p o r t a n t . included research within the candidate’s and p u b l i c a t i o n the empl oyi ng (a) These c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s practical record, ( c) institutions, field experience, r ecommendat i ons and (d) (b) from p e r s o n s r ecommendat i ons from persons a t other u n i v e r s i t i e s . Ac c or di ng t o McInt osh and Mai er ( 1 9 7 6 ) , qualities potential 1. should be kept in mind when the following attempting to list of identify ca nd i da te s f o r top a d m i n i s t r a t i v e p o s i t i o n s : The pe r s on s houl d a l r e a d y be f u n c t i o n i n g as a s u c c e s s f u l member o f t h e academi c wor l d. The p e r s o n s h o u l d show o r g a n i z a t i o n a l a b i l i t y , which s h o u l d be a p p a r e n t from p a s t and p r e s e n t p e r f o r ma n c e . The pe r s on s ho ul d have b e t t e r t h a n a v e r a g e i n t e r p e r s o n a l skills. Does t h e p e r s o n have t h e a b i l i t y t o l o o k ahead and s y n t h e ­ s i z e new and r e s p o n s i b l e p l a n s f o r t h e f u t u r e ? How much a d m i n i s t r a t i v e e x p e r i e n c e has t h e p e r s o n a l r e a d y had? Wi ll t h e p e r s o n be a b l e t o d e r i v e s a t i s f a c t i o n from i mpr ov­ i ng t h e q u a l i t y o f e x i s t i n g programs? Does t h e c a n d i d a t e e x h i b i t f i s c a l a b i l i t y or " fis cal sense"? Will he o r she be a b l e t o b a l a n c e t h e budge t creatively? Does he o r she have a h i s t o r y o f s o c i a l r e s p o n s i b i l i t y ? The p e r s o n a l c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s t h a t a p p e a r t o be mo s t u r g e n t l y needed in academi a t o d a y a r e a p r o p e n s i t y t o emphasi ze q u a l i t y r a t h e r t h a n e x p a n s i o n , c o p i n g a b i l i t i e s ( i n c l u d i n g " f i s c a l s e n s e " ) , and s o c i a l r e s p o n s i b i l i t y , (p. 91) 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. S k i p p e r (1977) and Heald (1982) i n t h e i r s t u d i e s used d i f f e r e n t a d m i n i s t r a t i v e r a t i n g forms t o a s c e r t a i n t h e q u a l i t i e s t o when bas ed selecting on top college community c o l l e g e s . administrative and university personnel. administrators, Both not look f o r studies on were those in 33 Ta b l e 2 . 2 shows t h e i t ems Form used experiences by S k i p p e r . in t e r ms of in t h e A d m i n i s t r a t i v e S k i l l s Heald’ s rankings their i mp o r t a n c e f u n c t i o n i n g a r e shown in Ta b l e 2 . 3 . of various for Ra t i ng professional selection and for The h i g h e s t - and l o w e s t - r a n k e d c r i t e r i a from H e a l d ’ s s t u d y a r e l i s t e d i n T a b l e 2 . 4 . Simon (1976) summed up t h i s s u b j e c t by n o t i n g : Comparing c o l l e g e s w i t h o t h e r o r g a n i z a t i o n s s e e s t h a t t h e i r most s t r i k i n g p e c u l i a r i t y i s b u t t h e e x t e n t t o which t h e y a r e o p e r a t e d a r e i n s t i t u t i o n s r un by a m a t e u r s t o t r a i n 69) i n our s o c i e t y , one not t h e i r product, by a m a t e u r s . They p r o f e s s i o n a l s , (p. Career Paths t o t h e P o s i t i o n o f C h i e f Academic O f f i c e r Anot her ma j o r focus of th is s t udy was t o examine t h e career p a t h s t h a t r e s p o n d e n t s had f o l l o w e d t o a r r i v e a t t h e c h i e f academi c officer position. The l i t e r a t u r e suggested point of en try into higher education that the most common a d m i n i s t r a t i o n was employment as a f a c u l t y member. Gysber s (1984) wr o t e t h a t modern t h e o r i e s o f c a r e e r devel opment began appearing in literature knowledge a b o u t o c c u p a t i o n a l increased dramatically. during the 1950s. By t h e c h o i c e a s a d e v e l op me nt a l At t h e same t i m e , t h e t e r ms 1960s, process had "career" and " c a r e e r d e ve l opme nt " became p o p u l a r . The c u r r e n t t y p i c a l p r o f i l e o f a c h i e f academi c o f f i c e r in a c o l l e g e o r u n i v e r s i t y i s a C a u c a s i a n male i n h i s l a t e f o r t i e s or early f i f t i e s . He h o l d s an e a r n e d d o c t o r a t e , o c c a s i o n a l l y in h ig he r e duca ti on a d m i n i s t r a t i o n , but more o f t e n i n an academi c d i s c i p l i n e i n which he has a backgr ound o f t e a c h i n g and r e s e a r c h . His c a r e e r up t o t h e t i me o f a p p o i n t me n t t o h i s p r e s e n t p o s i t i o n i n c l u d e d work as a f a c u l t y member, program c o o r d i n a t o r o r d e p a r t m e n t h e a d , and p r o b a b l y dean. 34 Tabl e 2 . 2 . - - I t e m s i n t h e A d m i n i s t r a t i v e S k i l l s Ra t i ng Form. S u p e r i o r Rat i ng Variable Poor Ra t i ng 1. P la n ni ng a b i l i t y F a i l s t o see ahead Ca pabl e o f t o p - l e v e l planning 2. Knowledge about position Lacks f a c t s a bout position Understands a l l f a c e t s of the position 3. O r g a n i z a t i o n and management A poor o r g a n i z e r B r i n g s a b o u t maximum effectiveness 4. L ea d e r s hi p A weak l e a d e r Q u a l i f i e s f o r h i g hl e v e l management 5. Judgment D ec i s i o n s a r e sometimes unsound Makes c o r r e c t d e c i s i o n s in complex s i t u a t i o n s 6. Human r e l a t i o n s Does not g e t along well wi t h o t h e r s Br i ng s o u t t h e b e s t in people 7. Qual i t y o f pe r f ormance Does not always per f orm well Work i s al ways o u t ­ standing Source: C h a r l e s E. S k i p p e r , " A d m i n i s t r a t i v e S k i l l s o f E f f e c t i v e and I n e f f e c t i v e U n i v e r s i t y L e a d e r s , " Co ll e g e and U n i v e r s i t y 52 ( Sp r i ng 197 7) : 277. T a bl e 2 . 3 . - -Ranki ng o f p r o f e s s i o n a l e x p e r i e n c e s in t e rms o f i mpor ta nc e f o r s e l e c t i o n and f u n c t i o n i n g . Rank Importance f o r Selection Rank Import ance f o r Functioning Vl Signif. U niversity administ. 1 1 1.5-2.1 N.S. U niversity teaching 2 2 2.5-2.6 N.S. P u b l i c school exp. 3 3 3.9-3.6 N.S. Institutional devel. 4 4 4.1-3.8 N.S. P er sonnel a d m i n i s t . 5 5 4.3-4.1 N.S. PBTE management 6 6 5.8-5.5 N.S. I n t e r n a t i o n a l program 7 7 6.0-6.4 N.S. Criterion Source: James E. He a l d , " Edu c at i on Deans and T h e i r S e l e c t i o n , " J o u r n a l o f Tea che r E d u c a t i on 33 ( J a n . / F e b . 1982): 48. 35 Ta bl e 2 . 4 . - - H i g h e s t - and l o w e s t - r a n k e d c r i t e r i a f o r e d u c a t i o n c h a i r s and d e a n s . Ranked Impor­ tance 1 2 3 4 TOP TEN 5 6 7 8 9 University relatio n s skills 33 S en sitiv ity to a f f i r ­ ma t i v e a c t i o n Professional organiz a­ t i o n membership Public r e l a t i o n s s k i l l s 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 S ou r c e : Leadership s k i l l De c i s i o n - ma k i n g s k i l l Commitment t o f a c u l t y devel opment S en sitiv ity to faculty needs University administra­ t i v e experience Program devel opment skills Faculty r e l a t i o n s s k i l l s Communication s k i l l s Vi s i o n f o r e d u c a t i o n 10 34 BOTTOM TEN Chairs E lig ib i lit y for gradu­ a t e school S ensitiv ity to c o lle c ­ t i v e bargaining P e r s on ne l a d m i n i s t r a ­ tion experience PBTE management Ci v i c i n v o l ve me nt I n t e r n a t i o n a l program experience S e n s i t i v i t y t o open a d mi s s i o n s Deans Leadership s k i l l D e c i s i o n - ma k i n g s k i l l Vision of education Communication s k i l l s P l a n n i n g and e v a l u a t i o n skills Faculty r e l a t i o n s s k i l l s H e a l t h and v i g o r Human r e l a t i o n s s k i l l s S en sitiv ity to faculty needs Program devel opment skills Re s e a r c h s k i l l s Gr ant manshi p s k i l l s Sensitivity to c o lle c ­ ti v e bargaining Extra-university r e l a ­ tions skills Professional organizaz a t i o n membership E l i g i b i l i t y f o r graduate school PBTE management C i v i c i n v o l v e me n t I n t e r n a t i o n a l program experience S e n s i t i v i t y t o open admissions James E. Heal d, " E d u c a t i o n Deans and T h e i r S e l e c t i o n , " J o u r n a l o f Te a c h e r Ed u c a t i o n 33 ( J a n . / F e b . 198 2) : 49. 36 G e n e r a l l y , he has s p e n t most o f h i s c a r e e r i n t h e same t y p e o f i n s t i t u t i o n ( t w o - y e a r community c o l l e g e , four-year l i b e r a l a r t s c o l l e g e , compr e hen s i ve u n i v e r s i t y ) , b u t he has moved about among s e v e r a l i n s t i t u t i o n s . Administrators are mor e m o b i l e t h a n f a c u l t y me mber s t o d a y , a nd " b r e a d t h o f experience" is c o n s i d e r e d a d e s i r a b l e q u a l i f i c a t i o n by most s e a r c h commi t t ees l o o k i n g f o r h i g h - l e v e l a d m i n i s t r a t o r s . He may have s p e n t a y e a r o r two on t h e s t a f f o f an e d u c a t i o n r e l a t e d agency i n h i s s t a t e ’ s c a p i t a l o r i n Was hi n gt on. ( A l l e n , 1984, p. 9) In a s t u d y o f c a r e e r Moore (1983) requisite position and for found that an that the patterns faculty faculty overwhel mi ng in colleges experience position majority of is is and a the universities, critical career typical entry top-1ine administrative positions. Anderson (1984) a t t e m p t e d t o sum up t h e pr obl em o f p r e p a r a t i o n by s t a t i n g : I t seems t h a t t h e b a s i c q u e s t i o n i s what can we do t o b e t t e r p r e p a r e menand women who w i l l l e a d o u r academi c institutions. The d o c t o r a l progr ams t h a t o f f e r t h e Ed.D. d e g r e e i n h i g h e r e d u c a t i o n a d m i n i s t r a t i o n a l r e a d y i n c l u d e an a p p r o p r i a t e c o m p o n e n t o f b e h a v i o r a l s c i e n c e t h e o r y and application. However, most o f o u r a d m i n i s t r a t o r s c o n t i n u e t o move up t h e t r a d i t i o n a l Ph.D. r o u t e . Along t h e way, u n l e s s t h e y ma j o r i n p s y c h o l o g y o r b u s i n e s s , t h e y mi s s t h i s e s s e n t i a l body o f r e s e a r c h and knowl e d g e . Th e y wi 11 become t h e d e p a r t m e n t h e a d s , d e a n s , and p r e s i d e n t s o f t h e 1 9 9 0 ’ s . I t i s t i me f o r us t o e mu l a t e t h e b u s i n e s s wor l d and r e c o g n i z e our own p r o p h e t s . T h e i r ma j o r wor ks , t h e o r i e s , and a p p l i c a t i o n s a r e as s i g n i f i c a n t t o t h e e f f e c t i v e p e r f o r ma n c e o f a c o l l e g e dean o r d e p a r t m e n t head as t o t h a t o f a c o r p o r a t e v i c e p r e s i d e n t , ( p. 21) Scott (1977) discussed the career mobility of middle-level c o l l e g e a d m i n i s t r a t o r s (community c o l l e g e s were n o t m e n t i o n e d ) . M o b i l i t y w i l l be sl ow, g i v e n t h e b o x - 1 i k e n a t u r e o f mi ddl e- management , b u t new o p p o r t u n i t i e s and r e w a r d s must be instituted. I n d u s t r y i s d e a l i n g w i t h a s i m i l a r pr obl em i n a v a r i e t y of ways, in c lu d in g e a r l y r e t i r e m e n t s , 1a t e r a l t r a n s f e r s , r e t r a i n i n g pr ogr ams , t h e 1 i b e r a l d i s t r i b u t i o n o f 37 titles, mor e t a s k f o r c e a s s i g n m e n t s , and d e p a r t m e n t a l reorganizations. The l a c k o f o p p o r t u n i t y f o r c a r e e r gr owt h l e a d s t o was t ed r e s o u r c e s bot h t h r o u g h t h e d e p a r t u r e t o g r e e n e r p a s t u r e s of b r i g h t a m b i t i o u s y o u n g a d m i n i s t r a t o r s , and t h r o u g h " e a r l y r e t i r e m e n t " i n t o t h e a c t i v i t i e s o f l o c a l s e r v i c e c l u b s and b u s i n e s s e s by t h o s e who f i r s t j o i n t h e c o l l e g e s t a f f wi t h e n e r g y and e n t h u s i a s m , bu t who f i n d a f t e r s e v e r a l y e a r s t h a t t h e i r s i g h t s must be l o we r e d b e c a u s e t h e o p p o r t u n i t i e s f o r advancement a r e l i m i t e d . A v a r i e t y o f c a r e e r p a t h s s houl d be open t o knowl edgea bl e and i m a g i n a t i v e m i d d l e - l e v e l ma nager s . P o s i t i o n s i n academi c a d m i n i s t r a t i o n , f i s c a l p l a n n i n g , and ge n e r a l a d m i n i s t r a t i o n , among o t h e r s , s h o u l d be o p e n to b rig h t, eager career a d m i n i s t r a t o r s who have pr oven t h e i r a b i l i t y t o l e a r n and accomplish. However, m o b i l i t y from one c a t e g o r y t o a n o t h e r i s l i m i t e d , ( pp. 48- 49) In models his to study, Arman establish literature. the (1986) developed common c a r e e r several patterns Model A p r e s e n t e d a p r e s i d e n t i a l Bi d e n t i f i e d a career path that c a r e e r - 1 adder suggested in career ladder. begins with the Model entry-level a d m i n i s t r a t i v e work i n h i g h e r e d u c a t i o n and upward p r o g r e s s i o n i n t o o t h e r a d m i n i s t r a t i v e j o b s w i t h o u t any f a c u l t y suggested higher early career education at a work o u t s i d e hi gh of level on the theme of entry to identifying th a t the i n i t i a l setting, or Model and e n t r y vice-president) a college education teaching community c o l l e g e career path. presidency. administrators t hr oug h j o b may have Some suggested on t h e that Model E a l s o p r e s e n t e d a c a r e e r teaching, but subsequent C into and Model D s u g g e s t e d a v a r i a t i o n teaching been steps literature this is by in a K-12 and p r o g r e s s i o n i n t o c o l l e g e t e a c h i n g , a d m i n i s t r a t i o n , ultim ately K-12 higher education (dean movement from t h e r e t o a p r e s i d e n c y . experience. and on a common pat h t h a t began w i t h involved adm inistrative 38 positions in a K-12 system education administration. and then progression into higher (See Ta b l e 2 . 5 . ) Ta b l e 2 . 5 . - - C a r e e r model s o f c h i e f academi c o f f i c e r s i n community c o l l e g e s (N = 5 1 ) . Community C o l l e g e C a r e e r Model No. % A ( p r e s i d e n t i a l c a r e e r model) 23 45.1 B ( a d m i n i s t r a t i v e c a r e e r model) 15 29. 4 C ( o u t s i d e work c a r e e r model) 1 1.9 D (K-12 t e a c h i n g t o a d m i n i s t r a t i o n c a r e e r mode l ) 8 1 5. 7 (K-12 t o h i g h e r e d u c a t i o n admi n­ i s t r a t i o n c a r e e r model) 4 7.8 E Total S ou r c e : 51 99.9' Har ol d D. Arman, " C a r e e r P r e p a r a t i o n o f C o l l e g e P r e s i d e n t s and C h i e f Academic O f f i c e r s in Mi dwest ern C o l l e g e s " (Ph.D. d i s s e r t a t i o n , Mi chi gan S t a t e U n i v e r s i t y , 1 986) , p. 88. aDoes not t o t a l 100% due t o r o u n d i n g . In d i s c u s s i n g t h e d i f f e r e n c e s between t r a i n i n g i n b u s i n e s s and higher education, Green (1981) stated that in t h e h ig h e r e duca tion c o n t e x t , l e a d e r s h i p s t r e s s e s v i s i o n - - t h e a b i l i t y t o s e t g o a l s and t o d e f i n e m i s s i o n i n a c c o r d a n c e w i t h t h e f o l l o w e r s ’ s e n s e o f t h e i r own needs, values, operational, and p u r p o s e s . and the Management c o n n o t e s t h e mundane, ability to get things done in order the to 39 ac c o m p li sh a p r e d e t e r m i n e d g o a l . As an a s s o c i a t e d i r e c t o r f o r t h e C e n t e r f o r L e a d e r s h i p Development, Green b e l i e v e d t h a t : L eadership e f f o r t s w ill be n e e d e d t o p r o m o t e t h e de v el op me n t o f new h y b r i d academic a d m i n i s t r a t o r s who a r e p a r t e d u c a t i o n a l l e a d e r and p a r t manager and who can s u c c e s s f u l l y p r e s e r v e a c o n s t r u c t i v e t e n s i o n b e t w e e n t h e a c a d e m i c and m a n a g e ria l com ponents o f t h e i r r o l e s . Armed w i t h an u n d e r s t a n d i n g t h a t commitment t o academic v a l u e s does not always s u f f i c e t o keep an i n s t i t u t i o n s o l v e n t and w i t h t h e knowledge t h a t good management p r a c t i c e s do n o t n e c e s s a r i l y pr o du ce q u a l i t y t e a c h i n g o r r e s e a r c h , t h e s e i n d i v i d u a l s w i l l be eq u i p p ed t o l e a d o u r b e l e a g u e r e d i n s t i t u t i o n s t h r o u g h t h e tough t i m e s ahea d. H igh er e d u c a t i o n w i l l have t o work c o n s c i o u s l y a t s t r i k i n g a p r o d u c t i v e b a l a n c e between t h e academic and t h e m a n ag er ia l r e q u i r e m e n t s o f l e a d e r s h i p and g i v e each i t s j u s t due. (p. 15) In t h e coming y e a r s , e d u c a t o r s w i l l have t o abandon t h e n o t i o n - - o r r a t h e r r e l i n q u i sh t h e wi s h - - t h a t t h e a r t o f a d m i n i s t r a t i o n r e q u i r e s 1 i t t l e i f any t r a i n i n g , ( p. 17) Methods o f R e c r u i tm e n t In a d d i t i o n decline to the came new l e g a l contem porary American legi s ia tio n and defining c iv il court change from ex p a n s io n constraints society deci sions to stab ilizatio n on employment. is the A hallmark of avalanche d eli neating and or of more federal cl e a r l y rights. Two p r e s i d e n t i al e x e c u tiv e o r d e r s , m ajor c i v i l rights l e g i s l a t i o n , and a f f i r m a t i v e a c t i o n g u i d e l i n e s - - c o m b i n e d w ith more t h a n 100 mi 11 i o n d o l 1a r s in f e d e r a l enforcem ent e x p e n d i t u r e s and t h e com p lia n c e powers o f t h e Department o f Labor, t h e O f f i c e o f C i v i l R i g h t s , and t h e Equal Employment O p p o r t u n i t y Com mi ssion--might l e a d one t o assume t h a t c o l l e g e s and u n i v e r s i t i e s w i l l no l o n g e r be s u c c e s s f u l in a v o i d i n g t h e im p l e m e n t a t i o n o f a f f i r m a t i v e a c t i n programs in t h e r e c r u i t m e n t o f f e m a le s and m i n o r i t i e s . ( S i l v e s t r i & Kane, 1975, p. 446) To remedy t h e d i s c r i m i n a t o r y p r a c t i c e s o f t h e p a s t , have issued directives to organizations to actively the courts recruit and 40 employ women and m inorities. Th is process is referred to as affirm ativ e action. A f f i r m a t i v e a c t i o n programs a r e d e t a i l e d , r e s u l t - o r i e n t e d p r o c e d u r e s t h a t , when c a r r i e d o u t in good f a i t h , r e s u l t in c o m p li a n c e w i t h t h e equal o p p o r t u n i t y c l a u s e s found in most l e g i s l a t i o n and e x e c u t i v e o r d e r s . A ffirm ative a c tio n , t h e r e f o r e , i s n o t a law w i t h i n i t s e l f b u t r a t h e r a s e t o f g u i d e l i n e s t h a t o r g a n i z a t i o n s may use t o i n s u r e c o m p li a n c e w it h l e g i s l a t i o n and e x e c u t i v e o r d e r s . Thus, an o r g a n i z a t i o n does n o t " v i o l a t e " a f f i r m a t i v e a c t i o n ; i t v i o l a t e s t h e law. (R ebo re, 1982, p. 40) The federal in flu en ces of affirm ativ e action, Employment Act o f 1967, may have changed t h e s t a f f i n g the Eq ual patterns for community c o l l e g e s . Because o f t h e r e c e n t f r e q u e n c y o f l a w s u i t s a r i s i n g from n o n r e t e n t i o n , s u s p e n s i o n , and f i r i n g , i t w i l l become n e c e s s a r y f o r community c o l l e g e managers t o f o r m a l i z e and s o p h i s t i c a t e t h e i r r e c r u i t m e n t and s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s e s and t o g u a r a n t e e due p r o c e s s p r o c e d u r e s f o r a l l p e r s o n n e l . ( L a h t i , 1973, p . 9) Legal r e q u i r e m e n t s f o r h i r i n g and r e t e n t i o n o f s t a f f have t o be substantiated. rights/equal organizations The a d m i n i s t r a t i v e g u i d e l i n e s accompanying t h e c i v i l employment o p p o r t u n i t y laws now make i t to conduct a job analysis in o r d e r to m a nd at o ry f o r defend their personnel p r a c t i c e s . O r g a n i z a t i o n s a r e now r e q u i r e d t o p r o v i d e e q u i t a b l e t r e a t m e n t t o a l l j o b a p p l i c a n t s , and t h e r e c r u i t m e n t and s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s e s have t o r e f l e c t more s y s t e m a t i c p l a n n i n g in o r d e r t o meet h i r i n g g o a l s f o r c e r t a i n m i n o r i t y g r o u p s and women. F u r t h e r m o r e , t h e s e l e c t i o n i n s t r u m e n t s used must be c a r e f u l l y examined t o be s u r e t h a t t h e y a s s e s s t h e c a n d i d a t e f o r t h e j o b i n q u e s t i o n and n o t t h e p e r s o n ’ s background o r c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s . The p r o c e s s o f o r g a n i z a t i o n a l e n t r y t o d a y i s i n t r i c a t e l y i n t e r t w i n e d w it h f a i r - e m p l o y m e n t p r a c t i c e s l e g i s l a t i o n and t h e g u i d e l i n e s e s t a b l i s h e d by f e d e r a l r e g u l a t o r y a g e n c i e s , such as t h e EEOC [Equal Employment O p p o r t u n i t y Commission]. (Rowland, 1983) 41 Several research studies have been conducted on recruitm ent methods o f c o l l e g e s and u n i v e r s i t i e s and a r e s u b s e q u e n t l y in t h i s have been r e p o r t e d t h a t d e a l t r e v ie w . As y e t , no s t u d i e s included e x c l u s i v e l y w i t h t h e r e c r u i t m e n t o f community c o l l e g e c h i e f academic officers. From h i s s t u d y , Socolow (1978) s t a t e d : The f e d e r a l g o v e r n m e n t’ s a f f i r m a t i v e a c t i o n r e g u l a t i o n s were d e s i g n e d t o do j u s t t h i s - - t o make j o b o p p o r t u n i t i e s more w i d e l y a v a i l a b l e t o a l l w o rth y c o n t e s t a n t s . The p r i n c i p a l t a r g e t o f a t t a c k o f t h e s e open r e c r u i t m e n t programs has been t h a t system o f h i r i n g b e s t known as t h e "Old Boy Netw or k," which s e l e c t s and employs i n d i v i d u a l s t h r o u g h an in f o r m a l and c o l l e g i a l exchange o f names. The o l d boy net wor k i s viewed by op po ne nt s as t h e s i n g l e most p e r v a s i v e o b s t a c l e t o open a c c e s s t o p o s i t i o n s in academe, ( p . 43) Socolow’ s findings showed that the new, mandated hiring have n o t c o m p l e t e l y o f f s e t t r a d i t i o n a l h i r i n g p r a c t i c e s . programs He w r o t e : C o l l e g e s and u n i v e r s i t i e s may, and o f t e n do, o p e r a t e p a r a l l e l and complementary h i r i n g s t r a t e g i e s , whereby t h e y a d v e r t i s e w i d e l y t o meet government r e q u i r e m e n t s a t t h e same ti m e as t h e i r o f f i c e r s a r e phoning c o l l e a g u e s f o r n o m i n a t i o n s and recommendations. There i s n o t h i n g i l l e g a l a b o u t t h i s twopronged ap p ro ac h : The o p e r a t i n g p r i n c i p l e s o f open r e c r u i t m e n t do n o t e x c l u d e o ld boy s t r a t e g i e s ; t h e y o n l y r e q u i r e t h a t a p o s i t i o n be made knownp u b l i c l y , t h a t a p p l i c a n t s be j u d g e d f a i r l y and a g a i n s t s p e c i f i e d c r i t e r i a , and t h a t t h e b e s t q u a l i f i e d a p p l i c a n t be s e l e c t e d . The d a t a in t h e s t u d y s u g g e s t e d t h a t a t l e a s t 76% o f t h e i n s t i t u t i o n s in t h e sample a d v e r t i s e d n a t i o n a l l y and a t t h e same ti m e invoked t h e o l d boy p r a c t i c e s , (p. 43) Socolow summed up t h e r e c r u i t m e n t p r o c e s s by s t a t i n g : D espite the sample i n s t i t u t i o n s ’ heavy investm ent in a d v e r t i s i n g , many showed a s t r o n g p r e d i s p o s i t i o n f o r h i r i n g t h e known c a n d i d a t e , however good t h e unknowns lo ok e d on p a p e r . J o b s a t s e n i o r a d m i n i s t r a t i v e l e v e l s , f o r exam ple, were f i l l e d o n ly 24% o f t h e t i m e by i n d i v i d u a l s who a p p l i e d d i r e c t l y f o r a p o s i t i o n w i t h o u t any p r i o r c o n n e c t i o n s w i t h t h e i n s t i t u t i o n s o r t h e i n d i v i d u a l s d oi n g t h e h i r i n g . For t h e f o r e s e e a b l e f u t u r e , t h o u g h , i n d i v i d u a l s i n t e r e s t e d in l e a d e r s h i p p o s i t i o n s in academe would do well t o work w i t h i n t h e o l d boy net wo rk as much a s p o s s i b l e , t o y i n g w i t h t h e j o b n o t i c e b o a r d s o f e d u c a t i o n a l p e r i o d i c a l s o n l y as a second r e s o r t , ( p . 54) 42 Factors such as d iscrim in atio n , so cializatio n , sex -ro le s t e r e o t y p i n g , l a c k o f fem a le r o l e models, and t h e a b s en ce o f an " o ld g i r l " net wor k have been blamed f o r t h e s h o r t a g e o f women in h i g h e r e d u c a t i o n a d m i n i s t r a t i o n (Benton, 1980). The t y p e s o f r e c r u i t m e n t methods c u r r e n t l y used by community colleges are: 1. Referral or nom inations. A recommendation by a c u r r e n t o r fo r m er employee o r by someone who i s well known a t t h e c o l l e g e . 2. Private employment agencies. a g e n c i e s s p e c i a l i z e in h e l p i n g f i l l Some private employment executive p o s itio n s , a practice commonly r e f e r r e d t o as " h e a d - h u n t i n g . " Through n a t i o n w i d e c o n t a c t s and of through credentials, executive business extensive these in v estig atio n agencies are able and m i d d l e - m a n a g e m e n t and industry. to po ten tial recommend c a n d i d a t e s po sitio n s, They c h a r g e a ex ecu tiv es’ u sually rather high in fee for p riv ate for this se rv ic e , u sually a percentage of the ex e c u tiv e ’ s f i r s t - y e a r s a la ry ; 30% o f a salary in excess of $100,000 is not uncommon (Rebo re, 198 2). 3. P u b l i c a t i o n s . distribution The C h r o n i c l e o f High er E d u c a ti o n has a t o t a l o f more t h a n 3 2, 00 0 c o p i e s p e r i s s u e , d e v o t e s 20% t o 30% o f each i s s u e t o h i g h e r e d u c a t i o n r e c r u i t m e n t ann ouncements, and invites openings readers to on t h e i r use advertising campuses; to s pa ce "to find s e e k new p o s i t i o n s ; candidates for and f o r o t h e r a p p r o p r i a t e p u r p o s e s " ( S i l v e s t r i & Kane, 1975, p. 4 4 7 ) . 43 4. P rofessional professional o rg an izatio n s, p la ce m e nt s e r v i c e s publish o rg an izatio n s. for their In including members. the labor priv ate secto r, unions, provide These o r g a n i z a t i o n s a r o s t e r o f job vacancies or n o t i f y individual either members o f p o t e n t i a l j o b s (Rebore, 1982 ). 5. Internal postings. The p o s t i n g o f t h e p o s itio n w ithin the c o l l e g e so t h a t c u r r e n t employees may a p p l y f o r t h e p o s i t i o n . 6. External postings. The 1i s t i n g o f t h e po sitio n outside of t h e c o l l e g e so t h a t i n d i v i d u a l s who a r e n o t c u r r e n t employees o f t h e col l e g e may app ly . 7. Word o f mo ut h. N o ti c e o f t h e vaca ncy i s t h r o u g h one o f t h e informal networks in t h e community c o l l e g e s . 8. C o n ta c t from t h e i n s t i t u t i o n . individual, in f or m in g him/her of The i n s t i t u t i o n c o n t a c t s an the vacancy and extending an i n v i t a t i o n t o become a c a n d i d a t e . 9. U nsolicited. Most unsolicited applicants contact the c o l l e g e by m a i l , t e l e p h o n e , o r in p e r s o n . Methods o f S e l e c t i o n For many p u b l i c community c o l l e g e s t h i s w i l l be t h e f i r s t ti m e since have their had to establishm ent th a t be filled. high-level Mangieri and adm inistrative Arnn (1984) positions stated , "The p r o c e s s o f s e a r c h i n g f o r a dean i s i m p o r t a n t and complex, and l i t t l e has been w r i t t e n t o a s s i s t f a c u l t i e s (p. 56 ). in p r e p a r i n g f o r t h e p r o c e s s " Col l e g e s have had t o l o o k a t t h e i r s e l e c t i o n p r o c e d u r e s t o insure th a t they are in comp lian ce w it h c u r r e n t federal and s t a t e 44 la w s . Walker (1983) stated th a t to achieve the o b je c tiv e s o f the Equal Employment O p p o r t u n i t y A ct , companies have d e v e l o p e d new j o b m a tc h in g /c a re e r p ro g ressio n systems, requirem ents, prospective more o bjective candidates for e x p lic it career ways p ro m o ti o ns to paths id e n tify and and t r a n s f e r s , and j o b ev aluate and expanded employee -d eve lopm en t programs. Socolow (1978) found t h a t t h e most w i d e l y used method f o r generated Higher in his Ed u ca ti o n suggested that selecting investigation published at least " o ld boy net wor k" of six a job candidate. issues of the between J a n u a r y 31 76% o f and at the the and in stitutions same re m a in ed time the The d a t a Chronicle March in 7, the invoked of 1977, sample advertised nationally practices. The p o s i t i o n s went t o t h o s e who e i t h e r were i n v i t e d t o ap pl y o r who were nominated f o r t h e i r positions; programs and, have not taken serious hold in open fact, "old boy" recruitm ent have failed in higher m i s e r a b l y t o acc om pli sh t h e i r g o a l s (B enton, 19 80 ). Taylor educational of faculty, in itiatio n positions" and Shavlik in stitu tio n s (1977) are f i l l e d adm inistrators, of stated response, or that most by means o f jobs "informal other educational recommend prom ising leaders ne tw or ks who, candidates by for (p . 9 1 ) . Because h i g h e r e d u c a t i o n a l i n s t i t u t i o n s have been l a r g e l y ma led o m i n a te d , so have been t h e in f o r m a l ne t w o rk s t h a t d e v e l o p e d w i t h i n them. C o n s e q u e n t ly , b ec a u se women have n o t been a b l e t o i n f i l t r a t e t h e "Old Boy" net wo rk , women c a n d i d a t e s l a c k t h e v i s i b i l i t y and a r e , t h e r e f o r e , r a r e l y s u g g e s t e d f o r t o p - l e v e l positions. Even t h o s e p e r s o n s who d e s i r e and a r e w i l l i n g t o recommend women a r e o f t e n n o t aware o f and do n o t know how o r where t o l o c a t e women q u a l i f i e d f o r j o b o p e n i n g s . (Be n to n , 1980, p. 6) 45 "go Socolow (1978) through the suggested m otions of that many c o l l e g e s searching and w idely in stitu tio n s for q u alified c a n d i d a t e s , w h i l e t h e y , i n f a c t , r e l y h e a v i l y on f a m i l i a r r e c r u i t i n g methods" (p. 42). His findings offered some g u id elin es for o b t a i n i n g such p o s i t i o n s : A c a n d i d a t e from w i t h i n t h e h i r i n g i n s t i t u t i o n has a s t r o n g edge . C a n d i d a t e s s h o u ld t r y t o f i n d i n d i v i d u a l s t o nomi nate them fo r p o s itio n s , p re fe ra b ly within the h irin g i n s t i t u t i o n . C a n d i d a t e s s h o u ld c o n s i d e r g e o g r a p h i c a l p r o x i m i t y when a p p l y i n g and c o n c e n t r a t e p r i m a r i l y on n ea r b y i n s t i t u t i o n s . Candidates whohave few c o n t a c t s and l i t t l e influence s h o u ld be p r e p a r e d t o res pon d t o a g r e a t number o f j o b n o t i c e s . C a n d i d a t e s a p p l y i n g d i r e c t l y f o r a j o b s h o u ld g i v e s p e c i a l a t t e n t i o n t o p o s i t i o n s a d v e r t i s e d a t e l i t e i n s t i t u t i o n s , (p. 54) Th is s t u d y u niversities. In 1979, Lutz and the following one used o n ly colleges and Community c o l l e g e s were n o t i n c l u d e d in t h e s t u d i e s . com pleted the follow ing study, also using the C h r o n i c l e o f H igh er E d u c a t i o n . C a n d i d a t e s f o r t h e d e a n s h i p were r e c r u i t e d t h r o u g h v a r i o u s methods. The i n s t i t u t i o n s s e l e c t e d f o r t h e s t u d y were t h o s e who had a d v e r t i s e d t h e i r op en in g s in t h e C h r o n i c l e o f H igh er Education. The n e x t most f r e q u e n t l y r e p o r t e d means was i n house s o l i c i t a t i o n . D i r e c t mail and t e l e p h o n e s o l i c i t a t i o n s o f nominees from s e l e c t e d i n s t i t u t i o n s and p e r s o n s were a l s o used f r e q u e n t l y , b u t a d v e r t i s i n g i n o t h e r n a t i o n a l and s t a t e j o u r n a l s was n o t . The deans s e l e c t e d he ar d a bo ut t h e o p e n i n g s from v a r i o u s sources: 31 p e r c e n t l e a r n e d a bo ut i t from a c o l l e a g u e a t t h e employing i n s t i t u t i o n , 25 p e r c e n t were s o l i c i t e d i n - h o u s e , and 25 p e r c e n t were nominated by someone on t h e s e a r c h co m m it te e. A d d i t i o n a l l y , 25 p e r c e n t r e p o r t e d be in g nom inated by someone o u t s i d e t h e i n s t i t u t i o n , 6 p e r c e n t he ar d abo ut t h e op eni ng from an o u t s i d e r , 5 p e r c e n t saw t h e opening in a n a t i o n a l o r s t a t e j o u r n a l ( o t h e r th a n t h e C h r o n i c l e ) . and 44 p e r c e n t saw t h e C h r o n i c l e a d v e r t i s e m e n t f o r t h e o p e n i n g , (p. 263) 46 In discussing com mittee p la y e d members an affirm ativ e were important action, asked w h e th e r in screening role Lutz gender the stated or that national in itial pool, when origin not committee member s a i d t h e s e f a c t o r s were h i g h l y s i g n i f i c a n t . three respondents im portant reported aspect, and that affirm ative 75% s t a t e d that action it h ad was Only a little one very or no im p o r t a n c e . In B e n t o n ’ s s tu d y in 1979, t h e women e x e c u t i v e s i n d i c a t e d had been a b l e t o e s t a b l i s h t h e " o ld b o y s . " personal significant relationships with they some o f S eve nt y p e r c e n t o f t h e r e s p o n d e n t s b e l i e v e d t h e i r r e l a t i o n s h i p s w it h both men and women in t h e o r g a n i z a t i o n , especially those holding superior positions, were the informal f a c t o r having t h e most i n f l u e n c e in t h e i r s e l e c t i o n f o r a t o p - l e v e l position. The responses of the women adm inistrators i n d i c a t e t h e y had been a c c e p t e d i n t o o r a t l e a s t inform al network. All the women expressed seemed to r e c o g n i z e d by t h e a w illingness recommend o t h e r women a p p l i c a n t s f o r j o b v a c a n c i e s and t o to introduce them t o t h e " ol d boys" whose c o n f i d e n c e t h e y had won. S ilvestri assess the institu tio n s. and Kane (1975) affirm ativ e completed action a research c o m m it m e n t of project to postsecondary The p r o j e c t s u p p l i e d modest e m p i r i c a l d a t a s u g g e s t i n g reluctant institutional commitment t o l o c a t e and r e c r u i t fem a le and m inority candidates fo r a d m in istrativ e p o s itio n s . In h e r s t u d y o f t h e s o u r c e s o f c u r r e n t c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s in t w o - y e a r c o l l e g e s , Twombly (1986) found: 47 In t h e 1960s and 1970s when t w o - y e a r c o l l e g e s were b ei ng founded and e x i s t i n g c o l l e g e s were growing a t tremendous r a t e s , t h e r e were two m a jo r c o n c e r n s a bo ut a d m i n i s t r a t o r s : would t h e r e be enough a d m i n i s t r a t o r s w i t h an u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f and commitment t o t h e s p e c i a l m i s s i o n o f t h e t w o - y e a r c o l l e g e , and where would t h e s e a d m i n i s t r a t o r s be found? (p . 34) The f i r s t p a r t o f t h e s t u d y s u g g e s t e d t h a t t h e v a s t m a j o r i t y o f appointm ents to to p - l e v e l colleges ad m in istrativ e were made from w i t h i n po sitio n s postsecondary labor in t w o - y e a r markets. The t w o - y e a r - c o l l e g e l a b o r m a rk e t f o r c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s appeared to m arkets be relativ ely closed to persons ( p o s t s e c o n d a r y 239, o u t s i d e 2 9 ) . from Educational o u tside agency p o s i t i o n s (15) were a p o p u l a r s t e p p i n g s t o n e t o t h e c h i e f academic o f f i c e r p o s i t i o n from o u tside, w hereas six came from p o sitio n s in school adm inistration. The f a c t held at artifact least of that one the such a large position tim e in period proportion a "senior" covered a d m i n i s t r a t o r s in Twombly’ s s t u d y . by of top adm inistrators institution the may careers be of an the Many c a r e e r s began in t h e 1960s and e a r l y 1970s when a d m i n i s t r a t o r s were in g r e a t demand in t h e twoyear co llege; common. t h u s , movement from f o u r - y e a r t o t w o - y e a r p l a c e s was On t h e o t h e r hand, i t may be t h a t i t i s , in f a c t , e a s i e r t o make i n t e r - i n s t i t u t i o n a l t y p e s o f moves e a r l i e r in o n e ’ s c a r e e r . Again, a l t h o u g h n o t a s t u d y o f community c o l l e g e s , an a n a l y s i s o f f i l l e d d e a n s ’ p o s i t i o n s in a s t u d y o f s e l e c t i o n t r e n d s by Glennen and McCullough (1976) showed t h a t 54% were f i l l e d s c h o o l s and 46% i n s i d e by s t a t e s c h o o l s . i n s i d e by p r i v a t e (See Ta b l e 2 . 6 . ) 48 T ab l e 2 . 6 . - - T r e n d s in dean p o s i t i o n s (number o f p o s i t i o n s f i l l e d = 98). Inside Outside Type o f I n s t i t u t i o n Public Private Total S o u r ce : No. % No. % 26 22 54 46 6 44 12 88 48 100 50 100 Ro b er t E. Glennen and Jo se p h B. McCullough, " S e l e c t i o n Tren ds in C o l l e g e A d m i n i s t r a t i v e P o s i t i o n s , " E d u c a ti o n 96 (Summer 1976 ): 385. For v i c e - p r e s i d e n t i a l stayed in s id e , t h e i r own. positions, w it h o n ly 36% o f t h e 64% o f state the private schools s c h o o l s c h o o s in g one o f (See T ab l e 2 . 7 . ) T ab l e 2 . 7 . - - T r e n d s in v i c e - p r e s i d e n t i a l p o s i t i o n s (number o f p o s i ­ t i o n s f i l l e d = 50 ). Inside Outside Type o f I n s t i t u t i o n Public Private Total S o u rc e : No. % No. % 18 10 64 36 10 12 45 55 28 100 22 100 Ro b ert E. Glennen and Jo sep h B. McCullough, " S e l e c t i o n Tr end s in C o l l e g e A d m i n i s t r a t i v e P o s i t i o n s , " E d u c a ti o n 96 (Summer 1976 ): 385. 49 In his study universities, on ad m in istrativ e movement in colleges and Poskozim (1984) found t h a t moves i n t o and w i t h i n the a d m i n i s t r a t i v e r a n k s o f c o l l e g e s and u n i v e r s i t i e s f o l l o w a g e n e r a l l y accepted h ie ra r c h ic a l Most de an s a t one ti m e were p r o f e s s o r s , most p r o v o s t s were once d e a n s , and so on. Many o p en in g s are f i l l e d p e ck in g o r d e r . by i n t e r n a l candidates, t h o s e p res um ab ly best t h e s e a r c h comm it tee s and a d m i n i s t r a t i v e d e c i s i o n ma k er s. positions rank. go t o Poskozim pe o p l e making l a t e r a l stated th at newly moves w i t h i n advertised planning is essential to Many more a given title ad m in istrativ e p o s i t i o n s r o u t i n e l y a t t r a c t hund red s o f a p p l i c a t i o n s . te rm c a r e e r known t o Serious long­ a c a n d i d a t e when f a c e d w it h odds so ove rwhelmingly n e g a t i v e . Allen (1984) summed up h e r b e l i e f a b ou t t h e selection process by s t a t i n g : U n f o r t u n a t e l y , c o l l e g e s and u n i v e r s i t i e s have n o t y e t coded t h e i r j o b n o t i c e s t o a l e r t p o t e n t i a l l y i n t e r e s t e d a p p l i c a n t s as to the serious or n o t-s o -s e rio u s n atu re of t h e i r in t e n ti o n s . Perhaps i n s t i t u t i o n s a d v e r t i s i n g o n ly to meet f e d e r a l r e q u i r e m e n t s s ho uld i n s e r t some n o t a t i o n in t h e i r n o t i c e s - - s u c h as C . G . S . , s i g n i f y i n g cum granum s a l i ( w it h a g r a i n o f s a l t ) . At l e a s t t h i s would s p a r e them t h e burden o f r e s p o n d i n g t o s c o r e s o f a p p l i c a t i o n s ; and i t would s p a r e p e r s o n s s e r i o u s l y seeking a po sitio n the burden of fillin g out those a p p l i c a t i o n s , (p. 9) Lutz (1979) r e p o r t e d from h i s s t u d y o f t h e s e l e c t i o n o f c o l l e g e and u n i v e r s i t y d ean s t h a t : Although t h e s c r e e n i n g p r o c e s s may be f o r m a l l y open, d a t a r e p o r t e d by de an s s e l e c t e d s u g g e s t t h a t i n s i d e r s ’ c o n n e c t i o n s were v a l u a b l e . The us e o f an " o ld boy net wor k" i s a l m o s t u n i v e r s a l l y d e n i e d by c h a i r p e r s o n s b u t 59 p e r c e n t o f t h e c o m m i t t e e members s t a t e d t h a t p e r s o n a l k n o w l e d g e o f t h e c a n d i d a t e was " h i g h l y " o r " v er y h i g h l y " i m p o r t a n t in t h e f i n a l decision. F i f t y p e r c e n t r e p o r t e d t h a t t e l e p h o n e c o n t a c t s were 50 a v i t a l e l e m e n t , and 43 p e r c e n t s a i d t h a t recommendations so u g h t by t h e committee ( n o t s u g g e s t e d by t h e c a n d i d a t e ) were u s e d . ( p . 264) During t h e f i n a l personal second knowledge place significant in screening, of the candidates im p o r ta n c e . during the according to Lutz, The selection jumps two of from elements a th e committee’ s fifth that fin alist are place to become more those most s u s c e p t i b l e t o " o l d boy network" i n f l u e n c e and i n s t i t u t i o n a l g o s s i p . A ccording t o Feu ers (1 98 1) : More c u r r e n t f o r c e s t h a t a r e e f f e c t i n g change t o d a y i n c l u d e t h e i n c r e a s e d i n c i d e n c e o f women in t h e work f o r c e , t h e dev el op me n t o f c o n t r a c e p t i v e s , t h e Equal Employment O p p o r t u n i t y Act o f 1964, a change in a t t i t u d e s a b ou t t h e r o l e o f women in s o c i e t y , improved e d u c a t i o n a l o p p o r t u n i t i e s f o r women, and i n c r e a s e d a c t i v i s m f o r j o b e q u a l i t y among f e m a l e s , ( p . 6) Lahti m anagerial (1973) b e l i e v e d t h a t t h e p r im a r y s o u r c e f o r f i l l i n g p ositions in c o m m u n it y colleges at th is tim e untrained, upwardly mo bi le a c a d e m i c i a n s who t a k e t h e i r t u r n classroom and then become a part of the higher key is in t h e education establishm ent. Too o f t e n , t h e c a n d i d a t e a c c e p t s t h e m a n a g e r i a l p o s t b e c a u s e he t h i n k s i t w i l l b r i n g him more money and p r e s t i g e , more f r i n g e b e n e f i t s , and an image o f s u c c e s s . In r e a l i t y , t h e i n s t r u c t o r has a c c e p t e d a m a n a g e ri a l c h a l l e n g e a b o u t which h e / s h e knows and u n d e r s t a n d s v e r y l i t t l e . Measures must be t a k e n t o d i s c a r d t h e o ld methods in which s e l e c t i o n i s made from p e o p l e who were n e v e r eq u ip ped t o be man age rs , and in t h o s e c a s e s where t h e r e i s dormant and undev elo ped p o t e n t i a l , some program must be d e s i g n e d t o d e ve lo p t h e t a l e n t , (pp. 34 -3 5) Puyear (1986) as ked : How can community c o l l e g e s i d e n t i f y and d e v e l o p l e a d e r s f o r tomorrow’ s c o l l e g e s when a 1984 s u r v e y by T r a i n i n g magazine l i s t e d e d u c a t i o n as one o f t h e f i v e t y p e s o f o r g a n i z a t i o n s t h a t do t h e w o r s t j o b o f t r a i n i n g and d e v e l o p i n g t h e i r employees? (p. 58) 51 Wexley (1981) defined training and development as a pla nn ed e f f o r t by an o r g a n i z a t i o n t o f a c i l i t a t e t h e l e a r n i n g o f j o b - r e l a t e d b e h a v i o r on t h e p a r t o f i t s emplo yee s. Laht i (1973) w r o t e : Because o f t h e u n i q u e n e s s o f t h e community c o l l e g e and i t s i n a b i l i t y to r e c r u i t know ledgeable a d m i n i s t r a t o r s , i t is becoming more a p p a r e n t t h a t d e ve lo pm en ta l programs need t o be i n i t i a t e d a t l e a s t f o r a d m i n i s t r a t o r s and f a c u l t y . In t h e c a s e o f t h e community c o l l e g e manager, t h e develo pme nt o f h i s s t a f f i s a f u n c t i o n f o r which he s h o u ld be h e l d a c c o u n t a b l e and i s t h e r e s p o n s i b i l i t y o f each employee i n t h i s newly e v o l v i n g i n s t i t u t i o n , (p. 9) Eisner (1984) believed that the American movement has t h u s f a r d e c l i n e d t o make a c r i t i c a l future. community college i n v e s t m e n t in i t s He w r o te : Community c o l l e g e s have avo id ed t h e ardu ous u n d e r t a k i n g o f d e f i n i n g and c h a r a c t e r i z i n g t h e t y p e o f l e a d e r s h i p t h a t t h e y w i l l need f o r t h e t w e n t y - f i r s t c e n t u r y . Lacking a c a r e f u l l y d e s i g n e d t r a i n i n g p ar ad i g m , t h e y a r e f o r c e d t o mold and s e l e c t f u t u r e l e a d e r s from t h e sha ky, o n - t h e - j o b c r u c i b l e o f p o l i t i c s , p r e s s u r e g r o u p s , i n t e r n a l 1 i n e a g e , and word o f mouth. Th is appro ac h w i l l n o t s u p p l y t h e f a r - s i g h t e d , i n n o v a t i v e t h i n k i n g n e e d e d f o r an e f f e c t i v e c o m m u n it y c o l l e g e r e s p o n s e t o tom orro w’ s demands. C u r r e n t p r a c t i c e s in management and s t a f f deve lop men t w i l l i n e x o r a b l y c r e a t e a vacuum a t t h e t o p . (pp. 33- 34) Zion (1977) stated that an e f f e c t i v e development program f o r a d m i n i s t r a t o r s must be ba se d on an u p - t o - d a t e u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f why each adm inistrator’s position o r g a n i z a t i o n a l framework. exists and how it fits into the Glennen and McCullough (1976) found t h a t : Much has been w r i t t e n in t h e p r o f e s s i o n a l 1 i t e r a t u r e d e a l i ng w i t h t h e s e a r c h p r o c e s s i n s e l e c t i ng c o l 1 e g e adm inistrators. T h i s s t u d y c o n c e n t r a t e d on how a d m i n i s t r a t i v e p o s i t i o n s were a c t u a l l y f i l l e d by c o l l e g e s and u n i v e r s i t i e s across the country. The a u t h o r s s t u d i e d two hundred randomly s e l e c t e d p o s i t i o n s a t t h e de an , v i c e p r e s i d e n t and p r e s i d e n t i a l l e v e l . They a n a l y z e d t h e d a t a in te rm s o f on-campus and o f f campus t r e n d s in b ot h s t a t e and p r i v a t e u n i v e r s i t i e s . Among t h e f i n d i n g s , t h e d a t a i n d i c a t e d i f f e r e n c e s do e x i s t between t r e n d s in s t a t e and p r i v a t e s c h o o l s , w i t h p r i v a t e s c h o o l s more 52 i n c l i n e d t o f i l l p o s i t i o n s by c h o o s in g i n d i v i d u a l s from w i t h i n t h e i r own r a n k s . A ls o , t h e d a t a p o i n t e d o u t t h a t g e n e r a l l y , an o u t s i d e c a n d i d a t e i s more a p t t o be s e l e c t e d f o r p o s i t i o n s t h a n someone from t h e campus. T h e r e f o r e , t h e i n s i d e c a n d i d a t e must n o t o n l y p o s s e s s c r e d e n t i a l s as s t r o n g as t h e o f f - c a m p u s c a n d i d a t e , b u t must overcome a c e r t a i n b i a s which e x i s t s a g a i n s t b e i n g oncampus. (p. 384) Lutz (1979) c i t e d t h e f o l l o w i n g recommendations from h i s study t h a t he b e l i e v e d would improve t h e p r o c e s s o f dean s e l e c t i o n : 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 5. Top u n i v e r s i t y a d m i n i s t r a t i o n s h o u ld a p p o i n t a s e a r c h s c r e e n i n g co m m it te e, u s in g i d e a s from t h e f a c u l t y members of the co llege. The p r e s i d e n t ’ s c h a r g e t o t h e com mittee s h o u ld d e f i n e (a) t h e i r r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s and a u t h o r i t y , (b) t h e number o f c a n d i d a t e s t o be p r e s e n t e d - - r a n k e d o r u n r a n k e d , ( c ) t h e r e s o u r c e s a t t h e i r d i s p o s a l , and (d) t h e ti m e s c h e d u l e t o be f o l l o w e d . The committee s h o u ld w r i t e a j o b d e s c r i p t i o n . The committee s h o u ld d e v e l o p a s p e c i f i c s e t o f c r i t e r i a t o screen can d id ate s. The p o s i t i o n s h ou ld be w id e l y a d v e r t i s e d in n a t i o n a l j o u r ­ nals. The committee s h o u ld s t a n d a r d i z e co m m u n ic a ti o n s , (p . 269) LeCroy (1984) stated that the m e n to r in g relationship offers s i g n i f i c a n t growth o p p o r t u n i t i e s t o both t h e p r o t e g e and t h e men tor i n a community c o l l e g e s e t t i n g . define s k i l l s . The p r o t e g e becomes b e t t e r a b l e t o The p r o t e g e i s encou ra ged t o d e v e l o p s k i l l s and i s f r e q u e n t l y a b l e t o a cc om pl is h more th a n h e / s h e dreamed p o s s i b l e . Although n o t a s t u d y o f community c o l l e g e s , t h e s t u d y by Heald (1982) showed c r i t e r i a by which deans a t f o u r - y e a r u n i v e r s i t i e s were s e l e c t e d by s e a r c h c o m m it te e s . (See T a b l e s 2 . 8 t h r o u g h 2 . 1 2 . ) 53 Table 2 . 8 . --Demonstrated s k i l l s ( g e n e r a l) . C riterion Rank Import anc e for Selection3 Leadership Faculty r e l a t i o n s Human r e l a t i o n s Communications U niversity r e la tio n s E xtra-university re la tio n s Public r e l a t i o n s S o ur ce : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Rank Im po rt anc e f o r Functioning^ 3 1.5 1.5 4 5 7 6 James E. Heald , " Ed uca tio n Deans and T h e i r S e l e c t i o n , " Te a c h e r E du ca ti on 33 ( J a n . / F e b . 1982): 47 aAs rank ed by s e a r c h committee c h a i r p e r s o n s . ^As rank ed by o n - t h e - j o b d e a n s . T ab l e 2 . 9 . - - D e m o n s tr a t e d s k i l l s ( f o c u s e d ) . C riterion Rank Import anc e for Selection3 D e c i s i o n making Program development P la n n i n g and e v a l u a t i o n Scholarship F i s c a l management Research G rantsm anship S o u r ce : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Rank Imp or ta nce f o r F u n c t i o n i n g 13 1 3 2 4 5 6 7 James E. Heald, " E du ca ti o n Deans and T h e i r S e l e c t i o n , " T ea ch er E du ca ti on 33 ( J a n . / F e b . 1982): 47. a As ra n k ed by s e a r c h committee c h a i r p e r s o n s . ty\s ran k ed by o n - t h e - j o b d e a n s . 54 Table 2 . 1 0 . - -P e r s o n a l. C riterion Rank Imp ortan ce for S election3 Vision f o r education Earned d o c t o r a t e H e a l t h and v i g o r National v i s i b i l i t y Membership in p r o f e s ­ sional o rg an iz atio n s C i v i c in vo lv em en t Source: Rank Imp or ta nce f o r F u n c t i o n i n g 13 1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4 5 6 5 6 James E. Heald , " E d u c a ti o n Deans and T h e i r S e l e c t i o n , " T e a c h e r E d u c a ti o n 33 ( J a n . / F e b . 198 2) : 47 aAs r an k ed by s e a r c h committee c h a i r p e r s o n s . ^As r an k ed by o n - t h e - j o b d e a n s . T a b l e 2 . 1 1 . - - P r o f e s s i o n a l commitment ( t o ) . C riterion Rank Imp or ta nce for Selection3 F a c u l t y development Teaching Resea rc h S hared g ov e rn a n c e Service a ffirm a tiv e Affirm ative action S o ur ce : 1 2 3 4 5 6 Rank Imp or ta nce fo r Functioning 2 3 4 1 5.5 5.5 James E. H eal d, " E d u c a t io n Deans and T h e i r S e l e c t i o n , " T e a c h e r E d u c a ti o n 33 ( J a n . / F e b . 19 82 ): 48. a As r a n k e d by s e a r c h committee c h a i r p e r s o n s . fy\s ran ke d by o n - t h e - j o b d e a n s . 55 Table 2 . 1 2 . --P ro fe s s io n a l s e n s i t i v i t i e s . F a c u l t y needs Current educational issu e s M ulti-cultural settin g s Open ad m is s i o n s C o llectiv e bargaining S o ur ce : Rank Im po rt anc e fo r Functioningb Rank Imp ort anc e for S election3 C riterion 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 James E. Heald, " E d u c a t io n Deans and T h e i r S e l e c t i o n , " T e a c h e r E d u c a t i o n 33 ( J a n . / F e b . 1982 ): 48. aAs r an k ed by s e a r c h com mi tt ee c h a i r p e r s o n s . ^As rank ed by o n - t h e - j o b d e a n s . Poskozim (1984) found t h a t o f t h e 1 , 0 0 0 new p o s i t i o n s p o s t e d in t h e C h r o n i c l e o f H igh er Ed uca tio n from September 1982 t h r o u g h June 1983, n e a r l y o n e - t h i r d o f t h e v a c a n t p o s i t i o n s were a t t h e p r o v o s t or v ice-p resid en t frequently. internal lev el. Forty-four candidates, D eanships percent and 58% o f of the the p r e s i d e n t s came from e x t e r n a l s o u r c e s . t i t l e r an k i s q u i t e common. were reported positions deans and were 52% o f nearly as filled by the vice- L a t e r a l movement w i t h i n t h e (See T a b l e s 2.13 t h r o u g h 2 . 1 5 . ) 56 Ta b l e 2 . 1 3 . - - E x t e r n a l and i n t e r n a l s o u r c e s o f new p r o v o s t s ( v i c e presidents). E x t e r n a l So u rc es %a Total 49 17 19 19 14 9 6 5 7 7 5 3 2 2 5 4 2 1 4 1 1 1 10 146 0.5 0.5 4 Provosts (vicepresidents) Deans D irectors Business ex e c u tiv e s A ssociate provosts A s s o c i a t e deans E d u c a ti o n agency officials D epa rtm ent al c h a i r s G o v e r n m e n t /p u b li c o fficials A ssistants-topresidents A ssistant d irec to rs Professors Otherb 52 Subtotal Grand t o t a l S o u r ce : T itle E x t e r n a l So u rc es Tot al %a 39 34 16 14 12 6 14 5 13 6 5 4.5 2 2 2 1 8 3 137 48 new p r o v o s t s ( v i c e - p r e s i d e n t s ) : T itle Deans D irectors A ssistants-topresidents Associate p ro­ vosts Professors A s s o c i a t e deans Depar tm ent al chairs A ssistant directors Otherb Subtotal 283 Paul S. Poskozim, "New A d m i n i s t r a t o r s - - A S t a t i s t i c a l Look a t Movement Wi thi n t h e Ranks, 19 8 2 - 1 9 8 3 ," Change 16 (O ct ob er 1 9 84) : 59. P e r c e n t a g e o f gr an d t o t a l o f 283. ^ I n c l u d e s an a s s i s t a n t s e c r e t a r y , br an ch o f armed f o r c e s , a ch u r c h m i n i s t e r , a s e n i o r f e l l o w in a t h i n k t a n k , an a s s i s t a n t d i r e c t o r o f N a t i o n a l C e n t e r f o r D is e a s e C o n t r o l , A t l a n t a , a c h i e f c o r r e s p o n d e n t o f a n a t i o n a l news mag azi ne , a d i r e c t o r o f a c i t y v o c a t i o n a l c e n t e r , and a c h a i r o f t h e N a t i o n a l Endowment f o r t h e H u m a n i ti e s . 57 T a b l e 2 . 1 4 . - - E x t e r n a l and i n t e r n a l sources o f new deans. E x t e r n a l So ur ce s %a T ot al 39 39 22 15 13 7 4 4 14 15 8 6 5 3 1.5 1.5 1 6 0.5 2 58 154 T itle T ot al Deans Professors De p ar tm en ta l c h a i r s D irectors A s s o c i a t e deans A ssistant d irec to rs B u s in e s s e x e c u t i v e s G o v e rn m e n t /p u b li c o fficials A ssociate provosts O th er Subtotal Grand t o t a l new d e a n s : So u rc e: E x t e r n a l S ou r ce s %a 52 22 11 11 7 3 20 8 4 4 3 1 2 2 2 1 1 1 112 42 T itle Professors D irectors A s s o c i a t e deans D ep ar tm en ta l c h a i r s Deans A ssistants-topresidents A ssociate provosts A ssistant direc to rs A ssociate provosts Subtotal 266 Paul S. Poskozim, "New A d m i n i s t r a t o r s - - A S t a t i s t i c a l Look a t Movement Wi thin t h e Ranks, 19 8 2 - 1 9 8 3 ," Change 16 ( O c to b e r 1984): 57. P e r c e n t a g e o f g r an d t o t a l o f 266. 58 T a b l e 2 . 1 5 . --Moves from o u t s i d e academia. T itle Number Business e x e c u tiv e s Government/public o f f i c i a l s E d u c a t i o n agency o f f i c i a l s Lawyers O f f i c i a l s o f t h e armed f o r c e s Judges O th e r 29 21 19 4 3 2 10 Total 88 Percentage of to t a l S o u rc e : In o f 907 moves: 9.7% Paul S. Poskozim, "New A d m i n i s t r a t o r s - - A S t a t i s t i c a l Look a t Movement Within t h e Ranks, 1 9 82 - 19 83 ," Change 16 (O c to b e r 198 4): 58. Estler and M i n e r ’ s (1985) s tud y on job m obility th r o u g h r e s p o n s i b i l i t y a c c r u a l , t h e p r o c e s s o f c a r e e r m o b i l i t y i d e n t i f i e d as accrual m obility was d escribed. Accrual m obility in higher e d u c a t i o n o c c u r s t h r o u g h e v o l v e d j o b s i n which t h e employee a c c r u e s responsibility job. and/or E ssentially, knowledge w e l l a new p o s i t i o n beyond normal i s d e v e l o p e d , which growth in the may t h e n be f o r m a l l y acknowledged by t h e i n s t i t u t i o n . The r e s u l t i s movement n o t i n t o f i x e d p o s i t i o n s b u t i n t o previously nonexistent jobs. In t h e us u al image o f i n t e r n a l j o b m o b i l i t y , a p e r s o n moves from one p r e d e f i n e d j o b t o another. In upward m o b i l i t y , t h e i n d i v i d u a l m a s t e r s c u r r e n t r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s and moves t o a j o b w i t h g r e a t e r r e s p o n s i b i l i t y when a vacancy o c c u r s i n a c h a i n o f j o b s above t h e i n d i v i d u a l ’ s c u r r e n t p o s i t i o n . The e s s e n t i a l mechanism f o r a c c r u a l m o b i l i t y 59 i s an e v ol v ed j o b , in which t h e d u t i e s were n o t p r e s p e c i f i e d i n d e p e n d e n t o f i t s incumbent. Rather, th e d u t i e s developed around t h e a c t i v i t i e s a n d / o r t h e a b i l i t i e s o f t h a t p e r s o n , (pp. 121- 22) CHAPTER I I I METHODOLOGY This study was d e s i g n e d to identify and investigate factors p e r c e i v e d as i m p o r t a n t / n o t i m p o r t a n t in r e l a t i o n t o both t h e c a r e e r paths and the selection process of Michigan p u b l i c community c o l l e g e s . two ti m e p e r i o d s : chief academic officers in The f a c t o r s were s t u d i e d o v e r 1960 t o 1974, and 1975 t o t h e p r e s e n t . Both t h e c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s and t h e p r e s i d e n t s were s u r v e y e d , and t h e i r p e r c e p t i o n s were compared as f o l l o w s : 1. between P e r c e p t i o n s o f p u b l i c community c o l l e g e p r e s i d e n t s employed 1960 and 1974 w it h the perceptions of community college p r e s i d e n t s employed d u r i n g t h e p e r i o d from 1975 t o t h e p r e s e n t . 2. 1960 and Perceptions 1974 of w it h the chief academic perceptions officers of chief employed academic between officers employed d u r i n g t h e p e r i o d from 1975 t o t h e p r e s e n t . 3. Perceptions of chief academic o f f i c e r s and p residents o f c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s and p residents employed between 1960 and 1974. 4. Perceptions employed from 1975 t o t h e p r e s e n t . 5. compared P e r c e p t i o n s o f c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s employed b e f o r e 1974 to those employed after 1974 academic o f f i c e r s . 60 on career paths of chief 61 Hypotheses The f o l l o w i n g r e s e a r c h h y p o th e s e s were d e v e l o p e d to test for d i f f e r e n c e s between t h e f a c t o r s f o r p r e - 1 9 7 4 and p o s t - 1 9 7 4 : H y p o th e s is 1 : There w i l l difference (p < .0 5) in s e l e c t i o n o f c h i e f academic 1974, as p e r c e i v e d by c h i e f be no s ta tis tic a lly significant the fa c to rs t h a t influenced the o f f i c e r s p re - 1 9 7 4 compared t o p o s t academic o f f i c e r s . H y p o th e s is 2 : There w i l l be no s ta tis tic a lly significant difference (p < .05) in t h e f a c t o r s t h a t influenced the s e l e c t i o n o f c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s p r e - 1 9 7 4 compared t o p o s t 1974, as p e r c e i v e d by c o l l e g e p r e s i d e n t s . H y p o th e s is 3 : There w i l l be no s ta tis tic a lly significant difference (p < .05) in t h e f a c t o r s th a t influenced the s e l e c t i o n o f c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s as p e r c e i v e d by community c o l l e g e p r e s i d e n t s employed p r e- 19 74 and by c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s employed p r e - 1 9 7 4 . H y p o th e s is 4 : There w i l l be no s ta tis tic a lly significant difference (p < .05) in t h e f a c t o r s t h a t influ enced the s e l e c t i o n o f c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s as p e r c e i v e d by community c o l l e g e p r e s i d e n t s employed p o s t - 1 9 7 4 and by c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s employed p o s t - 1 9 7 4 . H y p o th e s is 5 : There w i l l be no d i f f e r e n c e in t h e c a r e e r p a t h s o f t h e c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s s e l e c t e d p r e - 1 9 7 4 and p o s t - 1 9 7 4 , as r e p o r t e d by t h e c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s . Researc h P o p u l a t i o n Th is s tu d y was c on du ct ed a t t h e 29 p u b l i c community c o l l e g e s in Michigan involved). the chief (see Appendix B for a co m p lete 1i s t of institutions Those p a r t i c i p a n t s who were i n v o l v e d in t h e s t u d y were academic officers and the presidents t h e s e p o s i t i o n s a t some t i m e a f t e r 1960. who were holding The c h i e f academic o f f i c e r was d e f i n e d a s t h e s e n i o r a d m i n i s t r a t i v e o f f i c e r r e s p o n s i b l e f o r t h e d i r e c t i o n o f t h e academic program o f t h e i n s t i t u t i o n . th is po sitio n usually rep o rts d irectly to the The p e r s o n in president and, 62 depend ing on t h e size of the college and its structure, may be c a l l e d by a v a r i e t y o f t i t l e s . Th is p o p u l a t i o n co m pr is ed 113 c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s p resid en ts. categorized The c h i e f for the academic o fficers p u r p o s e o f exa m ini ng and the and 105 p residents selected factors t h o s e i n d i v i d u a l s h i r e d b e f o r e 1974 and t h o s e who w ere h i r e d 1974. Because o f t h e number o f a d m i n i s t r a t o r s were as after i n v o l v e d and t h e i r w id e s p r e a d l o c a t i o n s , a p e r s o n a l i n t e r v i e w w i t h ea ch p a r t i c i p a n t was not c o n s i d e r e d p o s s i b l e . So, f o r the purposes of t h i s study, e n t i r e p o p u l a t i o n o f c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s and p r e s i d e n t s he l d these positions at some time from 1960 through the who had 1987 were su rv ey ed by means o f a q u e s t i o n n a i r e . In t o t a l , 82 s u r v e y s were m a i l e d t o p r e s i d e n t s and 92 t o c h i e f academic o fficers. The breakdown of the population is shown in Ta bl e 3 . 1 . Ta bl e 3 . 1 . --Breakdown o f t h e s t u d y p o p u l a t i o n . Pre-1974 P os t-1 97 4 Known d e c e a s e d S t a t u s & a d d r e s s unknown Total Presidents C h i e f Academic O fficers 42 40 11 12 34 58 3 18 76 98 14 30 105 113 218 Total 63 Data C o l l e c t i o n Mailing L ist A list o f c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s and p r e s i d e n t s from 1960 t o 1987 was com pil ed f o r each c o l l e g e . all in d iv id u als positions were in any o f t h e obtained directors, who ha d from held, The name, t i t l e , or 29 p u b l i c the were and a d d r e s s o f holding, o ne community c o l l e g e s personnel/hum an of these in Michigan resource m a n ag em e n t c o l l e g e d i r e c t o r i e s , The H ig he r E d u c a ti o n D i r e c t o r y , and The Yearbook o f H igh er E d u c a ti o n ( s e e Appendix C f o r l e t t e r ) . Q u e s t i o n n a i r e Design By reviewing questionnaires areas being career questionnaires were specifically examined paths and in the used in designed study--the selection-process previous to provide chief factors studies, data academic (see two on the officers’ Appendix D for questionnaires). An officers analysis in of the The C h r o n i c l e provided the b a s is of th e (see position Appendix A for of description Hi gher factors summary). for E d u c a ti o n chief from 1960 t o t h a t were examined The number academic of in t h e position 1988 study o p en in gs examined was as f o l l o w s : 1960-1969 1970-1974 1975-1979 1980-1984 1985-1987 In a prelim inary q u alificatio n s being 6 64 62 73 253 analysis of advertised by the minimum public and community desired colleges 64 throughout be i n g the made country, in the it appears sk ills, that knowledge, increasing and demands experience levels were of i n d i v id u a l s being c o n sid ere d f o r t h i s p o s i t i o n . The q u e s t i o n n a i r e s c o n t a i n e d numerous f a c t o r s p osition vacancy Education, the d escrip tio n s review various colleges va cancy descriptions). of across from literature, the country Factors The C hronicle and job (see were s e l e c t e d through of descriptions Appendix A f o r considered that The following factors were found to be from position would c l a r i f y t h e c a r e e r p a t h s and s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s e s o f c h i e f officers. H igher help academic consistently 1 i s t e d in p o s i t i o n vac a n cy n o t i c e s f o r c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s : D egree/field Teach ing e x p e r i e n c e A dm inistrative experience o u tsid e of education Community c o l l e g e a d m i n i s t r a t i v e e x p e r i e n c e Scholarly a c t i v i t y / p u b l i c a t i o n O f f i c e s h e l d in s t a t e / n a t i o n a l o r g a n i z a t i o n s Age Sex Race M arried/single/divorced Children A ttitu d e /m a tu rity /1 e a d e rs h ip /s u p e rv is o ry experience B e l i e f in community c o l l e g e p h i l o s o p h y Management e x p e r i e n c e / b u d g e t i n g Computer l i t e r a c y C o llectiv e bargaining Lo ng-range p l a n n i n g Women and m i n o r i t i e s Fund r a i s i n g Student re cru itm e n t G ra nt e x p e r i e n c e These factors incorporated and into a the number of questions questionnaires. r e l a t i n g to ca re e r paths include: relating Examples of to the them were questions 65 1. Work e x p e r i e n c e , b ot h c o l l e g e and n o n - c o l l e g e , t h e i n d i v i d ­ ual had p r i o r t o s e l e c t i o n . 2. The o f f i c e r ’ s e d u c a t i o n a l background. 3. The o f f i c e r ’ s s c h o l a r l y a c t i v i t y p r i o r t o s e l e c t i o n , such as p u b l i c a t i o n s , p r e s e n t a t i o n s o f s c h o l a r l y p a p e r s a t s t a t e o r n a t i o n a l m e e t i n g s , and o f f i c e s h e l d i n s t a t e and national o rg an iz atio n s. 4. The i n d i v i d u a l ’ s o p i n i o n o f t h e most i m p o r t a n t f a c t o r t h a t l e d t o b ei ng s e l e c t e d f o r t h e p o s i t i o n . The recruitm ent determine if a process certain type of the colleges of recruitm ent s e l e c t i o n of a p a r t i c u l a r type o f can d id a te . was would of the process position that was was to the ( a ) how t h e y (b) t h e means by which t h e n o t i c e dissem inated, use d. lead to Th is p a r t o f t h e s t u d y was a c c om pl is h e d by a s k i n g t h e c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s le arn ed o f th e p o s it i o n opening, included Examples and of (c ) the questions type of relating selection to the s e le c tio n process are: 1. Was t h e i n d i v i d u a l who was s e l e c t e d an i n t e r n a l o r e x t e r n a l candidate? 2. From what s o u r c e o r s o u r c e s d i d t h e i n d i v i d u a l l e a r n o f t h e p o s i t i o n op e n i n g ? 3. Did t h e i n s t i t u t i o n d e v e l o p a p o s i t i o n d e s c r i p t i o n ? I f so, (1) what q u a l i f i c a t i o n s were s o u g h t , and (2) how was t h e p o s i t i o n openi ng d i s s e m i n a t e d ? 4. Did t h e i n s t i t u t i o n u t i l i z e a s e l e c t i o n committee? I f so , (1) what was i t s c o m p o s i t i o n , (2) what was i t s r o l e in t h e f i n a l s e l e c t i o n , and (3) how long d i d t h e p r o c e s s t a k e ? I f n o t , what k in d o f s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s was used? P i l o t Test Upon c o m p l e t i o n , d r a f t s o f t h e two q u e s t i o n n a i r e s were re v ie w e d by t h e D i r e c t o r o f Re s ea r c h and Development a t D e l t a C o l l e g e and t h e 66 chairman of the re s e a rc h e r’s incorporating t h e i r the suggestions q uestionnaires presidents colleges a nd chief outside M inn es ota , and to of six doctoral and r e v i s i o n s , selected academic Michigan o fficers for community from public N eb r as k a, pilot A fter the research er public (Arizona, Pennsylvania) com m ittee. testing sent colleg e c o m m u n it y North Carolina, the instrum ent of ( s ee Appendix E f o r c o p i e s o f t h e l e t t e r s t o t h e s e i n d i v i d u a l s ) . Each i n d i v i d u a l comment on each participating it em , u s in g i n t h e p i l o t s t u d y was as k ed t o the u n d e r s t a n d i n g , and r e a d a b i l i t y . criteria of clarity , ease of F u r t h e r m o d i f i c a t i o n s were made t o th e q u e s t i o n n a i r e , based on t h e a d v i c e from t h e s e p a r t i c i p a n t s . In officers, in v estig atin g the models the used career paths by Arman of (1986) the chief (modified to s t u d y ) were a l s o i n c o r p o r a t e d i n t o t h e q u e s t i o n n a i r e s . in Arman’ s s t u d y were asked t o circle the academic fit this Re sp ond ent s c a r e e r model that most c l o s e l y r es em b le d t h e i r own c a r e e r p a t h o r t o make m a jo r v a r i a t i o n s from t h e model that a p p ro x im at e d t h e i r career. These models were designed to correspond t o several p e r c e p t i o n s o f what c a r e e r p a t h s college 1ikely adm inistrators were most to follow. In s t u d y , v e r y few v a r i a t i o n s from t h e models were n o t e d . Arman’ s The r e s u l t s o f t h i s s t u d y were shown i n C h a p t e r I I . The q u e s t i o n n a i r e s f o r t h e p r e s i d e n t s d i f f e r e d from t h o s e for t h e c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s b e ca u se t h e fo r m e r asked f o r i n f o r m a t i o n on t h e s e l e c t i o n com mittee o f c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s use t h e c a r e e r p a t h s o f c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s model Appendix D f o r q u e s t i o n n a i r e s ) . and d i d section not (see 67 For ease in analysis, d iffe re n t colors. presidents the questionnaires Q uestionnaires employed b e f o r e for chief were printed academic o f f i c e r s 1974 were p r i n t e d on beige paper, in and and t h o s e f o r c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s and p r e s i d e n t s employed a f t e r 1974 were p r i n t e d on w h i t e p a p e r . Q uestionnaire D istrib u tio n Q u e s t i o n n a i r e s were s e n t t o t h e e n t i r e p o p u l a t i o n o f 113 c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s and 105 p r e s i d e n t s (those holding th e se p o s itio n s a t a Michigan community c o l l e g e sometime a f t e r cover purpose 1e t t e r explaining confidentiality envelope. weeks of the responses of (Appendix G), the and To o b t a i n as much d a t a as p o s s i b l e , after the questionnaires were mailed 1960) along with study a and a the self-addressed approxim ately th re e a follow-up letter (Appendix H ), q u e s t i o n n a i r e , and s e l f - a d d r e s s e d r e p l y e n v e l o p e were sent to those individuals request. A number including the of telephone, who avenues to the had were not responded used to contact individuals, where further attem pts point to the first to i n f l u e n c e t h e i n d i v i d u a l s t o res p on d would o n l y have r e s u l t e d in t h e s t u d y ’ s b ei ng c o n s i d e r e d a n u i s a n c e . In c a s e s where p r e s i d e n t s may have employed more t h a n one c h i e f academic o f f i c e r d u r i n g t h e time p e r i o d , t h e p r e s i d e n t was as ke d in t h e cover l e t t e r to 1i s t th e q u a l i f i c a t i o n s sought f o r th e p o s i t i o n o f c h i e f academic o f f i c e r h i r e d d u r i n g t h e p e r i o d from 1960 t o 1974, and t h e q u a l i f i c a t i o n s f o r t h e c h i e f academic o f f i c e r employed l a s t ( o r most r e c e n t l y ) d u r i n g t h e p e r i o d from 1975 t o t h e p r e s e n t . If a 68 p r e s i d e n t h i r e d a c h i e f academic o f f i c e r d u r i n g t h e p e r i o d from 1960 to 1974 and also hired one during the period from 1975 to the p r e s e n t , t h e p r e s i d e n t was asked t o d e s c r i b e only t h e c h i e f academic o f f i c e r h i r e d d u r i n g t h e l a t t e r p e r i o d , 1975 to t h e p r e s e n t . The U n it e d Auto W o rk ers -G en era l Motors Human R es o u r ce Center (1987) s t a t e d t h a t : One o f t h e m a jo r pro blems when us in g a q u e s t i o n n a i r e t o g a t h e r d a t a i s t h e r e s p o n s e r a t e from t h e t a r g e t p o p u l a t i o n . In o r d e r t o maximize t h e r e s p o n s e r a t e , s e v e r a l s t e p s can be t a k e n t o e n s u r e a s a t i s f a c t o r y p e r c e n t a g e o f r e s p o n s e (60% o r g r e a t e r ) . (P- 17) During an i n t e r v i e w w it h t h e D i r e c t o r o f Re s ea r c h and Development a t D elta College, in using questionnaires personnel, previous Dr. Gene Packwood, who has had the to statem ent surveys at gather was Michigan made data from that, it on the p u b l i c community c o l l e g e s , community c o l l e g e a d m i n i s t r a t o r s . interview s, background community based r a t e o f a p p r o x i m a t e l y 60% t o 70% i s a normal face extensive is d i f f i c u l t return a of return r e t u r n r a t e from p u b l i c He s t a t e d t h a t to obtain college w ithout face-to- a higher survey r e tu r n r a t e from t h e s e i n d i v i d u a l s . The in d iv id u als who re p re se n ta tiv e of the to ta l officers p articip ated in research population (a ll and p r e s i d e n t s who had h e l d t h e s e a f t e r 1 96 0 ) , respondents but, as n o te d returned com m unication were the used th is in Table 3 . 1 , not a ll questionnaires. (telephone, positions All 1e t t e r , pro ject were c h i e f academic at some ti m e of the p o te n tia l possible col le g e means of contact, 69 colleague contact) to contact and encourage th at enough the individuals to p a r t i c i p a t e in t h e p r o j e c t . The researcher believed returned to provide acc ep tab le r e s u l t s , qu estio n n aires even though n o t a l l were of the individuals returned t h e i r questionnaires. Methods o f A n a l y s i s S i m i l a r i t i e s in t h e f a c t o r s o f t h e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s a l o n g w it h the qualifications and career-preparation criteria used in the h i r i n g d e c i s i o n f o r t h e c h i e f academic o f f i c e r p o s i t i o n i n Michigan p u b l i c community c o l l e g e s were a n a l y z e d as t o their im p o r t a n c e in t h e p r o c e s s and t o d e t e r m i n e w h e th e r t h e y had changed o v e r a p e r i o d of time: b e f o r e 1974 as compared t o a f t e r 1974. P r o c e s s i n g o f t h e Data Once t h e r e t u r n o f t h e q u e s t i o n n a i r e s s t o p p e d , t h e r e s p o n s e s t o the questions on the surveys an a l y z e d a t D e l t a C o l l e g e . were co ded , The S t a t i s t i c a l and the results Package f o r t h e S o c i a l S c i e n c e s (SPSS) s o f t w a r e package p r o v i d e d t h e s t a t i s t i c a l descriptive statistics used in the were analysis of the tests data. and The comments t o t h e ope n- end ed q u e s t i o n s were r e c o r d e d and a r e l i s t e d in Appendix J . S t a t i s t i c a l T r e a tm e n t The d a t a o b t a i n e d from t h e q u e s t i o n n a i r e s were r e p o r t e d t h r o u g h t h e us e o f d e s c r i p t i v e s t a t i s t i c s significance. The s t a t i s t i c a l and t h r o u g h t e s t s of s ta t is tic a l t e s t s t h a t were used were t - t e s t s f o r 70 independent statistics means for H ypotheses 1 ( f r e q u e n c y and p e r c e n t a g e ) through 4. were used D escriptive for Hypothesis 5. The t - t e s t s were used t o compare t h e means between two d i s t r i b u t i o n s t o d e t e r m i n e i f t h e r e was a s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e . The 32 s e l e c t e d importance. f a c t o r s were a n a l y z e d s e p a r a t e l y to th eir The p r e - 1 9 7 4 and p o s t - 1 9 7 4 r e s u l t s were t h e n compared. Comparisons i n c l u d e d f r e q u e n c y , and p e r c e n t a g e selected as by are chief found in academic percentage, and t - t e s t . Appendix I. officers employed Frequency The c a r e e r - p a t h before models 1974 were compared t o t h o s e s e l e c t e d by c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s employed a f t e r 1974, using frequency and p ercentage. These data provided i n f o r m a t i o n on t h e f a c t o r s deemed i m p o r t a n t i n t h e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s and c a r e e r p a t h s o f c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s and indicated w h e th e r t h e r e were d i f f e r e n c e s between t h o s e employed p r e - 1 9 7 4 as compared t o t h o s e employed p o s t - 1 9 7 4 . C onfidentialitv The p r o p o s a l f o r t h i s p r o j e c t , in c lu d in g a plan f o r conducting t h e r e s e a r c h , was s u b m i t t e d t o t h e U n i v e r s i t y Committee on Resea rc h I n v o l v i n g Human S u b j e c t s f o r a p p r o v a l . the com mi tt ee as proposed (see Th is s t u d y was approv ed by Appendix F) and was conducted as o u t l i n e d in th e p r o p o s a l . C onfidentiality of responses p a r t i c i p a t i n g in t h e s t u d y . the purpose of m ailing was given to all individuals Names and a d d r e s s e s were used o n l y f o r q u estio n n aires. Respondents were not i d e n t i f i e d by name o r i n s t i t u t i o n , and t h e d a t a were gr ouped so t h a t 71 no one response colleges. could be attributed to On t h e op en -en de d q u e s t i o n s , specific individuals or any words t h a t mi ght have i d e n t i f i e d a p e r s o n o r i n s t i t u t i o n were o m i t t e d from t h e r e s p o n s e s r e c o r d e d in Appendix J . The Problems o f Bias A possible con ce rn T hi s i s b e c a u s e i t in c o n d u c t i n g a survey is response bias. i s n e a r l y impossible to convince everyone being studied to re tu rn the q u estionnaire. R e s e a r c h e r s want t h e b i a s (a s o u r c e o f e r r o r ) t o be as small as p o s s i b l e . Response r a t e s o f 50% ( i n which o n ly h a l f o f t h e p e o p l e c o n t a c t e d r e t u r n e d t h e i r forms ) a r e n o t uncommon. For t h e sample t o be r e p r e s e n t a t i v e o f t h e p o p u l a t i o n , we o f t e n hope o r assume t h a t t h o s e who d i d n o t r e t u r n t h e q u e s t i o n n a i r e s a r e n o t v e r y d i f f e r e n t from t h o s e who d i d . Al though t h i s hope i s sometimes j u s t i f i e d , u s u a l l y t h e r e i s l i t t l e we can do a b o u t t h i s problem e x c e p t t o a c c e p t i t and wish f o r a smal l amount o f response b ia s. To s e e why r e s p o n s e b i a s might s t i l l be a pro ble m , c o n s i d e r t h e f a c t t h a t t h o s e who do answer a q u e s t i o n n a i r e m ig h t w ell r e p r e s e n t t h e more a c t i v e and vocal members o f t h e population. Those w it h s t r o n g o p i n i o n s and i n t e r e s t s w i l l t e n d t o be t h e i n d i v i d u a l s who r e t u r n t h e q u e s t i o n n a i r e s . ( S i e g e l , 1988, p. 240) To 1 i m i t t h e amount o f r e s p o n s e b i a s , a p p r o p r i a t e f o l l o w - u p was initiated (two m a i l i n g s ) t o i n s u r e a l a r g e enough r e t u r n t o i n c r e a s e confidence in the fin a l r e s u l t s . As Arman (1986) s t a t e d : As i n t h e s e c t i o n on r e s p o n s e r a t e s , n o t a l 1 p o s s i b l e r e s p o n d e n t s com plete d q u e s t i o n n a i r e s , b u t a l l were c o n t a c t e d and en co u ra ge d t o p a r t i c i p a t e . In view o f t h e h ig h p e r c e n t a g e o f re tu rn s of the questio n n aire, i t was assumed f o r t h e p u r p o s e s o f t h i s r e s e a r c h t h a t r e s p o n d e n t s and n o n r e s p o n d e n t s were s i m i l a r . Care sh ou ld be t a k e n in e v a l u a t i n g t h e r e s u l t s b e c a u s e no a d d i t i o n a l i n t e r v i e w s o r f o l l o w - u p s were done t o c o n f i r m t h a t r e s p o n d e n t s and n o n r e s p o n d e n t s were s i m i l a r , (p. 55) 72 Summary A s u r v e y o f 82 p r e s i d e n t s had h e l d t h e s e p o s i t i o n s and 92 c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s who a t a Michigan community c o l l e g e sometime s i n c e 1960 was c on d uc te d t h r o u g h t h e use o f two q u e s t i o n n a i r e s . The i n t e n t i o n o f t h e s t u d y was t o a n a l y z e c a r e e r p a t h s o f c h i e f academic officers and 32 f a c t o r s related to the process of s e le c tin g chief academic o f f i c e r s . The statistics results and were t-tests analyzed for through in d e p e n d e n t the use of descriptive means by the S tatistical Package f o r t h e S o c i a l S c i e n c e s (SPSS) s o f t w a r e pa ck a g e . C h a p t e r IV c o n t a i n s t h e r e s u l t s o f t h e i d e n t i f i c a t i o n and a n a l y s i s p er f o r m e d on t h e r e s e a r c h q u e s t i o n s and h y p o t h e s e s posed in t h e s t u d y . CHAPTER IV RESULTS OF THE DATA ANALYSIS Introduction T hi s p r o j e c t was d e s i g n e d to test various hypotheses dealing w i t h f a c t o r s used in t h e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s and c a r e e r p a t h s o f c h i e f academic o fficers at public community colleges, as perceived by c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s and p r e s i d e n t s . The t h r e e a r e a s i n v e s t i g a t e d w er e: and c r i t e r i a used t o h i r e c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s ( q u a l i f i c a t i o n s career dissem inate hiring for preparation), position the mode of openings), position (the recruitm ent (sources used to selection processes used in and selection com mittee and its role). Data a r e p r e s e n t e d t h a t p e r t a i n t o each o f t h e h y p o t h e s e s s t a t e d Chapter I. in A co m pa ris o n was made between c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s employed b e f o r e 1974 and a f t e r 1974, p r e s i d e n t s employed b e f o r e 1974 and a f t e r 1974, presid en ts employed employed a f t e r two chief before 1974, employed and chief before academic 1974 and p r e s i d e n t s employed a f t e r 1974. com p ar is o ns p residents academic o f f i c e r s were showed of w h e th e r the same the chief opinion academic as to what 1974 and o fficers The l a s t officers factors and were i m p o r t a n t in t h e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s . A com parison employed before of the 1974 c a r e e r paths and those 73 of chief e m p lo y e d academic after 1974 officers gave an 74 indication o f what the trend is in the hiring process of chief academic o f f i c e r s . R e s u l t s o f t h e Study I t was h y p o t h e s i z e d t h a t factors the c h ief t h e r e would be no d i f f e r e n c e academic o f f i c e r s employed before 1974 in the used to s e l e c t o r p e r c e i v e d as i m p o r t a n t i n t h e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s o f c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s a t p u b l i c community c o l l e g e s c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s employed a f t e r 1974. these data are in c l u d e d in Appendix I. as compared t o The t a b l e s Each o f the the reporting 32 factors 1 i s t e d on t h e q u e s t i o n n a i r e was a n a l y z e d s e p a r a t e l y as t o im p o r ta n ce and w h et h er t h e p re -1 9 7 4 and p o s t - 1 9 7 4 r e s p o n d e n t s ’ answers showed a statistically significance significant used was the difference. t-test for The test independent of statistical means. It was s e l e c t e d beca use i t would be more d i s c r i m i n a t i n g in t h e t r e a t m e n t of th e hypotheses. By u s i n g t h e t - t e s t for in d e p e n d e n t means a t th e .05 l e v e l , r e s u l t s would a p p e a r t o be s t a t i s t i c a l l y significant chance a l o n e 1 o u t o f 20 t i m e s . Therefore, 128 t e s t s chance of could account for fiv e s ta t i s t i c a l l y sig n ifican t difference. the in th e factors th at by run, showed Based on t h e s e a n a l y s e s , a th e h y p o t h e s i s was th e n n o t r e j e c t e d o r r e j e c t e d . Not a l l o f t h e r e s p o n d e n t s answered a l l o f t h e q u e s t i o n s on t h e survey. The r e p o r t on each f a c t o r as t o t h e number o f r e s p o n d e n t s ans we rin g each q u e s t i o n can be found in Appendix I . Any discrepancy between the number of respondents and number o f c a s e s ( t h e s e r an g ed in number from f o u r t o e i g h t c a s e s ) the in 75 the s t a t i s t i c a l a n a l y s i s was due t o some r e s p o n d e n t s n o t c o m p le ti n g the questionnaire form to explain career paths. as d i r e c t e d , th eir but using perceptions of instead the a l e t t e r o r memo selection process and These comments can be found in Appendix B un de r open- ended r e s p o n s e s . Both gr o u p s t e n d e d t o p r o v i d e more i n f o r m a t i o n t h a n was asked f o r on t h e q u e s t i o n n a i r e s by w r i t i n g l e n g t h y comments in t h e s pa ce provided. It responses can be no te d from c h i e f th o u g h t t h a t this that academic proportionately officers may have been due t o than there were more presidents. the extensive It was lapsed time in v o l v e d and t h e ages o f t h e r e s p o n d e n t s who were employed in t h e p r e- 1 97 4 ti m e period. Many o f the presidents were d e c e a s e d , and as t h e t i m e s i n c e r e t i r e m e n t l e n g t h e n e d , known to be add resses of o t h e r s became unknown. Those q u e s t i o n n a i r e s effective percentage not completed returned. The were response not included rate of m a i l i n g t o t h e c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s and p r e s i d e n t s in the the first i s summarized in T a b l e s 4.1 and 4 . 2 , t h e second m a i l i n g in T a b l e s 4 . 3 and 4 . 4 , and t h e c u m u l a t i v e r e s p o n s e r a t e in T a b l e s 4 . 5 and 4 . 5 . In a l l , academic res p on d 14 q u e s t i o n n a i r e s and c o v e r l e t t e r s were s e n t t o c h i e f officers to the employed first in m ailing; the 21 p re -1 9 7 4 were o f f i c e r s employed in t h e p o s t - 1 9 7 4 p e r i o d . sent period to who chief did not academic At t h i s t i m e , p r e s i d e n t s o f t h o s e p u b l i c community c o l l e g e s where t h e r e was no r e s p o n s e from t h e i n i t i a l q u e s t i o n n a i r e o f o f f i c e r s p a s t and p r e s e n t were asked t o 76 h e l p by se n d in g t h e q u e s t i o n n a i r e s from t h e i r o f f i c e . This e l i c i t e d several of the responses. Ta b l e 4 . 1 . -- R e s p o n s e r a t e o f c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s t o t h e s u r v e y : f i r s t m ailing. F irst Mailing Retu rn ed Deceased E ffective % R et ur n ed Pr e-1974 (34 s e n t ) 18 2a 52.9 P o s t- 1 9 7 4 (58 s e n t ) 34 3a 58.6 a Deceased n o t i n c l u d e d in sample s i z e f o r e f f e c t i v e % returned. T ab l e 4 . 2 . -- R e s p o n s e r a t e o f p r e s i d e n t s t o t h e s u r v e y : f i r s t mailing. F irst M a il in g Re tu rn ed Deceased Effective % Returned Pre- 19 74 (42 s e n t ) 15 4a 35.7 P o s t- 19 74 (40 s e n t ) 26 6a 65.0 aDeceased n o t i n c l u d e d in sample s i z e f o r e f f e c t i v e % r e t u r n e d . In t h e p r e - 1 9 7 4 ti m e p e r i o d , 26 q u e s t i o n n a i r e s and a new c o v e r le tter were sent to th o se questionnaires in another l e t t e r were cover responding to the p resid en ts the post-1974 first sent m ailing who did ti m e p e r i o d . out to and f i v e the not re tu rn the Q u e s t i o n n a i r e s and five whose p r e s i d e n t s not letters were not 77 returned by the post office. New a d d r e s s e s were c o n t a c t i n g c o l l e a g u e s and by a s k i n g t h e p r e s i d e n t s obtained in t h e by colleges f o r h e l p in s e e i n g t h a t t h e q u e s t i o n n a i r e s r e a c h e d t h e i n d i v i d u a l s . T a b l e 4 . 3 . -- R e s p o n s e r a t e o f c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s t o t h e s u r v e y : secon d m a i l i n g . Second Mailing R et u r n ed Deceased Effective % R et ur ned P r e-1 97 4 (14 s e n t ) 5 0 3 5 .7 P o s t- 1 9 7 4 (21 s e n t ) 8 0 38.1 T a b l e 4 . 4 . -- R e s p o n s e r a t e o f p r e s i d e n t s t o t h e s u r v e y : m ailing. Second Mailing R et u r n ed second Deceased E ffective % R et ur ned P r e-1 97 4 (26 s e n t ) 8 0 30.8 P o s t- 1 9 7 4 (10 s e n t ) 7 0 7 0. 0 The f i n a l r e s p o n s e r a t e o f t h e q u e s t i o n n a i r e s ra n g ed from 61% o f t h e p r e s i d e n t s employed b e f o r e 1974 t o a 97% r e s p o n s e from t h e 78 p r e s i d e n t s employed a f t e r 1974. The c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s showed a r e t u r n o f 71.9% b e f o r e 1974 and 76.3% a f t e r 1974. T ab l e 4 . 5 . - - C u m u l a t i v e r e s p o n s e r a t e o f c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s t o th e survey. Returned Deceased Effective % R et u rn ed P re-1974 (34 s e n t ) 23 2a 67.6 P os t- 1 97 4 (58 s e n t ) 42 3a 7 2 .4 1 s t & 2nd Mailings aDeceased not i n c l u d e d in sample s i z e f o r e f f e c t i v e % returned. T a b l e 4 . 6 . - - C u m u l a ti v e r e s p o n s e r a t e o f p r e s i d e n t s t o t h e s u r v e y . 1 s t & 2nd Mailings Returned Deceased Effective % R et ur ned P re-1974 (42 s e n t ) 23 2a 54.8 P o s t- 1 9 7 4 (40 s e n t ) 33 6a 82.5 a Deceased n o t in c l u d e d in sample s i z e f o r e f f e c t i v e % r e t u r n e d . Using analyzed t-tests, to frequencies, determine if and p e r c e n t a g e s , there were differences 32 factors between were chief academic o f f i c e r s employed b e f o r e 1974 and t h o s e employed a f t e r 1974 concerning th eir perceptions of the selectio n process. The 79 follow ing academic factors officers involved were in the d e te rm in e d n o t i c e s s e n t t o community c o l l e g e s , selectio n by analyzing process position of chief vacancy c o l l e g e pl a ce m e n t o f f i c e s , t h e C h r o n i c l e o f Hig her Education p o s i t i o n s from 1960 t o 1986. and See Appendix A f o r a summary o f t h e p o s i t i o n vac ancy n o t i c e s . Experiential Variables Doctorate M aster’ s Major d i s c i p l i n e a r e a o f m a s t e r ’ s o r d o c t o r a t e P u b l i c school t e a c h i n g e x p e r i e n c e A dm inistrative experience (o th e r than co lle g e ) P u b l i c school Business/industry Community c o l l e g e a d m i n i s t r a t i v e e x p e r i e n c e D ivision/departm ent ch air A s s o c i a t e / a s s i s t a n t dean Dean V ice-president Noneducation e x p e r i e n c e Scholarly a c tiv ity /p u b lic a tio n s O f f i c e s he l d in s t a t e / n a t i o n a l o r g a n i z a t i o n s So u rc es (how c a n d i d a t e heard a b o u t t h e p o s i t i o n ) In ternal candidate External candidate P ers ona l V a r i a b l e s Age Sex Race Mar ried Single Divorced Children Communication s k i l l s L e a d e r s h ip M aturity B e l i e f in community c o l l e g e p h i l o s o p h y A ttitude A b i l i t y t o work with o t h e r s The f i n d i n g s f o r each f a c t o r were summarized u s i n g t h e t - t e s t f o r in d e p e n d e n t means. The f r eq ue nc y and p e r c e n t a g e o f each f a c t o r 80 are l i s t e d according to th e values o f Important ( t h i s values Very Im portant Important (th is and Important includes the on values the Not includes the questionnaire), Im portant, Not M inim ally I m p o r t a n t , and Of Average Importance on t h e q u e s t i o n n a i r e ) , and Does Not Apply/No R espons e. to separate most/very process in These v a l u e s were grouped in such a way as frequency and p e r c e n t a g e the factors i m p o r t a n t by c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s in from t h o s e f a c t o r s t h a t were p e r c e i v e d t o importance. perceived th eir as selection be o f l i t t l e / n o The t a b l e s a r e r e p o r t e d in Appendix I . S election-Process Factors: C h i e f Academic O f f i c e r P o s i t i o n F a c t o r s Used in t h e S e l e c t i o n P ro ces s as P e r c e i v e d bv C h i e f Academic O f f i c e r s Employed P r e- 1 97 4 and Those Employed P o s t- 1 9 7 4 Table 4.7 shows t h e f o r t h e 32 f a c t o r s r e s u l t s o f the used i n t h e poole d v a r i a n c e selec tio n process, estim ates as p e r c e i v e d by c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s employed p re -1 97 4 and t h o s e employed p o s t 1974. D octorate. statistically Using t h e t - t e s t , significant i t was found t h a t t h e r e was no difference in the perceptions of the im p o r ta n c e o f t h e d o c t o r a t e between c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s employed p r e - 1 9 7 4 and t h o s e employed p o s t - 1 9 7 4 . was .2 2 8, which ex ce ede d t h e significance. The t w o - t a i l e d p r o b a b i l i t y .05 l e v e l e s t a b l i s h e d The d a t a in Appendix I , Ta b le 1, for s t a t i s t i c a l i n d i c a t e t h a t more t h a n 50% o f t h e c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s employed a f t e r 1974 t h o u g h t a d o c t o r a t e was i m p o r t a n t , compared t o 21% employed b e f o r e 1974. 81 Ta b l e 4 . 7 . - - P o o l e d v a r i a n c e e s t i m a t e : pre-1974 c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s (CAO) v e r s u s p o s t- 1 9 7 4 c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s (CAO). No. Mean Std. Dev. S td . Error TValue Doctorate P r e-1 974 CAO P o s t - 1 9 7 4 CAO 11 33 3. 09 09 3 .7 576 1.640 1.542 0.495 0.268 i 09m M ^ s t s r *s P re - 19 74 CAO P o s t - 1 9 7 4 CAO 16 37 3.812 5 3.594 6 1.276 1.322 0.319 0.217 i n7 0 r ftn Ma.ior D i s c i p l i n e Area o f M a s t e r ’s / D o c t o r a t e P r e-1 974 CAO P o s t- 1 9 7 4 CAO 18 40 3.333 3 3.050 0 1.41 4 1.218 0.333 0.193 Q 7fi 0 4oq P u b l i c School Te a ch in g E x per ie nce P re -1 97 4 CAO P o s t- 1 9 7 4 CAO 12 30 2.5000 2.2000 1.087 0.314 1.157 0.211 0 77 Q 44r Community C o ll e g e Te a ch in g Exper ie nce P re -1 974 CAO P o s t- 1 9 7 4 CAO 16 36 3.625 0 3.777 8 1.147 0.287 1.045 0.174 n 47 A d m i n i s t r a t i v e Exper. O t h e r Than Comm. C o l l . P re -1 97 4 CAO P o s t- 1 9 7 4 CAO 11 22 4.090 9 2.9545 1.375 0.415 1.495 0.319 ?n P u b l i c School Adminis­ t r a t i v e Ex pe ri en ce P r e- 19 74 CAO P o s t- 1 9 7 4 CAO 8 19 3.375 0 2.7895 1.408 0.498 1.357 0.311 i Q1 0 B u s i n e s s - I n d u s t r v Exper. P r e-1 974 CAO P o s t- 1 9 7 4 CAO 5 16 3.200 0 2.2500 1.304 0.583 1.125 0.281 i cq n Community C ol l e g e A d m i n i s t r a t i v e Exper. P r e- 19 74 CAO P o s t- 1 9 7 4 CAO 9 27 4.4444 4.4444 1.130 0.377 1.219 0.235 n nn 2-Tail Prob. O fiTO 0 n4, * i nnn 82 Table 4 . 7 . --Continued. TValue 2-Tail Prob. 1.602 0. 6 54 1.201 0.22 7 Q o5 n 3.571 4 3.666 7 1.61 8 0. 61 2 1.390 0.303 Q u n Rftl 8 28 4.625 0 4.321 4 0.744 0.26 3 1.249 0.236 0 0 E x p e r i e n c e as V ice-President P r e-1 97 4 CAO P o s t- 1 9 7 4 CAO 2 13 3.500 0 3. 5385 0.707 0.50 0 1.613 0.447 n no n q7r None du cat ion Exper. Pre-1 97 4 CAO P o s t- 1 9 7 4 CAO 15 26 3 .4 000 3. 0000 1.517 0. 67 8 1.523 0.299 0 c4 n cqc Scholarly A c tiv itv Publications Pre-1 97 4 CAO P o s t- 1 9 7 4 CAO 14 36 3.3571 2.6944 1.008 0.26 9 0.980 0.16 3 ? n n Oofi* O f f i c e s Held in S t a t e National O rganiza tions Pre-1 97 4 CAO P o s t- 1 9 7 4 CAO 13 32 2.6923 2.9063 1.109 0. 3 0 8 1.058 0.187 n fil n r 47 Sources--How You Heard About t h e P o s i t i o n Pre- 19 74 CAO P o s t- 1 9 7 4 CAO 9 24 4.000 0 2.5417 1.323 0.441 1.503 0.307 o n nlfi* I n t e r n a l C a n d i d a te Pre-1 97 4 CAO P o s t- 1 9 7 4 CAO 9 24 No. Mean Division-Department C h a i r Ex p e ri e n c e P r e-1 97 4 CAO P o s t- 1 9 7 4 CAO 6 28 3 . 833 3 4. 03 57 A ssociate-A ssistant Dean E x pe ri en ce P r e-1 974 CAO P o s t- 1 9 7 4 CAO 7 21 E x p e r i e n c e as Dean P r e-1 974 CAO P o s t- 1 9 7 4 CAO Std. Dev. Std. Error 4.222 2 0.833 0 . 2 7 8 3.5833 1.316 0.269 i ,r 17c r lq n lft7 83 Table 4 . 7 . --C o ntinu ed. No. Mean Std. Dev. External Candidate Pre- 19 74 CAO P o s t- 1 9 7 4 CAO 8 17 3. 250 0 3. 11 76 Age Pre -1 974 CAO P o s t- 1 9 7 4 CAO 16 32 Gender Pre- 19 74 CAO P o s t- 1 9 7 4 CAO Std. Error TValue 2-Tail Prob. 1. 2 82 0. 4 5 3 1.495 0.363 n 99 n 2.4375 2.5313 0. 9 6 4 0.241 1.191 0.211 n 91 n 16 36 2.0625 2.1111 1.2 8 9 0 . 3 2 2 1.008 0.168 n ir n Race Pre-1974 CAO P o s t- 1 9 7 4 CAO 16 34 1.6250 1.911 8 1. 14 7 0 . 2 8 7 0 . 9 6 5 0 .1 6 6 0 n , fil M arr ied Pre-1 97 4 CAO P o s t- 1 9 7 4 CAO 18 34 2.2222 2.0882 1. 30 9 0 . 3 0 8 0. 9 9 6 0.171 n 41 n Single Pre- 19 74 CAO P o s t- 1 9 7 4 CAO 10 17 1.5000 1.2941 0. 8 5 0 0 . 2 6 9 0 . 4 7 0 0. 1 14 n n Divorced Pre- 19 74 CAO P o s t- 1 9 7 4 CAO 8 17 1.3750 1.3529 0 .7 4 4 0. 2 63 0 . 6 0 6 0. 1 4 7 n nfi n Children Pre- 19 74 CAO P o s t- 1 9 7 4 CAO 17 29 1.8235 1.8966 1.2 86 0. 3 1 2 1 .1 7 5 0 . 2 1 8 n ?n n Communication S k i l l s Pre-1 97 4 CAO P o s t- 1 9 7 4 CAO 18 40 4.555 6 4.7000 0.511 0.121 0 . 4 6 4 0. 07 3 i nfi n Leadership Pre- 19 74 CAO P o s t- 1 9 7 4 CAO 18 39 4.888 9 4.7436 0. 32 3 0 . 0 7 6 0 . 4 4 2 0.071 i 9c n M aturity Pre-1974 CAO P o s t- 1 9 7 4 CAO 18 40 4.5556 4.475 0 0.616 0.145 0 . 6 4 0 0.101 n dc q9 M i99 M t> n <■« 84 Table 4 . 7 . --C o n tin u e d . No. Mean Std. Dev. Std. Error TValue 2-Tail Prob. B e l i e f in Community C ol l e o e PhilosoDhv Pre- 19 74 CAO P o s t- 1 9 7 4 CAO 17 41 4.705 9 4 . 58 54 0. 5 8 8 0.836 0.1 43 0.131 0 .5 4 0.591 A ttitude Pre-1 97 4 CAO P o s t- 1 9 7 4 CAO 18 40 4.944 4 4 . 70 00 0. 23 6 0.648 0.0 56 0. 10 3 1.55 0.12 7 A b i l i t v t o Work With O th e r s Pre-1974 CAO P o s t- 1 9 7 4 CAO 18 38 5.0000 4.8947 0.000 0.000 0.311 0. 05 0 1.43 0.15 9 * S i g n i f i c a n t a t t h e .05 l e v e l . Of the pre-1974 respondents, c u r r i c u l u m de v e l o p m e n t , five had Ed.D. higher education/vocational degrees in adm inistration, e d u c a t i o n a d m i n i s t r a t i o n ( tw o ) , and h i g h e r e d u c a t i o n a d m i n i s t r a t i o n . One had a Ph.D. in h i s t o r y , and one had an Ed.S. in a d m i n i s t r a t i o n . Of the post-1974 continuing education chem istry, higher curriculum and ad m in istratio n , respondents, 18 adm inistration, had adult Ph.D.’ s education, education adm inistration in stru c tio n , c o m m u n it y and E nglish. le ad ersh ip , curriculum , Six had h e a l t h and p h y s i c a l in sociology, p sy ch o lo g y , (six ), education, college, education Ed.D .’ s in education, educational history, and education. M aster’s . statistically Using t h e t - t e s t , significant it difference was found t h a t in the t h e r e was no perceptions of the 85 im por tan ce o f t h e m a s t e r ’ s d e g r e e between c h i e f employed p r e- 19 74 and those employed post-1974. p r o b a b i l i t y was .580, which exceeded t h e statistical significance. academic o f f i c e r s The .05 l e v e l tw o-tailed established for The d a t a i n Appendix I , Ta bl e 2, i n d i c a t e t h e p e r c e n t a g e s o f c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s were a b o u t eq u al on t h e i m p or ta n ce o f a m a s t e r ’ s d e g r e e . Of t h e pr e- 1 97 4 r e s p o n d e n t s , 11 had M.A. d e g r e e s and 1 an M.S. Those degrees school were in a adm inistration, variety of areas, anthropology, including guidance education, and c o u n s e l i n g , s o c i o l o g y , e d u c a t i o n a l a d m i n i s t r a t i o n , g e o g ra p h y , t e a c h e r e d u c a t i o n , E n g l i s h , ps yc h o lo g y , h i g h e r e d u c a t i o n , and h i s t o r y . Of the m aster’s p o s t- 1 9 7 4 degree adm inistration, in respondents, the education, f o l 1owing English, 16 stated areas : that they p h y sics, psychology, had a business, industrial educa­ t i o n , h i s t o r y , v o c a t i o n a l e d u c a t i o n , e d u c a t i o n a l a d m i n i s t r a t i o n , and occupational education. Ma.ior d i s c i p l i n e t-test, it difference area was found t h a t in the of m aster’s there perceptions was of or doctorate. Using no s t a t i s t i c a l l y the i m p o r ta n c e the significant of the major d i s c i p l i n e a r e a o f t h e m a s t e r ’ s o r d o c t o r a t e between c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s employed pr e- 19 74 and t h o s e employed p o s t - 1 9 7 4 . tailed p r o b a b i l i t y was 1 is h e d f o r s t a t i s t i c a l the im po rta n ce .439, significance. (frequency s e le c tio n process. which ex ce ede d the .05 See Appendix I , and p e r c e n t a g e ) of this The two- level estab- Table 3, factor in for the 86 P u b l i c school teaching experience. found t h a t t h e r e was no s t a t i s t i c a l l y Using t h e t-test, it was s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e in t h e p e r c e p t i o n s o f t h e i m p o r ta n c e o f p u b l i c sch ool teaching experience between c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s employed p r e - 1 9 7 4 and t h o s e employed post-1974. The t w o - t a i l e d p r o b a b i l i t y was .4 4 5, which exce eded t h e .05 l e v e l established for s ta tis tic a l Ta bl e for 4, the im p o r ta n c e s i g n i f i c a n c e . See Appendix I , (frequency and percentage) of this f a c t o r in t h e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s . Community c o l l e g e teaching experience. was found t h a t t h e r e was no s t a t i s t i c a l l y the perceptions experience those of between employed im por tan ce chief academic post-1974. which exce eded t h e cance. the .05 See Appendix I , The level of t-test, it sig n ifican t difference in community officers tw o-tailed established Ta b le 5, Using t h e fo r the college employed p re -1 9 7 4 probability for teaching was statistical and .639, sig n ifi­ im po rta n ce ( f r e q u e n c y and p e r c e n t a g e ) o f t h i s f a c t o r in t h e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s . A d m i n i s t r a t i v e e x p e r i e n c e o t h e r th a n community c o l l e g e . the t - t e s t , i t was found t h a t t h e r e was a s t a t i s t i c a l l y difference in t h e perceptions experience other th a n officers tailed of the community im po rta n ce college was .043, established for s t a t i s t i c a l academic o fficers employed im p o r t a n t in t h e s e l e c t i o n which was between less significant of adm inistrative chief employed p r e - 1 9 7 4 and t h o s e employed p o s t - 1 9 7 4 . probabil i t y than the academic The two.05 s i g n i f i c a n c e between two g r o u p s . before 1974 th o u g h t Using this factor level Chief was p r o c e s s --47.4% as compared t o 23.8% o f 87 t h o s e o f f i c e r s employed a f t e r 1974. the im po rta n ce (frequency See Appendix I , and p e r c e n t a g e ) of this T ab l e 6, factor for in the se le c tio n process. P u b l i c school a d m i n i s t r a t i v e e x p e r i e n c e . Using t h e t - t e s t , it was found t h a t t h e r e was no s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e in the perceptions of the experience those between employed chief academic post-1974. which exceeded t h e ca n c e . im po rta n ce o f p u b l i c The .05 l e v e l See Appendix I , officers adm inistrative employed tw o-tailed established school p r e- 1 97 4 probability for was statistical and .321, sig n ifi­ Tabl e 7, f o r t h e im p or ta nc e ( f r e q u e n c y and p e r c e n t a g e ) o f t h i s f a c t o r in t h e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s . Business/industry experience. that there was perceptions no statistically of the im portance Using t h e t - t e s t , significant i t was found difference of busin ess/in d u stry in the experience between c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s employed p r e - 1 9 7 4 and t h o s e employed post-1974. The t w o - t a i l e d p r o b a b i l i t y was .1 28, which exceeded t h e .05 l e v e l e s t a b l i s h e d f o r s t a t i s t i c a l s i g n i f i c a n c e . Tab le 8, for the im po rta n ce (frequency and See Appendix I, percentage) of this f a c t o r in t h e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s . Community c o l l e g e a d m i n i s t r a t i v e e x p e r i e n c e . Using t h e t - t e s t , i t was found t h a t t h e r e was no s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e in the perceptions of the im portance co m m u n it y college a d m i n i s t r a t i v e e x p e r i e n c e between c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s employed p r e- 1 97 4 and t h o s e employed p o s t - 1 9 7 4 . was 1 . 0 , which exceeded t h e .05 l e v e l of The t w o - t a i l e d established for probability statistical 88 s i g n i f i c a n c e . S ee Appendix I, Table 9, for the im portance ( f r e q u e n c y and p e r c e n t a g e ) o f t h i s f a c t o r i n t h e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s . Division/departm ent chair ex p erien ce. Using t h e t - t e s t , i t was found t h a t t h e r e was no s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e in t h e perceptions experience those of the between employed chief the of academic post-1974. which exceeded cance. im portance The division/departm ent officers employed tw o-tailed See Appendix I , Ta bl e pre-1974 probability .05 l e v e l e s t a b l i s h e d f o r chair was statistical and .7 26, sig n ifi­ 10, f o r t h e i m p o r t a n c e ( f r e q u e n c y and p e r c e n t a g e ) o f t h i s f a c t o r in t h e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s . A s s o c i a t e / a s s i s t a n t dean e x p e r i e n c e . Using t h e t - t e s t , i t was found t h a t t h e r e was no s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e in t h e p e r c e p t i o n s o f t h e im p or ta nc e o f a s s o c i a t e / a s s i s t a n t dean e x p e r i e n c e between c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s employed p r e - 1 9 7 4 and t h o s e employed post-1974. The t w o - t a i l e d p r o b a b i l i t y was .8 8 1 , which excee ded t h e .05 l e v e l e s t a b l i s h e d f o r s t a t i s t i c a l Table 11, for the im po rta nce significance. ( f r e q u e n c y and See Appendix I , percentage) of this f a c t o r in t h e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s . Dean e x p e r i e n c e . no s t a t i s t i c a l l y Using t h e t - t e s t , significant difference im p o r ta n c e o f dean e x p e r i e n c e employed p r e- 1 97 4 and those i t was found t h a t t h e r e was in between employed significance. im portance (frequency se le c tio n process. and See chief perceptions academic post-1974. p r o b a b i l i t y was .5 19 , which exceeded t h e statistical the Appendix percentage) .05 l e v e l I, of Table th is The o f the o fficers tw o-tailed established 12, factor for for the in the 89 V ice-president experien ce. Using t h e t - t e s t , i t was found t h a t t h e r e was no s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e in t h e p e r c e p t i o n s of the im portance academic officers The t w o - t a i l e d of vice-president employed p re - 1 9 7 4 p r o b a b i l i t y was established for s t a t i s t i c a l experience and t h o s e .9 7 5, between employed which exceeded t h e significance. chief post-1974. .05 l e v e l See Appendix I , Ta b le 13, f o r t h e i m p o r t a n c e ( f r e q u e n c y and p e r c e n t a g e ) o f t h i s f a c t o r in t h e se le c tio n process. No ned uca ti on e x p e r i e n c e . Using t h e t - t e s t , i t was found t h a t t h e r e was no s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e in t h e p e r c e p t i o n s o f t h e im p or ta n ce o f n o n e d u c a t i o n e x p e r i e n c e between c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s employed p r e- 19 74 and t h o s e employed p o s t- 1 9 7 4 . tailed p r o b a b i l i t y was lished for s t a t is tic a l the im p o rt a n c e .5 95 , which exceeded significance. (frequency and the .05 The two- level estab­ See Appendix I , Tabl e 14, f o r percentage) of this factor in the t-test, it was s e le c tio n process. Scholarlv activity--pub1ications. found t h a t t h e r e was a s t a t i s t i c a l l y perceptions of the im p o r ta n c e of Using the s ig n ifican t difference scholarly in t h e activity--publications between c h i e f aca demic o f f i c e r s employed p re -1 97 4 and th o s e employed post-1974. the The t w o - t a i l e d p r o b a b i l i t y was .0 38, which was l e s s th a n .05 l e v e l e s t a b l i s h e d f o r s t a t i s t i c a l groups. Thirty-one and six-tenths s i g n i f i c a n c e between two percent of the chief academic o f f i c e r s employed b e f o r e 1974 p e r c e i v e d t h i s f a c t o r as i m p o r t a n t in the selection process, compared t o 11.9% o f t h o s e employed after 90 1974. See Appendix I , T ab l e 15, f o r t h e im po rta n ce ( f r e q u e n c y percentage) o f t h i s f a c t o r in t h e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s . O ffices t-test, it held was difference in state/n atio n al found t h a t there organizations. Using was no s t a t i s t i c a l l y the significant i n t h e p e r c e p t i o n s o f t h e impo rta nce o f o f f i c e s h e l d in state/n atio n al employed and o rganizations pre-1974 p r o b a b i l i t y was and those between employed chief academic post-1974. The . 5 4 7 , which exceeded t h e .05 l e v e l statistical significance. im portance (frequency See Appendix and p e r c e n t a g e ) I, of tw o-tailed established Ta bl e th is o fficers 16, factor for for the in the se le c tio n process. Sources--how th e can d id ate learned of the p o s i t i o n . t-test, it was found that there was a statistically Using t h e significant d i f f e r e n c e in t h e p e r c e p t i o n s o f t h e importance o f s o u r c e s - - h o w t h e c a n d i d a t e l e a r n e d o f t h e p o s i t i o n - - b e t w e e n c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s employed pre-1974 and those employed p o s t - 1 9 7 4 . The p r o b a b i l i t y was .0 1 6 , which was l e s s than t h e .05 l e v e l for s ta tis tic a l s i g n i f i c a n c e between two g r o u p s . o f t h e c h i e f aca demic o f f i c e r s the candidate learned of the T ab l e 17, established A pp ro x im at el y 37% h i r e d b e f o r e 1974 t h o u g h t t h a t position was im portant, 14.3% o f t h e c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s h i r e d a f t e r 1974. I, tw o-tailed compared how to See Appendix f o r t h e im po rta n ce ( f r eq u en cy and p e r c e n t a g e ) o f t h i s f a c t o r in th e s e l e c t i o n process. In t h e h i r i n g p r o c e s s f o r th e m s e l v e s , t - t e s t s were used and i t was found between that the there sources was no of word statistically of mouth, significant publication, difference nomination, 91 c o n t a c t from t h e i n s t i t u t i o n , and w h e th e r t h e y were an i n t e r n a l or an e x t e r n a l c a n d i d a t e f o r t h o s e c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s h i r e d b e f o r e 1974 and t h o s e h i r e d a f t e r 1974. Of t h e p re -1 9 7 4 r e s p o n d e n t s an s w er in g t h e question "From what s o u r c e ( s ) d i d you l e a r n o f t h e p o s i t i o n o p e n i n g s ? " one s t a t e d i t was a n o m i n a t i o n , two h e a r d by word o f mouth, se ve n had c o n t a c t from t h e in stitution, thro ugh one s a i d publications "I was asked t o ( Chronicle of a c c e p t , " and t h r e e H ig h er Education and learned the MSU B ulletin) . Of t h e p o s t - 1 9 7 4 r e s p o n d e n t s an s w er in g t h e q u e s t i o n , nominated, s i x he ar d by word o f mouth, in stitution, three were promotions, f i v e were e i g h t had c o n t a c t and six heard from t h e through the C h r o n i c l e o f H igh er E d u c a t i o n . Internal c an d id ate. was no s t a t i s t i c a l l y Using t h e t - t e s t , significant i t was found t h a t t h e r e difference in the perceptions of t h e im p o r ta n ce o f i n t e r n a l c a n d i d a t e between c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s employed pre-1974 and those employed post-1974. p r o b a b i l i t y was .1 87, which exceeded t h e statistic al im portance sig n ifican ce. (frequency and See The .05 l e v e l Appendix percentage) I, of established Table th is tw o-tailed 18, factor for for the in the selection process. There were s i x internal c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s candidates and 16 i n t e r n a l in the pre-1974 g ro u p of c a n d i d a t e s employed in t h e p os t-1 97 4 g r o u p . External c a n d i d a te . was no s t a t i s t i c a l l y Using t h e t - t e s t , significant difference i t was found t h a t t h e r e in the perceptions of 92 t h e i m p o r ta n c e o f e x t e r n a l c a n d i d a t e between c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s employed pre-1974 and those employed post-1974. p r o b a b i l i t y was . 8 8 1 , which exceeded t h e .05 l e v e l statistical significance. See im portance (frequency percentage) and The Appendix I, established Ta b le of tw o-tailed th is 19, factor for for the in the selectio n process. From t h e external, question in the o f w he th er From t h e q u e s t i o n someone "yes," at candidate was internal pr e- 1 97 4 group t h e r e was one e x t e r n a l and from t h e p o s t - 1 9 7 4 g r ou p t h e r e know the the and t h a t pe rs on candidate, were f o u r . " I f you were an e x t e r n a l college?" four pr e- 1 97 4 was t h e p r e s i d e n t , candidate, candidates respondents presidents, answ ered "yes" one f a c u l t y member, who e n co u r a ge d them to apply. to the question, answered showed t h a t of S ix p o s t w ith and one dean being t h e A t-test d i d you who encouraged t h r e e them t o a p p l y f o r t h e p o s i t i o n o f c h i e f academic o f f i c e r . 1974 or four individuals t h e r e was no s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e between c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s employed p r e- 19 74 who were e x t e r n a l c a n d i d a t e s and knew someone a t the post-1974 college and those employed who were external c a n d i d a t e s and knew someone a t t h e c o l l e g e . Age. When hired as chief academic officers, r e s p o n d e n t s ran ge d in age from 27 t o 51 y e a r s o l d . was as f o l l o w s : 20s 30s 40s 50s 1 5 10 2 the p r e- 19 74 The d i s t r i b u t i o n 93 The d a t e s t h e y were h i r e d as c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s ran ge d from 1952 t o 1984: 1950s 1960s 1970-74 1975-79 1980s When hired as chief 1 9 5 2 1 academic o fficers, r e s p o n d e n t s rang ed in age from 27 t o 60 y e a r s o l d . the post-1974 The d i s t r i b u t i o n i s as f o l l o w s : 20s 30s 40s 50s 60s The d a t e s t h e y were h i r e d as 1 11 20 5 3 c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s ran ge d from 1968 t o 1987: 1950s 1960s 1970-74 1975-79 1980s Using t h e t - t e s t , 0 2 2 10 24 i t was found t h a t t h e r e was no s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e in t h e p e r c e p t i o n s o f t h e im p o r ta n ce o f age between c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s employed p r e - 1 9 7 4 and t h o s e employed post-1974. The t w o - t a i l e d p r o b a b i l i t y was .7 8 6, which exce eded t h e .05 l e v e l e s t a b l i s h e d f o r s t a t i s t i c a l s i g n i f i c a n c e . showed no s t a t i s t i c a l l y viduals e m p lo y e d sig n ifican t difference pre-1974 and those The t - t e s t a l s o in t h e age o f i n d i ­ employed post-1974. See Appendix I , Ta b le 20, f o r t h e impo rta nce ( f r e q u e n c y and p e r c e n t a g e ) o f t h i s f a c t o r in t h e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s . 94 G en d er . officers, Of t h e p r e - 1 9 7 4 r e s p o n d e n t s h i r e d 19 were male and none was female. r e s p o n d e n t s h i r e d as c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s , as chief Of the academic post-1974 35 were m a le , 4 were f e m a le , and 1 d i d n o t r es p on d t o t h i s q u e s t i o n . The t-test was used to determ ine w hether there was a s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e i n t h e g e n d e r o f c h i e f academic officers employed The r e s u l t s pre-1974 compared to showed no s t a t i s t i c a l l y those employed post-1974. sig n ific a n t difference between t h e two g r o u p s . A1 so using statistically the t-te st, significant it was difference found in th at th ere the perceptions im po rta nce o f g en d er between c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s 1974 and t h o s e employed p o s t - 1 9 7 4 . .8 84, which exceeded sig n ifican ce. See the .05 The t w o - t a i l e d level Appendix I, established Table 21, for was no of the employed p r e - p r o b a b i l i t y was for statistical the im portance ( f r e q u e n c y and p e r c e n t a g e ) o f t h i s f a c t o r in t h e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s . Race. statistically Using the t-test, significant it was difference in found that there the perceptions was no o f the im p or ta nc e o f r a c e between c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s employed p r e - 1 9 7 4 and t h o s e employed p o s t - 1 9 7 4 . which exceeded t h e cance. .05 l e v e l The t w o - t a i l e d p r o b a b i l i t y was .3 61 , established See Appendix I , Ta b le 22, f o r t h e for s ta tis tic a ls ig n if i­ i m p o r ta n c e ( f r e q u e n c y and p e r c e n t a g e ) o f t h i s f a c t o r in t h e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s . Of t h e p r e- 19 74 r e s p o n d e n t s h i r e d as c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s , all 19 were W h i t e / C a u c a s i a n . Of t h e p o s t - 1 9 7 4 r e s p o n d e n t s , 36 were 95 W h i t e / C a u c a s i a n and 4 were B la c k /N e g r o /A f r o - A m e r ic a n . of the those two gr ou ps employed (chief academic o f f i c e r s post-1974) by a t-test Comparisons employed showed pr e- 1 97 4 no and statistically s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e between t h e grou ps in te rm s o f r a c e . M arried. statistic ally Using the t - t e s t , significant i t was difference in found the that there perceptions was of no the i m p o r ta n c e o f be in g m a r r i e d between c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s employed p r e - 1 9 7 4 and t h o s e employed p o s t - 1 9 7 4 . was .6 8 1, which exceed ed t h e sig n ifican ce. S ee The t w o - t a i l e d .05 l e v e l Appendix I, established Table 23, for probability for s ta t is tic a l the im portance ( f r e q u e n c y and p e r c e n t a g e ) o f t h i s f a c t o r in t h e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s . S ingle. statistically Using the t-test, significant it was difference in found the that there perceptions was of no the im p o r ta n c e o f bei ng s i n g l e between c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s employed p re - 1 9 7 4 and t h o s e employed p o s t - 1 9 7 4 . was .4 22 , which exceeded t h e sig n ifican ce. See The t w o - t a i l e d .05 l e v e l Appendix I, established Table 24, for probability for s ta tis tic a l the im portance ( f r e q u e n c y and p e r c e n t a g e ) o f t h i s f a c t o r i n t h e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s . Divorced. statistic ally Using the t - t e s t , significant i t was d i f f e r e n c e in found t h a t the t h e r e was no perceptions of b ei ng d i v o r c e d between c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s employed p r e- 1 9 74 and t h o s e employed post-1974. excee ded the S ee A p p e n d i x The t w o - t a i l e d p r o b a b i l i t y .05 level established I, Table 25, for the for was statistical im portance p e r c e n t a g e ) o f t h i s f a c t o r in t h e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s . .9 38, which significance. ( frequency and 96 C hildren. statistically Using t h e t-test, significant it was fo und t h a t t h e r e difference in the perceptions was no of th e im p or ta nc e o f c h i l d r e n between c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s employed p r e 1974 and t h o s e employed p o s t - 1 9 7 4 . .8 45 , which exceeded sig n ifican ce. S ee the .05 Appendix The t w o - t a i l e d p r o b a b i l i t y was level I, established Table 26, for for statistical the im portance ( f r e q u e n c y and p e r c e n t a g e ) o f t h i s f a c t o r in t h e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s . Communication sk ills. Using t h e t-test, it was found that t h e r e was no s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e i n t h e p e r c e p t i o n s of the im p o r ta n c e of communication skills between chief o f f i c e r s employed p r e - 1 9 7 4 and t h o s e employed p o s t - 1 9 7 4 . tailed probability was 1 is h e d f o r s t a t i s t i c a l the im p o r ta n ce .2 9 3 , which exceeded t h e significance. (frequency and academic The two- .05 l e v e l estab- See Appendix I , Tabl e 27, f o r percentage) of this f a c t o r in the selection process. Leadership. Using t h e t - t e s t , statistically significant im p or ta nc e o f leadership i t was found t h a t t h e r e was no d i f f e r e n c e in between the c h i e f aca demic o f f i c e r s p r e- 1 97 4 and t h o s e employed p o s t - 1 9 7 4 . was .218, which exce eded t h e sig n ifican ce. S ee Appendix .05 l e v e l I, perceptions of The t w o - t a i l e d th e employed probabil i t y established for s t a t is tic a l Table 28, for the im portance ( f r e q u e n c y and p e r c e n t a g e ) o f t h i s f a c t o r in th e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s . M aturity. statistically Using t h e significant t-test, it d i f f e r e n c e in was found t h a t the t h e r e was perceptions of no the i m por tan ce o f m a t u r i t y between c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s employed p r e 1974 and t h o s e employed p o s t - 1 9 7 4 . The t w o - t a i l e d p r o b a b i l i t y was 97 .655, which exc e ed ed sig n ifican ce. S ee the .05 level Appendix I, established Table 29, for for statistical the im portance ( f r e q u e n c y and p e r c e n t a g e ) o f t h i s f a c t o r in t h e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s . B e l i e f i n community c o l l e g e p h i l o s o p h y . Using t h e t - t e s t , it was found t h a t t h e r e was no s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e in t h e p e r c e p t i o n s o f t h e im p o rt a n c e o f b e l i e f in t h e community c o l l e g e philosophy those between employed academic post-1974. which exc e ed ed t h e cance. chief .05 The level officers tw o-tailed established employed pre -1 974 probability for was statistical and .591, sig n ifi­ See Appendix I , T ab l e 30, f o r t h e im p o rt an ce ( f r e q u e n c y and p e r c e n t a g e ) o f t h i s f a c t o r in t h e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s . A ttitude. statistically Using t h e t - t e s t , significant it was found t h a t difference in the t h e r e was no perceptions of the i m p o r t a n c e o f a t t i t u d e between c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s employed p r e 1974 and t h o s e employed p o s t - 1 9 7 4 . .127, which exc e ed ed sig n ifican ce. S ee the .05 Appendix The t w o - t a i l e d p r o b a b i l i t y was level I, established Table 31, for for statistical the im portance ( f r e q u e n c y and p e r c e n t a g e ) o f t h i s f a c t o r in t h e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s . A b i l i t y t o work w i t h o t h e r s . th at there perceptions was no of the statistic ally Using t h e t - t e s t , significant im p o r t a n c e o f t h e ability i t was found difference t o work w ith in the others between c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s employed pr e- 19 74 and t h o s e employed post-1974. .05 l e v e l Table 32, The t w o - t a i l e d p r o b a b i l i t y was .1 59, which exceeded th e established for s ta tis tic a l for the im p o r t a n c e f a c t o r in t h e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s . significance. (frequency and See Appendix I , percentage) of this 98 Summary o f f i n d i n g s c o n c e r n i n g t h e importance o f f a c t o r s i n t h e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s as p e r c e i v e d by c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s . Of t h e 34 q u e s t i o n n a i r e s s e n t t o c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s employed a t p u b l i c community c o l l e g e s b e f o r e 1974, 23 were r e t u r n e d f o r a r e s p o n s e r a t e o f 67.6%. All o f t h e c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s who res po nde d t o t h e questions of race, gender, and age were w h ite males between 20 and 59 (6 in t h e i r 30s and 10 in t h e i r 4 0 s ) . Of the 58 questionnaires sent to chief academic officers employed a t p u b l i c community c o l l e g e s a f t e r 1974, 42 were r e t u r n e d fo r a response r a te officers o f 72.4%. who r e s p o n d e d were male, to the T h irty -fiv e of the questions and f o u r were f e m a l e . c h i e f academic of race, gender, T h i r t y - s i x were W h i te /C a u c a s ia n and f o u r l i s t e d t h e m s e l v e s as B l a c k / Negro/Afro-American. ran ged from 20 t o 69 (11 Those f a c t o r s t h a t before 1974 perceived and age The ages in t h e i r 30s and 20 in t h e i r 4 0 s ) . 50% o r more c h i e f as important o r most academic o f f i c e r s employed influential in the s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s were: Communication s k i l l s Leadership A ttitude A bility M aturity B e l i e f i n community c o l l e g e p h il os o ph y 94.7% 94.7% 94.7% 94.7% 89.5% 84.2% F i f t y p e r c e n t o r more o f t h o s e c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s employed after 1974 in flu en tial perceived the following factors as important in t h e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s : Communication s k i l l s Leadership A bility 95.2% 95.2% 90.5% or most 99 88 . 1% 8 8 . 1% M aturity B e l i e f in community c o l l e g e p h i l o s o p h y A ttitude Community c o l l e g e t e a c h i n g e x p e r i e n c e Dean e x p e r i e n c e Doctorate D epartm ent/division c h a ir experience Community c o l l e g e a d m i n i s t r a t i v e experience In the gro up community c o l l e g e s more t h a n of chief individuals t h o u g h t were key f a c t o r s in t h e employed were o n l y responding selection were 1 i s t e d as t h e most i n f l u e n t i al to six the at factors public that questionnaire process. factors academic o f f i c e r s empl oyed a f t e r 1974. an a d d i t i o n a l 52.4% academic o f f i c e r s b e f o r e 1974 , t h e r e 50% o f t h e 78.6% 59.5% 57.1% 54.8% 54.8% The same s i x by t h e gr o up o f c h i e f Th is g r ou p a l s o identified f i v e f a c t o r s t h a t 50% or more o f them b e l i e v e d t o be v e r y i m p o r t a n t in t h e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s . It was found that 29 of 32 f a c t o r s showed no statistic ally s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e between t h e p e r c e p t i o n s o f t h e im p o r t a n c e by chief academic after 1974. officers employed A dm inistrative before experience 1974 other and than those in a community c o l l e g e and s c h o l a r l y a c t i vi t y - - p u b l i c a t ions were f a c t o r s s ta t is tic a lly significant employed showing a d i f f e r e n c e between t h e p e r c e p t i o n s o f t h e two g ro up s on t h e im p o r ta n c e o f t h e s e f a c t o r s . In b ot h c a s e s t h e c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s empl oyed b e f o r e 1974 t h o u g h t t h e f a c t o r was im portant officers im portant. in the employed selection after process, 1974 S o u rc e- - ho w t h e th o ug ht individual w he re as it was the chief academic statistically less l e a r n e d o f t h e p o s i t i o n was t h e t h i r d f a c t o r t h a t showed a s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e i n how t h e c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s employed b e f o r e 1974 viewed i t s 100 im p o r ta n c e as compared t o t h o s e employed a f t e r 1974. A p pr o xi m at el y 37% o f t h e c h i e f aca demic o f f i c e r s employed b e f o r e 1974 t h o u g h t how they learned o f the position t h o s e employed a f t e r 1974. difference used: was im portant, compared t o There was no s t a t i s t i c a l l y between t h e two g r ou ps c o n c e r n i n g t h e publication, in stitution, nomination, internal posting, word o f external mouth, posting, 14.3% o f significant types of contact external sources from the candidate who knew someone a t t h e i n s t i t u t i o n , and en co ur ag ed t o a p p l y f o r t h e p o s i t i o n by someone a t t h e i n s t i t u t i o n . Three difference decision affected. of the 32 factors showed a statistically significant but th e preponderance of the f a c t o r s did not; concerning the The h y p o t h e s i s acceptability tested of and t h e the thus the was no t concerning its hypothesis decision a c c e p t a b i l i t y b as ed on t h e r e s u l t s o f t h e a n a l y s e s o f d a t a g a t h e r e d in t h i s s t u d y were: H y p o th e s is 1 : Th ere w i l l be no s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e (p < .0 5) in t h e f a c t o r s t h a t i n f l u e n c e d t h e s e l e c t i o n o f c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s p r e - 1 9 7 4 compared t o p o s t 1974, as p e r c e i v e d by c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s . Decision: Do n o t r e j e c t t h e n u l l hypothesis. As a r e s u l t o f n o t r e j e c t i n g t h e n u l l h y p o t h e s i s ( t h e r e i s no s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t difference in the factors), the research hypothesis was rejected ( t h e r e i s a s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e in t h e f a c t o r s ) . 101 F a c t o r s Used in t h e S e l e c t i o n P r o c e s s as P e r c e i v e d bv P r e s i d e n t s Employed a t P u b l i c Community C o l l e g e s Pre-1974 and Those Employed P os t- 19 7 4 Tab le 4 . 8 shows t h e r e s u l t s f o r t h e 32 f a c t o r s used of the p o o le d in t h e s e l e c t i o n variance process, estim ates as p e r c e i v e d by p r e s i d e n t s employed a t p u b l i c community c o l l e g e s p r e - 1 9 7 4 and t h o s e employed p o s t - 1 9 7 4 . Ta b l e 4 . 8 . - - P o o l e d v a r i a n c e e s t i m a t e : post-1974 p r e s i d e n t s . No. Doctorate Pre-1974 p r e s i d e n t s P o s t- 1 9 7 4 p r e s i d e n t s 14 25 M aster’s Pre -1 974 p r e s i d e n t s P o s t- 1 9 7 4 p r e s i d e n t s 13 20 Ma.ior D i s c i p l i n e Area of M aster’s/D octorate Pre- 19 74 p r e s i d e n t s P o s t- 1 9 7 4 p r e s i d e n t s Mean pre-1974 p r e s id e n ts versus Std. Dev. 3. 42 86 1 . 1 5 8 4 .0 8 00 0 . 7 0 2 Std. Error TValue 2-Tail Prob. 0. 3 0 9 0. 14 0 ? 0 Qoc* 4 . 538 5 4. 95 00 1. 1 27 0 . 3 1 2 0 .2 2 4 0 . 0 5 0 i 0 i ?0 14 23 3. 071 4 3 .4 34 8 1.2 0 7 0 . 3 2 2 0 .9 9 2 0 . 2 0 7 -i P u b l i c School Te ac hin g Ex p er i en ce Pr e-1974 p r e s i d e n t s P o s t- 1 9 7 4 p r e s i d e n t s 13 22 1.7692 2.045 5 1. 16 6 0 . 3 2 3 1. 3 27 0. 2 8 3 0 Community C o ll e g e Teach ing Ex pe ri en ce Pre- 19 74 p r e s i d e n t s P o s t- 1 9 7 4 p r e s i d e n t s 15 22 3.933 3 4.136 4 1. 10 0 0 . 2 8 4 1. 0 37 0.221 nr7 n r 7? A d m i n i s t r a t i v e Exper. O t h e r Than Comm. C o l l . Pre -1 974 p r e s i d e n t s P o s t- 1 9 7 4 p r e s i d e n t s 10 16 3. 60 00 3. 50 00 1. 2 65 0 . 4 0 0 1.461 0 . 3 6 5 n n 0 0 coq 102 Table 4 . 8 . --C o ntinu ed. No. Std. Dev. Std. Error TValue 2-Tail Prob. 2.4286 1. 5 12 3 . 062 5 0. 9 2 9 0.571 0. 23 2 i 04 n ?28 Mean P u b l i c School Adminis­ t r a t i v e E xp er i en ce Pre-1974 p r e s i d e n t s Po st -1 9 74 p r e s i d e n t s 7 16 B u s i n e s s - I n d u s t r v Exper. Pre-1974 p r e s i d e n t s Po st -1 9 74 p r e s i d e n t s 7 12 3.714 3 2.9167 1. 38 0 1.08 4 0. 5 2 2 0.3 1 3 i 4Q 0 17q Community C o l l e g e A d m i n i s t r a t i v e Exper. Pre-1974 p r e s i d e n t s Po st -1 9 74 p r e s i d e n t s 9 18 4.000 0 4.8333 1.50 0 0. 38 3 0.500 0.0 90 2 ?5 0 033* Pi v i s io n - D ep ar tm en t C h a i r Ex p er i en ce Pr e-1974 p r e s i d e n t s P o s t- 1 97 4 p r e s i d e n t s 12 18 3.3333 4.2222 1.303 0 .8 0 8 0 .3 7 6 0.191 00-1 A ssociate-A ssistant Dean E x p e ri e n c e Pre- 19 74 p r e s i d e n t s Po st -1 9 74 p r e s i d e n t s 13 18 3.5385 4.3333 1.26 6 0. 68 6 0.351 0. 16 2 2 Ex p er i en ce as Dean Pre-1974 p r e s i d e n t s P o s t- 19 74 p r e s i d e n t s 11 19 3.8182 4.5263 1.328 0. 7 72 0.400 0. 1 77 -i n n74 E xp er i en ce as Vice-President Pre-1 97 4 p r e s i d e n t s Po st- 19 7 4 p r e s i d e n t s 9 13 3.000 0 3.4615 1.581 1. 4 50 0.527 0.4 02 0 71 n 4fi7 Noneducation Exper. Pre- 19 74 p r e s i d e n t s P o s t- 19 74 p r e s i d e n t s 10 13 2.6000 2.8462 1.43 0 1.21 4 0 .4 5 2 0 .3 3 7 n 4c n Scholarly A ctiv itv Publications Pre- 19 74 p r e s i d e n t s P o s t- 19 74 p r e s i d e n t s 10 20 2.2000 2.9000 1.13 5 1. 11 9 0.359 0. 2 50 i n nq 2c 0 n ? o* n no2* 103 Table 4 . 8 . --C ontinued. No. Mean Std. Dev. Std. Error TValue 2-Tail Prob. O f f i c e s Held in S t a t e National O rganizations P r e- 19 74 p r e s i d e n t s Post-1974 p r e s id e n t s 11 20 2.5455 2.750 0 1.128 1.11 8 0 .3 4 0 0.25 0 0 4q 0 63-i Sources--How You Heard About t h e P o s i t i o n P r e-1 974 p r e s i d e n t s Post-1974 p r e s id e n t s 5 15 2.000 0 2.6567 1.000 0.97 6 0.4 47 0.25 2 i 3? 0 ?flc I n t e r n a l C a n d i d a te P r e-1 974 p r e s i d e n t s P o s t- 1 9 7 4 p r e s i d e n t s 10 15 2.2000 3.066 7 1.398 1.534 0.44 2 0.39 6 i 43 E x t e r n a l C a n d i d a te P r e-1 97 4 p r e s i d e n t s P o s t- 1 9 7 4 p r e s i d e n t s 10 15 2.2000 2.9333 1.398 1.438 0. 44 2 0.371 l 0 ?1q Age Pre- 19 74 p r e s i d e n t s P o s t- 1 9 7 4 p r e s i d e n t s 12 15 2.1667 2.2000 1.115 1.146 0.32 2 0. 29 6 n no n q4n Gender Pre- 19 74 p r e s i d e n t s P o s t- 1 9 7 4 p r e s i d e n t s 10 16 1.7000 0.375 0 1.494 0.719 0.47 3 0.180 Q 7c n 4fii Race Pre-1 97 4 p r e s i d e n t s P o s t- 1 9 7 4 p r e s i d e n t s 9 16 1.0000 1.3125 0.000 0.793 0.00 0 0.19 8 -i -i7 M a r r ie d Pre-1 97 4 p r e s i d e n t s Post-1974 p r e s id e n t s 9 16 1.5556 1.3750 1.333 0.80 6 0.4 4 4 0.20 2 n 4? 0 fi7r Single Pre-1 97 4 p r e s i d e n t s P o s t- 1 9 7 4 p r e s i d e n t s 9 15 1.3333 1.2667 0.707 0.799 0. 23 6 0.206 n n R3q Di vo rc ed Pre-1974 p r e s i d e n t s P o s t- 1 9 7 4 p r e s i d e n t s 10 15 1.3000 1.2000 0.483 0.561 0.15 3 0.14 5 n 4fi n fi4q n n 104 Table 4 . 8 . --Continued. No. Mean S td . Dev. Std. Error TValue 2-Tail Prob. Children P re-1974 p r e s i d e n t s P o s t- 1 9 7 4 p r e s i d e n t s 9 16 1.4444 1.4375 1.014 1.094 0.33 8 0.273 0.02 0. 9 8 8 Communication S k i l l s Pr e-1974 p r e s i d e n t s P o s t- 1 9 7 4 p r e s i d e n t s 14 24 4.5714 4.7917 1.089 0.833 0.291 0.170 -0.70 0.488 LeadershiD Pre-1974 p r e s i d e n t s P o s t- 1 9 7 4 p r e s i d e n t s 14 22 4.8571 4.9091 0.363 0.294 0.097 0.063 -0.47 0. 64 0 M aturity Pre-1974 p r e s i d e n t s P o s t- 19 74 p r e s i d e n t s 21 4.7692 4.9048 0.439 0.301 0.122 0.06 6 -1.07 0.292 B e l i e f in Community C o l l e a e P h ilo s o ph y Pre-1974 p r e s i d e n t s P o s t- 19 74 p r e s i d e n t s 22 4.8571 4.8636 0.363 0.351 0.097 0.075 -0.05 0.958 A ttitude Pre-1974 p r e s i d e n t s P o s t- 19 74 p r e s i d e n t s 14 22 4.9286 4.8636 0.267 0.351 0.071 0.07 5 0 .5 9 0.5 59 A b i l i t y t o Work With O the rs Pre-1974 p r e s i d e n t s P o s t- 19 74 p r e s i d e n t s 13 22 4.8462 4.9091 0.376 0.294 0.104 0.063 -0.55 0. 5 85 13 14 ♦ S i g n i f i c a n t a t t h e .05 l e v e l . D octorate. statistically Using t h e t - t e s t , significant it difference was found t h a t in the there perceptions was a of the im p o r ta n ce o f t h e d o c t o r a t e between p r e s i d e n t s employed p r e - 1 9 7 4 and those employed which was less post-1974. than the The t w o - t a i l e d .05 level probability established for was .035, statistical 105 s i g n i f i c a n c e between two g r o u p s . The d a t a in Appendix I , T ab l e 33, i n d i c a t e t h a t 50% o f t h e p r e s i d e n t s employed b e f o r e 1974 th o u g h t a d o c t o r a t e was i m p o r t a n t , compared t o 80% employed a f t e r 1974. M aster’ s . Using t h e t - t e s t , statistically significant it was found t h a t difference in the perceptions im p or ta nc e o f t h e m a s t e r ’ s d e g r e e between p r e s i d e n t s 1974 and t h o s e employed p o s t - 1 9 7 4 . .120, which exceeded significance. the .05 t h e r e was no of the employed p r e - The t w o - t a i l e d p r o b a b i l i t y was level established The d a t a in Appendix I , T a b l e 34, for statistical i n d i c a t e t h a t 75% o f t h e p r e s i d e n t s in t h e p re -1 9 7 4 and p o s t - 1 9 7 4 t i m e p e r i o d s th o u g h t having a m a s t e r ’ s d e g r e e was i m p o r t a n t in t h e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s . Major d i s c i p l i n e t-test, it was found t h a t difference in discipline area employed area the of pre-1974 p r o b a b i l i t y was statistical indicate th a t of m aster’s there perceptions the and m aster’s those was of or no statistically the or i m p o r ta n c e doctorate employed The data t h e t r e n d may be s h i f t i n g area of th e degree not being .05 l e v e l in of between post-1974. .3 26, which exceeded t h e significance. doctorate. Appendix The Using significant the m a jo r presidents tw o-tailed established I, the Ta bl e for 35, from t h e major d i s c i p l i n e im p o r t a n t t o a p o s i t i o n where n e a r l y 50% o f t h e p r e s i d e n t s in t h e p o s t- 1 9 7 4 t i m e p e r i o d b e l i e v e d i t t o be important. P u b l i c school teaching experience. Using t h e t - t e s t , it was found t h a t t h e r e was no s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e in t h e p e r c e p t i o n s o f t h e im p o rt a n c e o f p u b l i c sc ho ol teaching experience 106 between p r e s i d e n t s employed p r e - 1 9 7 4 and t h o s e employed p o s t - 1 9 7 4 . The t w o - t a i l e d established p r o b a b i l i t y was for statistical significance. i n d i c a t e s t h a t p u b l i c school to be an important .5 3 9 , which exceeded t h e factor Appendix .05 l e v e l I, Tabl e 36, t e a c h i n g e x p e r i e n c e was n o t p e r c e i v e d in the selection process of a chief academic o f f i c e r . Community c o l l e g e t e a c h i n g t-test, it was found t h a t t h e r e was no s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e in the perceptions of the im po r ta nc e e x p e r i e n c e between p r e s i d e n t s post-1974. .05 of Using t h e community college teaching employed pr e-1 974 and t h o s e employed The t w o - t a i l e d p r o b a b i l i t y was .572, which exceeded t h e level Appendix experience. established I, Table p resid en ts for 37, thought statistical indicate c o m m u n it y significance. that both c o l 1 ege p re- 197 4 teach in g The d a t a and in po s t- 1 9 7 4 experience was i m p o r t a n t in t h e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s . A d m i n i s t r a t i v e e x p e r i e n c e o t h e r tha n community c o l l e g e . the t - t e s t , difference Using i t was found t h a t t h e r e was no s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t in t h e perceptions o f the im portance o f a d m i n i s t r a t i v e e x p e r i e n c e o t h e r th a n community c o l l e g e between p r e s i d e n t s employed p r e - 1 9 7 4 and t h o s e employed p o s t - 1 9 7 4 . was .860, which exceeded t h e significance. Appendix I , The t w o - t a i l e d .05 l e v e l T ab l e 38, probability established for s t a t i s t i c a l indicates th a t adm inistrative e x p e r i e n c e o t h e r t h a n community c o l l e g e was c o n s i d e r e d i m p o r t a n t by t h e m a j o r i t y o f p r e s i d e n t s in b o th time p e r i o d s , bu t n o t by 50%. P u b l i c school a d m i n i s t r a t i v e e x p e r i e n c e . Using t h e t - t e s t , it was found t h a t t h e r e was no s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e in 107 the perceptions o f the im po r ta nc e o f p u b l i c e x p e r i e n c e between p r e s i d e n t s post-1974. .05 l e v e l sc ho ol adm inistrative employed p r e - 1 9 7 4 and t h o s e employed The t w o - t a i l e d p r o b a b i l i t y was .2 2 8 , which e x c e e d e d t h e established Appendix I , Ta b le 39, for statistical significance. The d a t a in in d ic a te t h a t the m a jo rity o f th e p r e s id e n ts in both time p e r i o d s th o u g h t p u b l i c school a d m i n i s t r a t i v e e x p e r i e n c e was n o t an i m p o r t a n t f a c t o r in t h e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s . B usiness/industry experience. that there was perceptions no of the between p r e s i d e n t s The t w o - t a i l e d statistically im portance significant of it was found differen ce b u sin ess/in d u stry in the experience employed p re -1 9 7 4 and t h o s e employed p o s t - 1 9 7 4 . p r o b a b i l i t y was established for s t a t i s t i c a l the Using t h e t - t e s t , .1 79 , which exc e ed ed the .05 level significance. Although no s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e was fo und i n perceptions employed of presidents in the two time periods, Appendix I , T ab l e 40, does show t h a t t h e m a j o r i t y o f p r e s i d e n t s the p re -1 97 4 ti m e period th o u g h t business/industry i m p o r t a n t , whereas t h e m a j o r i t y o f p r e s i d e n t s experience in was in t h e p o s t - 1 9 7 4 t i m e p e r i o d d i d n o t t h i n k i t was i m p o r t a n t . Community c o l l e g e a d m i n i s t r a t i v e e x p e r i e n c e . i t was found t h a t t h e r e was a s t a t i s t i c a l l y Using t h e t - t e s t , significant difference i n t h e p e r c e p t i o n s o f t h e im po r ta nc e o f community c o l l e g e trative experience employed p o s t - 1 9 7 4 . less th a n the .05 between p r e s i d e n t s employed p r e - 1 9 7 4 adm inis­ and those The t w o - t a i l e d p r o b a b i l i t y was . 0 3 3 , which was level established for statistical significance 108 between two g r o u p s . The d a t a i n Appendix I , T a b l e 41, i n d i c a t e t h a t the m ajority of in d iv id u a ls college adm inistrative process, but the in b o th t i m e p e r i o d s th o u g h t experience percentage of was im portant individuals in who community the selection thought it was i m p o r t a n t more t h a n d o u b l e d in t h e p o s t - 1 9 7 4 t i m e p e r i o d . D ivision/departm ent c h a ir ex p e rie n c e . found t h a t t h e r e was a s t a t i s t i c a l l y perceptions of the Using t h e t - t e s t , i t was sig n ific a n t difference in t h e im p o r t a n c e o f d i v i s i o n / d e p a r t m e n t c h a i r e x p e r i - e n ce between p r e s i d e n t s employed p r e - 1 9 7 4 and t h o s e employed p o s t 1974. .05 The t w o - t a i l e d p r o b a b i l i t y was .0 28 , which was l e s s t h a n t h e level groups. established for The p e r c e n t a g e division/departm ent statistical significance individuals who t h o u g h t of chair was im portant in the between th at being selection i n c r e a s e d by 18.5% from t h e p r e - 1 9 7 4 ti m e p e r i o d t o t h e two a process p o s t- 1 9 7 4 t i m e p e r i o d , as shown in Appendix I , T ab l e 42. A s s o c i a t e / a s s i s t a n t dean e x p e r i e n c e . found t h a t t h e r e was a s t a t i s t i c a l l y Using t h e t - t e s t , it was sig n ifican t difference in the p e r c e p t i o n s o f t h e i m p o r t a n c e o f a s s o c i a t e / a s s i s t a n t dean e x p e r i e n c e between p r e s i d e n t s The t w o - t a i l e d employed p r e - 1 9 7 4 and t h o s e employed p o s t - 1 9 7 4 . probabil i t y was .0 3 2 , which was l e s s than the .05 level e sta b lish ed fo r s t a t i s t i c a l significance As shown in Appendix I , t h e d a t a i n d i c a t e t h a t more t h a n 50% of both groups associate/assistant process, dean T a b l e 43, of as but those 1i s t i n g between two g r o u p s . in d iv id u als 1 i sted an factor it important as n o t i m p o r t a n t p o i n t s in t h e p o s t - 1 9 7 4 t i m e p e r i o d . e x p e r i ence in fell the as selection 17 p e r c e n t a g e 109 Dean e x p e r i e n c e . no s t a t i s t i c a l l y Using t h e t - t e s t , significant i t was found t h a t t h e r e was difference in the perceptions of the impo rta nce o f dean e x p e r i e n c e between p r e s i d e n t s employed p r e - 1 9 7 4 and t h o s e employed p o s t - 1 9 7 4 . which exceeded significance. the .05 The t w o - t a i l e d p r o b a b i l i t y was .0 7 4, level estab lish ed for statistic al F i f t y p e r c e n t o r more o f t h e p r e s i d e n t s in b ot h time p e r i o d s l i s t e d e x p e r i e n c e as a dean as an i m p o r t a n t f a c t o r selection process. in t h e (See Appendix I , Table 4 4 . ) V ice-president experience. Using t h e t - t e s t , i t was found t h a t t h e r e was no s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e in t h e p e r c e p t i o n s o f the employed im po r ta nc e o f v i c e - p r e s i d e n t pre-1974 p r o b a b i l i t y was and those experience employed significance. im portance (frequency See presidents The tw o-tailed post-1974. .4 87 , which exceeded t h e statistical between Appendix and p e r c e n t a g e ) .05 l e v e l I , Ta bl e of th is established 45, for factor for the in th e selection process. Noneducation e x p e r i e n c e . Using t h e t - t e s t , i t was found t h a t t h e r e was no s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e in t h e p e r c e p t i o n s of the employed im p or ta n ce of p r e- 1 97 4 and n o n e d u c a ti o n those experience employed post-1974. p r o b a b i l i t y was .6 50, which exceeded t h e statistical significance. im portance (frequency selection process. See between Appendix and p e r c e n t a g e ) .05 l e v e l I , Tabl e of th is The presidents tw o-tailed established 46, factor for f o r the in th e 110 Scholarly activitv--publications. Using the t-test, it was found t h a t t h e r e was no s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e in t h e perceptions of the im p o r ta n c e of scholarly activity--publications between p r e s i d e n t s employed p r e- 1 97 4 and t h o s e employed p o s t - 1 9 7 4 . The t w o - t a i l e d p r o b a b i l i t y was established for s t a t i s t i c a l .1 19, which exc e ed ed significance. the .05 l e v e l F i f t y p e r c e n t o r more o f t h e p r e s i d e n t s employed in b ot h ti m e p e r i o d s 1 i s t e d t h i s f a c t o r as n o t i m p o r t a n t , as shown in Appendix I , Ta b l e 47. Offices test, it hel d was difference in found state/national that there was no Using statistically organizations and t h o s e employed p o s t - 1 9 7 4 . exceeded significance. the .05 This f a c t o r , between presidents the employed h e l d in pre-1974 The t w o - t a i l e d p r o b a b i l i t y was 1evel e s t a b l i shed for as shown in Appendix 1 i s t e d by more th a n 50% o f t h e p r e s i d e n t s I, t- significant in t h e p e r c e p t i o n s o f t h e i m p o r ta n c e o f o f f i c e s state/national which organizations. .6 31, s t a t i s ti cal T a b l e 48, was in b o t h t i m e p e r i o d s as n o t be in g im p o r t a n t in t h e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s . Sourc es -- how t h e c a n d i d a t e heard abo ut t h e p o s i t i o n . t-test, it was found t h a t there was no s t a t i s t i c a l l y Using t h e significant d i f f e r e n c e in t h e p e r c e p t i o n s o f t h e i m p o r ta n c e o f s o u r c e s - - h o w t h e c a n d i d a t e he ar d abo ut t h e p o s i t i o n - - b e t w e e n p r e s i d e n t s employed p r e 1974 and t h o s e employed p o s t - 1 9 7 4 . . 205, which exceeded t h e nificance. In both The t w o - t a i l e d p r o b a b i l i t y was .05 l e v e l e s t a b l i s h e d f o r s t a t i s t i c a l time periods, 1 i s t e d t h i s f a c t o r as n o t i m p o r t a n t . a m ajority of the sig ­ presidents See Appendix I , T a b l e 49, f o r Ill the im p o r t a n c e (frequency and percentage) of this factor in th e selection process. Internal candidate. was no s t a t i s t i c a l l y the im p o r t a n c e of Using t h e t - t e s t , significant internal difference candidate .166, exceeded sig n ifican ce. See the .05 in between p r e - 1 9 7 4 and t h o s e employed p o s t - 1 9 7 4 . was i t was found t h a t t h e r e the perceptions presidents employed The t w o - t a i l e d p r o b a b i l i t y 1evel established I, 50, Appendix of Table for for statistic al the im portance ( f r e q u e n c y and p e r c e n t a g e ) o f t h i s f a c t o r in t h e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s . External c a n d i d a te . was no s t a t i s t i c a l l y the im p o r t a n c e of Using t h e t - t e s t , significant external difference candidate sig n ifican ce. See I, perceptions presidents of employed The t w o - t a i l e d p r o b a b i l i t y .05 l e v e l Appendix in t h e between p r e - 1 9 7 4 and t h o s e employed p o s t - 1 9 7 4 . was .2 19 , which ex ce ed ed t h e i t was found t h a t t h e r e established Table 51, for s ta tis tic a l for the im portance ( f r e q u e n c y and p e r c e n t a g e ) o f t h i s f a c t o r in t h e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s . Age. Using the t-test, it was found there statistically significant difference in im p o rt a n c e age presidents employed p r e- 19 74 of between employed post-1974. exceeded the S ee A p p e n d i x The tw o-tailed .05 level established I, Table 52, for the the that perceptions probability for was statistical im portance was of no th e and t h o s e .9 40, which significance. (frequency and p e r c e n t a g e ) o f t h i s f a c t o r in t h e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s . G en d er . statistically Using the significant t-test, it difference was in found the that there perceptions was of no th e im p o rt a n c e o f g e n d e r between p r e s i d e n t s employed pr e- 19 74 and t h o s e 112 employed post-1974. The tw o-tailed probability was exceeded t h e .05 l e v e l e s t a b l i s h e d f o r s t a t i s t i c a l .4 61 , which s i g n i f i c a n c e . See Appendix I , T ab l e 53, f o r t h e im po rt an ce ( f r e q u e n c y and p e r c e n t a g e ) o f t h i s f a c t o r in t h e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s . Ra ce. Using statistically the significant im po r ta nc e o f r a c e post-1974. exceeded the .05 AppendixI , it was difference The level Table tw o-tailed established 54, for the that there was perceptions employed p r e - 1 9 7 4 probability for the found in between p r e s i d e n t s employed S ee t-test, was the and t h o s e .2 5 4, statistical im portance of no which significance. (frequency and p e r c e n t a g e ) o f t h i s f a c t o r in t h e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s . M arried. Using t h e statistically significant t-test, it difference was found t h a t in the there was perceptions no of the im p or ta nc e o f b ei ng m a r r i e d between p r e s i d e n t s employed p r e - 1 9 7 4 and those employed which exceeded sig n ifican ce. p o s t - 1 9 7 4 . The the tw o-tailed .05 1evel See A p p e n d i x probability e s t a b l i shed I ,Table 55, for was .675, s t a t i s t i cal fo r the im portance ( f r e q u e n c y and p e r c e n t a g e ) o f t h i s f a c t o r in t h e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s . Single. statistically Using t h e t-test, significant it difference was in found the that there perceptions was of no the im po r ta nc e o f be in g s i n g l e between p r e s i d e n t s employed p r e - 1 9 7 4 and those employed which exceeded sig n ifican ce. p o s t - 1 9 7 4 . The the tw o-tailed .05 l e v e l See A p p e n d i x probability e s t a b l i shed I ,Table 56, for fo r the was .839, statistic al im portance ( f r e q u e n c y and p e r c e n t a g e ) o f t h i s f a c t o r in t h e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s . 113 Divorced. Using statistic ally im p o r ta n c e the significant o f being t-test, it difference divorced exceeded sig n ifican ce. the in of the perceptions employed the pre-1974 The t w o - t a i l e d p r o b a b i l i t y was .6 49, .05 See was no between p r e s i d e n t s and t h o s e employed p o s t - 1 9 7 4 . w hich was found t h a t t h e r e levele s ta b lis h e d fo r Appendix I, Table 57, for statistic al the im portance ( f r e q u e n c y and p e r c e n t a g e ) o f t h i s f a c t o r i n t h e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s . C hildren. Using the t - t e s t , i t statistically significant im p o r t a n c e children those of employed w hich difference between post-1974. exceeded sig n ifican ce. the See was no in of the pre-1974 and the presidents The .05 was found t h a t t h e r e tw o-tailed perceptions employed probability 1 evele s t a b l i shedf o r Appendix I, Table 58, for was .98 8, s t a t i s t i cal the im portance ( f r e q u e n c y and p e r c e n t a g e ) o f t h i s f a c t o r in t h e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s . Communication sk ills. Using the t-test, it was found that t h e r e was no s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e in t h e p e r c e p t i o n s of the im portance employed pre-1974 p r o b a b i l i t y was of and com m unication sk ills those post-1974. employed . 4 8 8 , which exceeded t h e statistical significance. See im portance (frequency percentage) and between .05 l e v e l Appendix I, of The tw o-tailed established Table th is p residents 59, factor for for the in the s e lec tio n process. L eadership. statistically importance those Using t h e t - t e s t , significant of leadership employed post-1974. i t was found t h a t t h e r e was no difference in the between p r e s i d e n t s The tw o-tailed perceptions of the employed pre-1974 and probability was .6 40, 114 w hich exceeded sig n ifican ce. the See .05 level Appendix I, estab lish ed for Table 60, for statistic al the im portance ( f r e q u e n c y and p e r c e n t a g e ) o f t h i s f a c t o r in t h e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s . M aturity. Using t h e t - t e s t , statistically significant im p o r t a n c e m aturity those of employed which sig n ifican ce. difference between post-1974. exceeded the See it the perceptions of the p r e- 19 74 and employed tw o-tailed probability 1e v e l Appendix in t h e r e was no presidents The .05 was found t h a t I, established for Table 61, for was .2 92, s t a t i s t i cal the im portance ( f r e q u e n c y and p e r c e n t a g e ) o f t h i s f a c t o r in t h e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s . B e l i e f in community c o l l e g e p h i l o s o p h y . Using t h e t - t e s t , it was found t h a t t h e r e was no s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e in t h e p e r c e p t i o n s o f t h e i m p o r ta n c e o f b e l i e f in t h e community c o l l e g e p h i l o s o p h y between p r e s i d e n t s post-1974. employed pre-1974 and t h o s e employed The t w o - t a i l e d p r o b a b i l i t y was .958, which exceeded t h e .05 l e v e l e s t a b l i s h e d f o r s t a t i s t i c a l T ab l e 62, for the importance significance. (frequency and See Appendix I , percentage) of this f a c t o r in t h e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s . A ttitude. statistically im p o r t a n c e those w hich of employed Using t h e t - t e s t , significant attitude exceeded sig n ifican ce . the S ee difference between post-1974. .05 it The I, in the there perceptions the p r e- 19 74 and employed tw o-tailed probability established for Table 63, for the was no of presidents 1evel Appendix was found t h a t was .5 5 9, s t a t i s t i cal im portance ( f r e q u e n c y and p e r c e n t a g e ) o f t h i s f a c t o r in t h e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s . 115 A b i l i t y t o work w i t h o t h e r s . that there was no Using t h e t - t e s t , statistically significant it was found difference in the p e r c e p t i o n s o f t h e i m p o r ta n c e o f a b i l i t y t o work w i t h o t h e r s between p r e s i d e n t s employed pr e- 19 74 and t h o s e employed p o s t - 1 9 7 4 . tailed p ro b ab ility was .585, which exceeded established fo r s t a t i s t i c a l significance. the The two.05 level See Appendix I , T a b l e 64, f o r t h e im p o r ta n c e ( f r e q u e n c y and p e r c e n t a g e ) o f t h i s f a c t o r i n t h e selec tio n process. Summary o f f i n d i n g s c o n c e r n i n g t h e im p o rt a n c e o f f a c t o r s i n t h e selection process of chief academic o f f i c e r s c o l l e g e s as p e r c e i v e d by p r e s i d e n t s . at public community Of t h e 42 q u e s t i o n n a i r e s s e n t t o p r e s i d e n t s employed a t p u b l i c community c o l l e g e s b e f o r e 1974, were r e t u r n e d , f o r a response r a te were s e n t t o p r e s i d e n t s o f 54.8%. empl oyed a f t e r 23 Forty q u e s tio n n a ir e s 1974 and 26 were r e t u r n e d , f o r a r e s p o n s e r a t e o f 65%. Those factors that 50% o r more of the presidents employed b e f o r e 1974 p e r c e i v e d as i m p o r t a n t were: Leadership B e l i e f in community c o l l e g e p h i l o s o p h y A ttitude A b i l i t y t o work w i t h o t h e r s M aturity Communication s k i l l s M aster’s degree Community c o l l e g e t e a c h i n g e x p e r i e n c e A s s i s t a n t / a s s o c i a t e dean e x p e r i e n c e Dean e x p e r i e n c e Doctorate 87.5% 87.5% 87.5% 81.3% 81.3% 81.3% 75.0% 6 8 . 8% 63.0% 50.0% 50.0% Those f a c t o r s t h a t 50% o r more o f t h e p r e s i d e n t s employed a f t e r 1974 p e r c e i v e d as i m p o r t a n t were: 116 Communication s k i l l s B e l i e f in community c o l l e g e p h i l o s o p h y Leadership A ttitude A b i l i t y t o work w it h o t h e r s Community c o l l e g e a d m i n i s t r a t i v e e x p e r i e n c e M aturity Doctorate M aster’ s degree Dean e x p e r i e n c e Community c o l l e g e t e a c h i n g e x p e r i e n c e A s s i s t a n t / a s s o c i a t e dean e x p e r i e n c e Division/departm ent c h a ir experience 92.0% 8 8 . 6% 8 8 . 0% 8 8 . 0% 8 8 . 0% 88.0% 84.0% 80.0% 80.0% 72.0% 64.0% 64.0% 56.0% Within t h e t o p 10 f a c t o r s , t h e p r e s i d e n t s employed b e f o r e 1974 ag r e e d w i t h t h o s e employed a f t e r 1974 on e i g h t o f t h e f a c t o r s th e y considered key in t h e selection process. The l e v e l o f im p o r ta n c e v a r i e d w i t h i n t h e 10 bu t s t i l l rema ined o v e r 50%. Four o f t h e 32 factors community adm inistrative (having experience, assistan t division/departm ent dean e x p e r i e n c e ) difference employed a d octorate, between before the 1974 community c o l l e g e s . chair showed perceptions and those college experience, a statistically of i m p o r ta n c e employed In each c a s e , and the after significant by presidents 1974 presidents associate/ at public employed after 1974 p e r c e i v e d t h e f a c t o r t o be s i g n i f i c a n t l y more i m p o r t a n t in t h e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s th a n d i d t h o s e employed b e f o r e 1974. There was no s t a t i s t i c a l l y composition o f th e s e l e c t i o n the p resen t. staff, The p r e s i d e n t s first-lin e m inorities, and sig n ifican t genders in the com mi tt ee from 1960-1974 and 1974 t o indicated adm inistrators, both d ifferen ce were that faculty, professional m id-management, classified , represented on the co m mi tt ee. There was n o t a s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e in w h e th e r t h e in stitu tio n s used a s e l e c t i o n co m m it te e, t h e l e n g t h o f t i m e o f th e 117 selection process, position d escrip tio n . o r w he th er the i n s t i t u t i o n The s e l e c t i o n had dev el o pe d a c o m m it te e’ s r o l e in t h e f i n a l s e l e c t i o n o f t h e c a n d i d a t e was s t a t e d in both time p e r i o d s as being t h a t of a d v i s o r y t o t h e p r e s i d e n t , the president, a nd to t o p r e s e n t rank ed c a n d i d a t e s t o recommend fin alists to the president. Responses t o t h e q u e s t i o n "What was t h e s e l e c t i o n c o m m it te e ’ s r o l e in t h e f i n a l s e l e c t i o n ? " can be found in Appendix J . Four o f t h e 32 factors showed a statistically significant d i f f e r e n c e , but t h e p r e p o n d e r a n c e o f t h e f a c t o r s d id n o t . decision concerning the acceptability of the hypothesis Thus, t h e was not affected. The hypothesis tested and the decision concerning its a c c e p t a b i l i t y b as ed on t h e r e s u l t s o f t h e a n a l y s e s o f d a t a g a t h e r e d in t h i s s t u d y were: H yp oth es is 2 : There w i l l be no s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e (p < .05) in the f a c to rs th a t influenced the s e l e c t i o n o f c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s pr e-1 97 4 compared t o p o s t 1974, as p e r c e i v e d by c o l l e g e p r e s i d e n t s . D e c is io n : Do n o t r e j e c t the null rejecting thenull hypothesis difference in t h e f a c t o r s ) , hypothesis. As a r e s u l t o f no t ( t h e r e i s no s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t the research hypothesis (there is s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e in t h e f a c t o r s ) was r e j e c t e d . a 118 F a c t o r s Used in t h e S e l e c t i o n P r o c e s s as P e r c e i v e d by C h i e f Academic O f f i c e r s and P r e s i d e n t s Employed Befo re 1974 and Those Employed A f t e r 1974 a t P u b l i c Community C o l l e g e s Table 4 . 9 shows t h e r e s u l t s o f t h e f o r th e 32 f a c t o r s presidents used employed at po o le d v a r i a n c e e s t i m a t e s in t h e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s , public community c o l l e g e s as p e r c e i v e d before 1974 by and c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s employed a t p u b l i c community c o l l e g e s b e f o r e 1974. Ta b le 4 . 1 0 shows t h e r e s u l t s o f t h e po o le d v a r i a n c e e s t i m a t e s f o r th e 32 f a c t o r s presidents used employed at in t h e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s , public community colleges as p e r c e i v e d after 1974 by and c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s employed a t p u b l i c community c o l l e g e s a f t e r 1974. Tabl e 4 . 9 . - - P o o l e d v a r i a n c e e s t i m a t e : pre -1 9 74 p r e s i d e n t s v e r s u s p r e - 1 9 7 4 c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s (CAO). No. Mean Std. Dev. Std. Error TValue 2-Tail Prob. Doctorate Pre-1974 p r e s i d e n t s Pre-1974 CAO 14 11 3.4286 3.090 9 1.158 1.640 0. 49 5 ° - 60 0,552 Master’s Pre-1974 p r e s i d e n t s Pre-1974 CAO 13 16 4.5385 1.127 3.812 5 1.276 0,312 Ma.ior D i s c i p l i n e Area of Master’s/D o cto rate Pre-1974 p r e s i d e n t s Pre-1974 CAO 14 18 3.0714 3.3333 1.207 1.414 0,332 P u b l i c School Teaching Ex p er i en ce Pre-1974 p r e s i d e n t s Pre-1974 CAO 13 12 1 .7692 2.5000 1.166 1.087 0. 3 23 0.314 1.60 0.120 0 .3 1 9 0.3 33 -0.55 -i 0.584 n iiq 119 Table 4 - 9 . --C o n tin u e d . No. Mean Std. Dev. Std. Error TValue 2-Tail Prob. Community C o l l e g e Teaching E x p e r i e n c e Pre-1974 p r e s i d e n t s P re-1974 CAO 15 16 3.9333 3. 62 50 1.100 1.147 0.284 0.287 0 76 Q 4 c? A d m i n i s t r a t i v e Exper. O t h e r Than Comm. C o l l . Pr e-1974 p r e s i d e n t s Pre-1974 CAO 10 11 3. 6000 4. 0909 1.265 1.375 0.40 0 0.415 0 oc n 407 P u b l i c School A dm ini s­ t r a t i v e Experience Pre-1974 p r e s i d e n t s Pre-1974 CAO 7 2.4286 3.375 0 1.512 1.408 0.571 0.498 -i 8 B u s i n e s s - I n d u s t r v Exper. Pre-1974 p r e s i d e n t s Pre-1974 CAO 7 5 3.7143 3.2000 1.380 1.304 0.522 0.583 0 6c Q con Community C o l l e g e A d m i n i s t r a t i v e Exper. Pre-1974 p r e s i d e n t s Pre-1974 CAO 9 9 4.0000 4.4444 1.500 1.130 0.50 0 0.377 n 7-i n 400 Pi v i s i o n - D e p a r t m e n t Chair Experience Pre-1974 p r e s i d e n t s P re-1974 CAO 12 6 3.3333 3.8333 1.303 0.37 6 1.602 0.654 0 71 0 40 c A ssociate-A ssistant Dean E x p e r i e n c e Pre-1974 p r e s i d e n t s Pre-1974 CAO 13 7 3.5385 3.5714 1.266 0.351 1.618 0.612 n nc n Qfin Ex p e r i e n c e as Dean Pre-1974 p r e s i d e n t s Pre-1974 CAO 11 8 3.8182 4.6250 1.328 0.40 0 0.744 0.263 -i C4 n -14-. E x p e ri e n c e as V ice-President P re-1974 p r e s i d e n t s Pre-1974 CAO 9 2 3.000 0 3.500 0 1.581 0.527 0.707 0.500 0 0 120 Table 4 . 9 . --Continued. No. Mean Std. Dev. Std. Error TValue 2-Tail Prob. No neducation Exper. P r e- 19 74 p r e s i d e n t s P r e-1 974 CAO 10 5 2.6000 3. 4000 1. 43 0 0. 4 5 2 1.51 7 0. 67 8 -i no Scholarly A ctiv itv Publications P r e-1 97 4 p r e s i d e n t s P r e-1 97 4 CAO 10 14 2.2000 3.3571 1 .135 0. 35 9 1. 0 0 8 0. 26 9 ? 63 0 0-ic* O f f i c e s Held in S t a t e National O rganizations Pre-1 97 4 p r e s i d e n t s P r e-1 974 CAO 11 13 2.5455 2.6923 1. 12 8 1.10 9 0. 3 40 0. 3 08 0 30 0 7c ? Sources--How You Heard About t h e P o s i t i o n Pre- 19 74 p r e s i d e n t s Pre- 19 74 CAO 5 9 2.0000 4.0000 1.00 0 1.323 0.4 47 0.441 ? q3 0 0 1 o* I n t e r n a l C a n d i d a te Pre-1 97 4 p r e s i d e n t s Pre-1974 CAO 10 9 2.2000 4.2222 1.39 8 0.833 0.44 2 0. 2 78 o 77 0 0 0 o* E x t e r n a l C a n d i d a te Pre-1974 p r e s i d e n t s Pre-1974 CAO 10 8 2.2000 3.2500 1. 3 9 8 1.282 0.44 2 0.453 -1 64 Q -i?0 Age Pr e-1974 p r e s i d e n t s Pre- 19 74 CAO 12 16 2.1667 2.4375 1.115 0. 96 4 0. 3 22 0.241 n fiq n 4q7 Gender Pr e-1974 p r e s i d e n t s Pre- 19 74 CAO 10 16 1.7000 2.0625 1.494 1.289 0.4 73 0.322 0 fifi 0 51fi Race Pre-1974 p r e s i d e n t s Pre-1974 CAO 9 16 1.0000 1.6250 0.00 0 1.147 0. 0 0 0 0. 2 87 -i Mar ried Pre-1974 p r e s i d e n t s Pre-1974 CAO 9 18 1.5556 2.2222 1.333 1.309 0.444 0. 3 08 -174 o 334 n i-iq n 121 Table 4 . 9 . --C o ntinu ed. No. Mean Std. Dev. Std. Error Sinqle Pre-1974 p r e s i d e n t s Pre-1974 CAO 9 10 1.3333 1.5000 0. 7 0 7 0. 8 5 0 0.2 36 0.269 -0.46 0.650 Divorced Pre-1974 p r e s i d e n t s Pre-1974 CAO 10 8 1.3000 1.375 0 0. 48 3 0.744 0.15 3 0. 26 3 -0.26 0.799 Children Pre-1974 p r e s i d e n t s Pre-1974 CAO 9 17 1.4444 1.8235 1.0 14 1.28 6 0.338 0.31 2 -0.76 0.4 52 Communication S k i l l s Pre-1974 p r e s i d e n t s P re-1974 CAO 14 18 4.571 4 4.5556 1.089 0.511 0.291 0.121 0.05 0. 95 7 Leadership P re-1974 p r e s i d e n t s Pre- 19 74 CAO 14 18 4.8571 4.8889 0.36 3 0.32 3 0. 09 7 0. 07 6 -0.26 0. 7 9 6 M aturity Pre-1974 p r e s i d e n t s Pre-1974 CAO 13 18 4.7692 4.5556 0. 4 3 9 0.6 16 0.12 2 0.14 5 1 .0 7 0.2 94 B e l i e f in Community C o ll e q e PhilosoDhv Pre-1974 p r e s i d e n t s Pre -1 974 CAO 14 17 4.8571 4.7059 0.36 3 0.588 0.0 97 0.143 0.84 0.4 09 A ttitude Pre-1974 p r e s i d e n t s Pre-1974 CAO 14 18 4.9286 4.9444 0.2 67 0. 2 3 6 0.071 0.056 -0.18 0.860 A b i l i t y t o Work With O th e r s Pre-1974 p r e s i d e n t s Pre- 19 74 CAO 13 18 4.8462 5.0000 0.376 0.1 04 0.000 0.000 -1.75 0.091 * S i g n i f i c a n t a t t h e .05 l e v e l . TValue 2-Tail Pro b. 122 T a b l e 4 . 1 0 . - - P o o l e d v a r i a n c e e s t i m a t e : po st -1 9 7 4 p r e s i d e n t s v e r s u s p o s t - 1 9 7 4 c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s (CAO). No. Mean Std. Dev. Std. Error TValue 2-Tail Prob. 0 Doctorate Post-1974 Post-1974 presidents CAO 25 33 4 . 08 00 3 . 7 57 6 0.702 1.542 0.14 0 0.26 8 0 q7 M aster’s Post-1974 Post-1974 presidents CAO 20 37 4 . 95 00 3 . 5 94 6 0. 2 24 1.322 0.05 0 0.217 a Ma.ior D i s c i p l i n e Area o f M aster’ s/D octorate P o s t- 1 9 7 4 p r e s i d e n t s P o s t - 1 9 7 4 CAO 23 40 3 . 43 48 3. 05 00 0.99 2 1. 21 8 0.207 0.193 i ?q P u b l i c School Te a ch in g Ex p e ri e n c e P o s t- 1 9 7 4 p r e s i d e n t s P o s t- 1 9 7 4 CAO 22 30 2.045 5 2 .2 00 0 1.327 1.157 0.283 0.211 n 4c n fin7 Community C o l l e g e Te a ch in g Ex p e r i e n c e P o s t- 1 9 7 4 p r e s i d e n t s P o s t- 1 9 7 4 CAO 22 36 4 .1 364 3 .7 7 78 1.037 1.04 5 0.221 0.174 -i ?7 n ?f)q A d m i n i s t r a t i v e Exper. O t h e r Than Comm. C o l l . P o s t- 1 9 7 4 p r e s i d e n t s P o s t- 1 9 7 4 CAO 16 22 3. 50 00 2.954 5 1.461 0.365 1.495 0.319 -i i o n 97n P u b l i c School Adminis­ t r a t i v e Experience P o s t- 1 9 7 4 p r e s i d e n t s P o s t- 1 9 7 4 CAO 16 19 3 . 06 2 5 2 . 789 5 0.92 9 0.23 2 1.357 0.311 n n c nl B u s i n e s s - I n d u s t r v Exper. P o s t- 1 9 7 4 p r e s i d e n t s P o s t- 1 9 7 4 CAO 12 16 2.916 7 2.250 0 1.084 0.313 1.12 5 0.281 -i co n 197 Community C o l l e g e A d m i n i s t r a t i v e Exper. P o s t- 1 9 7 4 p r e s i d e n t s P o s t- 1 9 7 4 CAO 18 27 4. 833 3 4. 44 44 0.383 0.09 0 1.21 9 0.235 -i qi n lqfl cq n nnn* n ?f)o 123 Table 4 . 1 0 . --Continued. No. Mean Std. Dev. Std. Error TValu e 2-Tail Pr ob. Division-Department C h a i r E x per ie nce Post-19 74 p r e s i d e n t s Pos t-1 974 CAO 18 28 4.2222 4. 0357 0 . 8 0 8 0.191 1.201 0. 22 7 0 eg q A ssociate-A ssistant Dean Ex p er ie n ce Pos t-1 974 p r e s i d e n t s P os t-1 97 4 CAO 18 21 4. 3333 3. 6667 0 .6 8 6 1. 39 0 0.162 0.30 3 -i 05 0 073 Ex pe ri en ce as Dean P os t-1 97 4 p r e s i d e n t s Post-1 974 CAO 19 28 4.5263 4.3214 0. 77 2 1.2 4 9 0. 1 7 7 0 .2 3 6 0 0 cog Ex p er i en ce as Vice-President Post-1 974 p r e s i d e n t s P os t-1 97 4 CAO 13 13 3.461 5 3.538 5 1.4 5 0 1.613 0. 4 0 2 0.44 7 0 to n gqq Noneducation Exper. Po st- 197 4 p r e s i d e n t s Po st-197 4 CAO 13 26 2.8462 3.000 0 1. 2 14 0. 3 3 7 1. 5 23 0 . 2 9 9 q 30 0 7 co Scholarly A ctiv itv Publications Post-19 74 p r e s i d e n t s Po st-197 4 CAO 20 36 2.9000 2.6944 1.11 9 0. 2 5 0 0. 9 8 0 0. 1 63 0 71 0 4™ O f f i c e s Held in S t a t e N a ti o n a l O r g a n i z a t i o n s Post-1 974 p r e s i d e n t s Po st-197 4 CAO 20 32 2.7500 2.9063 1.118 0.250 1. 0 58 0 . 1 8 7 0 c-i 0 c -14 Sources--How You Heard About t h e P o s i t i o n Post-1 974 p r e s i d e n t s Po st- 197 4 CAO 15 24 2.6667 2.5417 0. 9 7 6 0. 2 52 1.50 3 0. 3 07 0 0 777 I n t e r n a l C an di da te Po st- 197 4 p r e s i d e n t s Post-1 974 CAO 15 24 3. 0667 3.5833 1.5 3 4 0 . 3 9 6 1. 3 16 0. 2 69 -1 -10 n 97n cgc 124 Table 4 . 1 0 . --C o ntinu ed. No. Mean Std. Dev. Std. Error TValu e 2-Tail Pr ob. E x t e r n a l C a n d i d a te Pos t-1 974 p r e s i d e n t s Po st- 19 7 4 CAO 15 17 2 . 933 3 3.1175 1.438 1.495 0.371 0. 3 63 0 3c 7?fi Age Pos t-1 974 p r e s i d e n t s Pos t-1 974 CAO 15 32 2 . 20 00 2 . 53 13 1.146 0.296 1.191 0.211 n qn « 070 Gender P os t-1 97 4 p r e s i d e n t s Po st- 197 4 CAO 16 36 1. 37 50 2.1111 0.719 1.008 0. 1 8 0 0. 1 6 8 ? n n ll* Race Po st- 197 4 p r e s i d e n t s P os t-1 9 74 CAO 16 34 1. 31 25 1.9118 0. 7 9 3 0.965 0.198 0. 16 6 0 n n nfi* Mar r i e d P os t-1 97 4 p r e s i d e n t s P os t-1 97 4 CAO 16 34 1 .3 75 0 2.088 2 0.806 0.996 0. 2 02 0.171 ? cq n aic* Single Post-1 974 p r e s i d e n t s Po st- 197 4 CAO 15 17 1.266 7 1.2941 0.799 0.470 0. 2 0 6 0. 11 4 n n q nc Divorced P os t-1974 p r e s i d e n t s Po st- 19 7 4 CAO 15 17 1. 20 00 1 . 352 9 0.561 0 . 1 4 5 0 . 6 0 6 0 .1 4 7 0 74 0 4fi7 Children Post-19 74 p r e s i d e n t s Pos t-1 974 CAO 16 29 1 . 4 37 5 1.896 6 1.094 0.175 0.273 0.218 -i 00 Communication S k i l l s Post-19 74 p r e s i d e n t s P os t-1 97 4 CAO 24 40 4 .7 917 4. 70 00 0.833 0.464 0.170 0.07 3 0 c7 L e a d e r s h ip Po st -1 9 74 p r e s i d e n t s Po st- 197 4 CAO 22 39 4.9091 4 .7 43 6 0.294 0.442 0. 06 3 0.071 i c7 Maturity P os t-1 97 4 p r e s i d e n t s Po st- 197 4 CAO 21 40 4.9048 4. 47 50 0.301 0 . 0 6 6 0 . 6 4 0 0.101 ? qn 0 n c 7-3 n n n n c* 125 Table 4 . 1 0 . --C o n tin u e d . No. Mean Std. Dev. Std. Error TValue 2-Tail Prob. B e l i e f in Community C o l l e q e PhilosoDhv Po st- 197 4 p r e s i d e n t s P os t-1 97 4 CAO 22 41 4.8636 4.5854 0.351 0.836 0.0 75 0.131 1.49 0. 14 2 A ttitude Pos t-1 974 p r e s i d e n t s Po st -1 9 74 CAO 22 40 4.863 6 4.700 0 0.351 0.648 0. 07 5 0.10 3 1.10 0. 2 7 8 A b i l i t y t o Work With Oth ers Po st -1 9 74 p r e s i d e n t s P os t-1 97 4 CAO 22 38 4.9091 4.8947 0.2 94 0.311 0.06 3 0.05 0 0.18 0.861 ♦ S i g n i f i c a n t a t t h e .02 l e v e l . D octorate. Using t h e t - t e s t , statistically significant im p or ta nc e of the presidents employed b e f o r e .5 52, which sig n ifican ce. difference doctorate exc e ed ed See the i t was found t h a t between 1974. .05 Appendix in the chief perceptions academic The t w o - t a i l e d level established I , Table t h e r e was no 55, of the officers and p r o b a b i l i t y was for fo rthe statistical im portance ( f r e q u e n c y and p e r c e n t a g e ) o f t h i s f a c t o r i n t h e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s . With the t-te st it statistically significant im por tan ce of the presidents employed a f t e r .3 36, which was difference doctorate ex ce ede d the al so between 1974. .05 The level found in the chief that th ere perceptions academic tw o-tailed established was no of the officers and p r o b a b i l i t y was for statistical 126 sig n ifican ce. See A p p e n d i x I, T able 65, fo r the im portance ( f r e q u e n c y and p e r c e n t a g e ) o f t h i s f a c t o r in t h e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s . M aster’s . statistically Using t h e t - t e s t , significant it difference im po rta nce o f t h e m a s t e r ’ s d e g r e e which exceeded sig n ifican ce. the the perceptions of the The t w o - t a i l e d p r o b a b i l i t y was .05 l e v e l See A p p e n d i x in t h e r e was no between c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s and p r e s i d e n t s employed b e f o r e 1974. .1 20 , was found t h a t established I, T able 66, for statistical fo r the im portance ( f r e q u e n c y and p e r c e n t a g e ) o f t h i s f a c t o r in t h e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s . With the statistically t-test it significant was a l so difference im po rta nce o f t h e m a s t e r ’ s d e g r e e found in the th at was perceptions between c h i e f and p r e s i d e n t s employed a f t e r 1974. there of a the academic o f f i c e r s The t w o - t a i l e d p r o b a b i l i t y was .0 00, which was l e s s th a n t h e .05 l e v e l e s t a b l i s h e d f o r s t a t i s t i c a l s i g n i f i c a n c e between two g r o u p s . im portance (frequency selection process. it and See Appendix I , Tabl e 66, f o r t h e percentage) th is factor in the P r e s i d e n t s employed a f t e r 1974 p e r c e i v e d t h a t was s i g n i f i c a n t l y more i m p o r t a n t t h a t have a m a s t e r ’ s d e g r e e t h a n d i d a f t e r 1974. of chief None o f t h e p r e s i d e n t s a chief academic academic o f f i c e r officers employed 1 i s t e d t h e m a s t e r ’ s d e g r e e as n o t i m p o r t a n t , compared t o 24% o f t h e c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s . Ma.ior d i s c i p l i n e a r e a o f m a s t e r ’ s o r d o c t o r a t e d e g r e e . Using the t - t e s t , i t was found t h a t t h e r e was no s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t difference in discipline academic the perceptions of the im po rt an ce of area o f the m a ste r’ s or d o c to ra te degree o fficers and presidents employed before the major between c h i e f 1974. The 127 tw o-tailed probability was established fo r s t a t i s t i c a l .58 4, which exceeded significance. the .05 level See Appendix I , T a b l e 67, f o r t h e im p o r t a n c e ( f r e q u e n c y and p e r c e n t a g e ) o f t h i s f a c t o r in t h e selectio n process. With the statistic ally t-te st it significant was also found difference in the that there perceptions was no of the im p o r t a n c e o f t h e m a jo r d i s c i p l i n e a r e a o f t h e m a s t e r ’ s o r d o c t o r a t e d e g r e e between c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s and p r e s i d e n t s employed a f t e r 1974. The t w o - t a i l e d p r o b a b i l i t y was .203, which exceeded t h e level established Ta b l e 67, for for the statistical im p o r ta n c e significance. (frequency and .05 See Appendix percentage) of I, this f a c t o r in t h e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s . P u b l i c sc h o o l teaching ex p erien ce. found t h a t t h e r e was no s t a t i s t i c a l l y perceptions of the Using t h e t - t e s t , it was s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e in t h e im p o r ta n c e o f p u b l i c school teaching experience between c h i e f aca dem ic o f f i c e r s and p r e s i d e n t s employed b e f o r e 1974. The t w o - t a i l e d p r o b a b i l i t y was established for s t a t i s t i c a l .1 19 , which exceeded t h e significance. .05 level See Appendix I , T a b l e 68, f o r t h e im p o r t a n c e ( f r e q u e n c y and p e r c e n t a g e ) o f t h i s f a c t o r in t h e selection process. With the statistic ally t-te st it significant was difference im p o rtan ce o f p u b li c school academic presidents tailed officers and p robabi1ity was a l so found in the th at there perceptions teach in g experience .657, employed w hi ch was after exceeded of between 1974. the The .05 no the chief two1e v e l 128 estab lish ed for s t a t i s t i c a l significance. See Appendix I , Ta b le 68, f o r t h e im p o rt a n c e ( f r e q u e n c y and p e r c e n t a g e ) o f t h i s f a c t o r in t h e se le c tio n process. Community c o l l e g e t e a c h i n g t-test, it was found t h a t t h e r e was no s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e in the perceptions of the experience. im p o r t a n c e of community e x p e r i e n c e between c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s b e f o r e 1974. the .05 The t w o - t a i l e d 1evel estab lish ed Using t h e teaching and p r e s i d e n t s employed p r o b a b i l i t y was for college statistic al .452, which exceeded sig n ifican ce. See Appendix I , Ta b le 69, f o r t h e impo rta nce ( f r e q u e n c y and p e r c e n t a g e ) o f t h i s f a c t o r in t h e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s . With the statistic ally im p o r ta n c e academic t a i 1 ed t-te st it significant was was estab lished for s t a t i s t i c a l in the th at there perceptions teaching experience and p r e s i d e n t s probabi1ity found difference o f community c o l l e g e officers a l so .209, employed w hi ch after exceeded significance. was no of the between 1974. the chief The .05 two1evel See Appendix I , Ta b le 69, f o r t h e im p o rt a n c e ( f r e q u e n c y and p e r c e n t a g e ) o f t h i s f a c t o r in t h e s e le c tio n process. A d m i n i s t r a t i v e e x p e r i e n c e o t h e r tha n community c o l l e g e . the t - t e s t , i t was found t h a t t h e r e was no s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t difference in t h e perceptions experience other than officers and of the community presidents p r o b a b i l i t y was .4 0 7, statistical Using employed impo rta nce o f a d m i n i s t r a t i v e college before which exceeded t h e significance. See Appendix between chief 1974. The .05 l e v e l I, academic tw o-tailed established Tabl e 70, for for the 129 im portance (frequency and percentage) of th is factor in the selec tio n process. With the t-test statistically it significant was al so difference found in the th a t there was perceptions of no the i m p o r ta n c e o f a d m i n i s t r a t i v e e x p e r i e n c e o t h e r th a n community c o l l e g e between c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s and p r e s i d e n t s employed a f t e r 1974. The t w o - t a i l e d p r o b a b i l i t y was established for s t a t i s t i c a l .2 7 0 , which exceeded t h e significance. .05 l e v e l See Appendix I , T ab l e 70, f o r t h e im p o r t a n c e ( f r e q u e n c y and p e r c e n t a g e ) o f t h i s f a c t o r in t h e se le c tio n process. P u b l i c sch ool adm inistrative experience. Using t h e t - t e s t , it was found t h a t t h e r e was no s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e in the perceptions of the im p o r t a n c e o f p u b l i c e x p e r i e n c e between c h i e f before the 1974. .05 academic o f f i c e r s The t w o - t a i l e d 1e v e l e s t a b l i s h e d adm inistrative and p r e s i d e n t s p r o b a b i l i t y was for school s t a t i s t i cal .2 31, employed which exceeded sig n ifican ce. Appendix I , T a b l e 71, f o r t h e im p or ta n ce ( f r e q u e n c y See and p e r c e n t a g e ) o f t h i s f a c t o r in the s e le c tio n process. With the statistically t-test it significant i m p o r ta n c e o f p u b l i c s ch o ol academic tailed officers was difference was established for s t a t i s t i c a l found t h a t in the there perceptions was no of the a d m i n i s t r a t i v e e x p e r i e n c e between c h i e f and p r e s i d e n t s p ro b ab i1ity a l so .501, employed w h ic h significance. after exceeded 1974. the The .05 two1e v e l See Appendix I , T a b l e 71, 130 f o r t h e im po rt an ce ( f r e q u e n c y and p e r c e n t a g e ) o f t h i s f a c t o r in t h e selectio n process. B usiness/industry ex p erien ce. that there was perceptions no Using t h e t - t e s t , statistically of the im portance significant of i t was found difference b u sin ess/in d u stry in the experience between c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s and p r e s i d e n t s employed b e f o r e 1974. The t w o - t a i l e d p r o b a b i l i t y was .;>30, which exceeded t h e established for s t a t i s t i c a l significance. .05 l e v e l See Appendix I , Ta b l e 72, f o r t h e im p or ta nc e ( f r e q u e n c y and p e r c e n t a g e ) o f t h i s f a c t o r in t h e selectio n process. With the t-test it was statistically significant im por tan ce business/industry o fficers of difference and p r e s i d e n t s p r o b a b i l i t y was .127, al so found in perceptions 1 974. .05 l e v e l statistical significance. See im portance (frequency percentage) there between after which exce eded t h e and the experience e m p lo y e d th at Appendix I, chief The of th is no the academic t w o - t a i 1 ed established Table of was 72, factor for for the in the selectio n process. Community c o l l e g e a d m i n i s t r a t i v e e x p e r i e n c e . i t was found t h a t t h e r e was no s t a t i s t i c a l l y in the percep tio n s adm inistrative presidents .48 8, which of experience employed before exceeded significance. the S ee the im portance between 1974. .05 Appendix The level I, sig n ifican t difference of chief Using t h e t - t e s t , c o m m u n it y academic tw o-tailed established Table 73, for col 1 ege o fficers and probability was for statistical the im portance ( f r e q u e n c y and p e r c e n t a g e ) o f t h i s f a c t o r in t h e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s . 131 With the t-test it was statistically significant im po r ta nc e community c o l l e g e of c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s tw o-tailed probability also difference found in established for s t a t i s t i c a l the .198, after exceeded significance. was of experience employed which th ere perceptions adm inistrative and p r e s i d e n t s was th at the between 1974. the no The .05 level See Appendix I , T a b l e 73, f o r t h e im po rta n ce ( f r e q u e n c y and p e r c e n t a g e ) o f t h i s f a c t o r in t h e se le c tio n process. Division/departm ent c h a ir ex p erien ce. Using t h e t - t e s t , i t was found t h a t t h e r e was no s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e i n t h e p erceptions of the im portance e x p e r i e n c e between c h i e f b e f o r e 1974. the .05 level of div isio n /d ep artm en t academic o f f i c e r s and p r e s i d e n t s The t w o - t a i l e d p r o b a b i l i t y was estab lish ed for sta tistic al .4 8 6 , chair employed which exc e ed ed sig n ifican ce. See Appendix I , Table 74, f o r t h e im po r ta nc e ( f r e q u e n c y and p e r c e n t a g e ) o f t h i s f a c t o r in t h e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s . With the t-test it was statistically significant impo rta nce division/departm ent of academic o f f i c e r s t a i 1ed difference and p r e s i d e n t s probabi1ity was established for s t a t i s t i c a l a l so .566, found in chair the significance. there was perceptions experience employed which th at after exceeded of between 1974. the The .05 no the chief two1evel See Appendix I , T a b l e 74, f o r t h e im p or ta nc e ( f r e q u e n c y and p e r c e n t a g e ) o f t h i s f a c t o r i n t h e selec tio n process. 132 A s s o c i a t e / a s s i s t a n t dean e x p e r i e n c e . Using t h e t - t e s t , i t was found t h a t t h e r e was no s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e in t h e p e r c e p t i o n s o f t h e im po r ta nc e o f a s s o c i a t e / a s s i s t a n t dean e x p e r i e n c e between c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s and p r e s i d e n t s employed b e f o r e 1974. The t w o - t a i l e d p r o b a b i l i t y was established for s t a t i s t i c a l .960, which exceeded t h e significance. .05 l e v e l See Appendix I , Ta b le 75, f o r t h e im po rta n ce ( f r e q u e n c y and p e r c e n t a g e ) o f t h i s f a c t o r in t h e se le c tio n process. With the statistically im p or ta nc e academic tailed t-test i t was significant of al so difference associate/assistant officers and p r e s i d e n t s p robabi1ity was in dean the th at w h ic h after was of between 1974. exceeded significance. there perceptions experience employed .073, established for s t a t i s t i c a l found the no the chief The .05 twolevel See Appendix I , Ta bl e 75, f o r t h e im po rta n ce ( f r e q u e n c y and p e r c e n t a g e ) o f t h i s f a c t o r in t h e se le c tio n process. Dean e x p e r i e n c e . no s t a t i s t i c a l l y Using t h e t - t e s t , s ig n ific a n t difference im po r ta nc e o f dean e x p e r i e n c e presidents employed .14 1, which S ee the .05 Appendix in t h e between b e f o r e 1974. exceeded sig n ifican ce. i t was found t h a t t h e r e was perceptions c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s The t w o - t a i l e d level I, of the established Table 76, for and p r o b a b i 1 i t y was for statistical the im portance ( f r e q u e n c y and p e r c e n t a g e ) o f t h i s f a c t o r in t h e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s . With the statistically t-test i t was significant al so difference im p or ta nc e o f dean e x p e r i e n c e found in the th at there perceptions was no of the between c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s and 133 presidents .528, employed which a f t e r 1974. exceeded sig n ifican ce. the .05 See A p p e n d i x The level I, tw o-tailed p ro b a b ility established for Table 76, was statistical fo r the im portance ( f r e q u e n c y and p e r c e n t a g e ) o f t h i s f a c t o r in t h e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s . V ice-president experience. Using t h e t - t e s t , i t was found t h a t t h e r e was no s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e in t h e p e r c e p t i o n s of the im portance academic o f f i c e r s tailed of v ice-p resid en t and p r e s i d e n t s probabi1ity employed b e f o r e was . 6 8 2 , established for s t a t i s t i c a l experience which significance. between 1974. chief The exceeded th e .05 two1e v e l See Appendix I , T a b l e 77, f o r t h e im p o r ta n c e ( f r e q u e n c y and p e r c e n t a g e ) o f t h i s f a c t o r in t h e selection' process. With the statistically t-test it significant was a l so difference found in th at the th ere perceptions was no of the im portance o f v i c e - p r e s i d e n t e x p e r ie n c e between c h i e f academ ic officers and p r e s i d e n t s em p lo y ed after p r o b a b i 1i t y was .899, which exceeded t h e statistical significance. See im portance (frequency percentage) and Appendix 1974. The .05 l e v e l I, of established Table th is t w o - t a i 1ed 77, factor for for the in the selectio n process. Noneducation e x p e r i e n c e . Using t h e t - t e s t , i t was found t h a t t h e r e was no s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e in t h e p e r c e p t i o n s o f t h e im p o r ta n ce o f n o n e d u c a ti o n e x p e r i e n c e between c h i e f academic officers and presidents employed before p r o b a b i l i t y was .3 34, which exceeded t h e 1974. .05 l e v e l The tw o-tailed established for 134 statistical significance. im portance (frequency See Appendix I, and p e r c e n t a g e ) Tabl e of th is 78, fo r the factor in th e selec tio n process. With the statistically im portance o fficers t-te st it significant of and was also found difference noneducation p resid en ts in the experience e m p lo y e d after significance. im portance (frequency See chief 1974. I, and p e r c e n t a g e ) was no of the academic The t w o - t a i l e d .05 l e v e l Appendix there perceptions between p r o b a b i l i t y was .3 3 6 , which exceeded t h e statistical th at established Ta b le of th is for 78, fo r the factor in t h e selec tio n process. Scholar!v activity--pub!ications. found t h a t t h e r e was a s t a t i s t i c a l l y perceptions of the im p o r ta n c e of Using the t-test, it sig n ifican t difference scholarly was in t h e activity--publications between c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s and p r e s i d e n t s employed b e f o r e 1974. The t w o - t a i l e d level probabi 1i t y established for presidents as im portant statistically academic tailed of t-te st it significant sch o larly officers before the .05 1974, whereas was o n ly 12.5% o f the i t was i m p o r t a n t and 50% (See Appendix I , T ab l e 7 9 . ) was a l so difference found in the that .478, employed w hi ch there perceptions activ ity --p u b l ications and p r e s i d e n t s p ro b ab ility th a n s i g n i f i c a n c e between two g r o u p s . in t h a t t i m e p e r i o d i n d i c a t e d the im portance which was l e s s (3 1 .6 % ) p e r c e i v e d s c h o l a r l y a c t i v i t y - - 1 i s t e d i t as n o t i m p o r t a n t . With .0 15, statistical C h ie f academic o f f i c e r s publications was after exceeded was no of the between 1974. the The .05 chief two1evel 135 established for s ta t is tic a l significance. See Appendix I , T ab l e 79, f o r t h e im p o r t a n c e ( f r e q u e n c y and p e r c e n t a g e ) o f t h i s f a c t o r in t h e se le c tio n process. O f f i c e s h e l d in s t a t e / n a t i o n a l o r g a n i z a t i o n . Using t h e t - t e s t , i t was found t h a t t h e r e was no s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e in the perceptions national the organizations presidents .752, of employed which sig n ifican ce. between before exceeded See impo rta nce the chief 1974. .05 Appendix of offices academic The t w o - t a i l e d level I, established Table held 80, for in state/ o fficers and probabi1it y was for statistical the im portance ( f r e q u e n c y and p e r c e n t a g e ) o f t h i s f a c t o r in t h e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s . With the t-test statistically it significant im p o r t a n c e o f o f f i c e s chief probabi1i t y al so difference held academic o f f i c e r s tw o-tailed was found in in s t a t e / n a t i o n a l and p r e s i d e n t s was established for s t a t i s t i c a l the .614, that th ere perceptions significance. of organizations employed a f t e r which was exceeded the between 1974. the no .05 The level See Appendix I , Ta bl e 80, f o r t h e im p o r ta n c e ( f r e q u e n c y and p e r c e n t a g e ) o f t h i s f a c t o r in t h e se le c tio n process. S o u r c e s - - h o w t h e c a n d i d a t e hea rd about t h e p o s i t i o n . t-test, it difference the was in candidate officers and found the that there perceptions heard about presidents the was of the a statistically im portance position--betw een employed before 1974. of Using t h e significant sources--how chief The p r o b a b i 1 i t y was .0 1 3, which was l e s s th a n t h e .05 l e v e l academic tw o-tailed e s ta b l ished 136 for s ta t is tic a l s i g n i f i c a n c e between two g r o u p s . Ta bl e 81, fo r the factor the s e le c tio n in im p o r t a n c e ( f r e q u e n c y and process. See Appendix percentage) The c h i e f of academic I, this officers (36.9%) employed b e f o r e 1974 p e r c e i v e d how t h e c a n d i d a t e l e a r n e d o f the p o sitio n op en i n g a s indicated th i s With w h er ea s none o f t h e presidents f a c t o r was i m p o r t a n t in t h e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s . thet - t e s t statistically im portant, it was significant a l so found difference th at in t h e there perceptions was no of the im p or ta nc e o f s o u r c e s - - h o w t h e c a n d i d a t e h e a r d a b o u t t h e p o s i t i o n - between c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s and p r e s i d e n t s employed a f t e r 1974. The t w o - t a i l e d p r o b a b i l i t y was established for s t a t i s t i c a l .7 77 , which exceed ed t h e significance. .05 l e v e l See Appendix I , Ta bl e 81, f o r t h e im p or ta n ce ( f r e q u e n c y and p e r c e n t a g e ) o f t h i s f a c t o r in t h e selec tio n process. Internal c a n d id a te . Using t h e t - t e s t , i t was found t h a t t h e r e was a s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e in t h e p e r c e p t i o n s o f t h e im p or ta nc e o f i n t e r n a l c a n d i d a t e between c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s and presidents employed before 1974. .002 which was l e s s t h a n t h e The t w o - t a i l e d p r o b a b i l i t y was .05 l e v e l e s t a b l i s h e d f o r s t a t i s t i c a l s i g n i f i c a n c e between two g r o u p s . F ifty percent of the employed b e f o r e 1974 1 i s t e d w h e t h e r t h e c a n d i d a t e was n o t i m p o r t a n t (12.6% 1 i s t e d the chief academic officers 1i s t e d i t as i m p o r t a n t ) . With the statistically it t-te st significant internal as as i m p o r t a n t ) , compared t o 10.5% o f 1is tin g i t as (See Appendix I , it presidents was al so difference not i m p o r t a n t (36.9% Ta b l e 8 2 . ) found in th e th at th ere was no perceptions of the 137 i m p o r ta n c e o f i n t e r n a l c a n d i d a t e between c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s and presidents .27 0, employed which after ex ce ede d sig n ifican ce. S ee 1974. the .05 The level Appendix I, tw o-tailed probability established Table 82, for was for statistical the im portance ( f r e q u e n c y and p e r c e n t a g e ) o f t h i s f a c t o r in t h e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s . External c a n d i d a te . was no s t a t i s t i c a l l y Using t h e t - t e s t , i t was found t h a t t h e r e sig n ifican t difference in the perceptions of t h e i m p o r ta n c e o f e x t e r n a l c a n d i d a t e between c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s and p r e s i d e n t s employed b e f o r e 1974. .1 20, which ex ce ede d sig n ifican ce. See the .05 The t w o - t a i l e d p r o b a b i l i t y was level Appendix I, established Table 83, for for statistical the im portance ( f r e q u e n c y and p e r c e n t a g e ) o f t h i s f a c t o r in t h e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s . With the t-test statistic ally it significant was a l so difference found in th a t th ere the was no of the perceptions im p o rt a n c e o f e x t e r n a l c a n d i d a t e between c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s and presidents .726, employed which after ex ce ede d sig n ifican ce. S ee the 1974. .05 Appendix The level I, tw o-tailed established Table 83, for probability was for statistical the im portance ( f r e q u e n c y and p e r c e n t a g e ) o f t h i s f a c t o r in t h e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s . Age.Using the t-test, it was statistically significant difference im p o r ta n c e o f age chief employed b e f o r e excee ded the between 1974. .05 level found that in the academic The t w o - t a i l e d established there no of the perceptions o f f i c e r s and probability for was was statistical presidents .4 9 7 , which significance. 138 See A p p e n d i x I, Table 84, for the im portance (frequency and p e r c e n t a g e ) o f t h i s f a c t o r in t h e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s . With the statistically imp ort anc e t-test it significant of employed a f t e r age between 1974. was al so found difference chief in t h e academic The t w o - t a i l e d th at th ere was perceptions of officers probability exceeded t h e .05 l e v e l e s t a b l i s h e d f o r s t a t i s t i c a l and was no the presidents .373, w hich s i g n i f i c a n c e . See Appendix I , T ab l e 84, f o r t h e im po rta nce ( f r e q u e n c y and p e r c e n t a g e ) o f t h i s f a c t o r in t h e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s . Gen der . statistically Using the significant t-test, it was found difference th at in t h e perceptions of impo rta nce o f g e n d e r between c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s employed b e f o r e 1974. The t w o - t a i l e d probability exceeded t h e .05 l e v e l e s t a b l is h e d f o r s t a t i s t i c a l t h e r e was no the and p r e s i d e n t s was .518, which significance. See Appendix I , Ta bl e 85, f o r t h e im por tan ce ( f r e q u e n c y and p e r c e n t a g e ) o f t h i s f a c t o r in t h e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s . With t h e t - t e s t it was a l s o found t h a t t h e r e was a s t a t i s t i - c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e in t h e p e r c e p t i o n s o f t h e i m p o r t a n c e o f ge n d er between c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s and p r e s i d e n t s employed a f t e r 1974. .05 The t w o - t a i l e d p r o b a b i l i t y was .0 1 1, which was l e s s t h a n t h e level g ro u p s . established Presidents for statistical employed after significance 1974 d i d n o t 1i s t between two gender as i m p o r t a n t , whereas 7.1% o f t h e c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s d i d i n d i c a t e i t was i m p o r t a n t in t h e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s . 36% o f the presidents 1isted this Response in t h e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s . factor I t mi gh t be n o t e d t h a t as Does Not Apply/No (See Appendix I , Ta b le 8 5 . ) 139 Ra ce. Using statistically the t-test, significant im p o rt an ce o f r a c e it was difference found in that the there perceptions between c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s employed b e f o r e 1974. was the and p r e s i d e n t s The t w o - t a i l e d p r o b a b i l i t y was excee ded t h e .05 l e v e l e s t a b l i s h e d f o r s t a t i s t i c a l of no .1 19, which s i g n i f i c a n c e . See Appendix I , T ab l e 85, f o r t h e impo rta nce ( f r e q u e n c y and p e r c e n t a g e ) o f t h i s f a c t o r in t h e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s . With the statistically t-te st between the .05 a l so difference found in th at the there was perceptions between c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s employed a f t e r 1974. than was significant im p o r ta n c e o f r a c e less it of no the and p r e s i d e n t s The t w o - t a i l e d p r o b a b i l i t y was .0 36 , which was level two g r o u p s . established for N in e t y - t w o p e r c e n t statistical of the significance presidents p o s t - 1 9 7 4 ti m e p e r i o d i n d i c a t e d t h a t t h i s f a c t o r was n o t o r Does Not Apply in t h e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s . in the important (See Appendix I , Ta bl e 86.) M arried. Using t h e t-test, statistically significant im po r ta nc e of be i n g presidents employed .2 26 , which exceeded sig n ifican ce. S ee difference married before the it between 1974. .05 Appendix in found the chief that 87, for was no of the officers and probability was academic established Table there perceptions The t w o - t a i l e d level I, was for statistical the im portance ( f r e q u e n c y and p e r c e n t a g e ) o f t h i s f a c t o r in t h e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s . With the statistically t-test it significant was also difference found in the th at there perceptions was of a the 140 im po rta n ce of b ei ng m a r r i e d between presidents employed a f t e r 1974. chief The academic o f f i c e r s and tw o-tailed p ro b ab ility was .0 16, which was l e s s t h a n t h e .05 l e v e l e s t a b l i s h e d f o r s t a t i s t i c a l sig n ifican ce presidents was not between groups. percent o r Does Not Apply/No Response in t h e of the factor selection (See Appendix I , Table 8 7 . ) Single. Using statistically the t-test, of presidents employed b e f o r e 1974. which it was s ig n ific a n t difference im por tan ce .6 50 , N inety-tw o i n t h e p o s t - 1 9 7 4 time p e r i o d i n d i c a t e d t h a t t h i s important process. two be in g s i n g l e between exceeded sig n ifican ce. See the .05 Appendix in that the perceptions of the academic o f f i c e r s and tw o-tailed p ro b ab ility was chief The level I, found established Table 88, for there was no for statistical the im portance ( f r e q u e n c y and p e r c e n t a g e ) o f t h i s f a c t o r in t h e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s . With the statistically t-test it was of presidents employed a f t e r 1974. which found s ig n ific a n t difference i m por tan ce .9 05 , al so be in g excee ded sig n ifican ce. s i n g l e between the .05 See A p p e n d i x in level was no the academic o f f i c e r s and tw o-tailed p ro b ab ility was established Table there perceptions of chief The I, the th at 88, for for statistical the im portance ( f r e q u e n c y and p e r c e n t a g e ) o f t h i s f a c t o r in t h e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s . Divorced. statistically Using t h e t - t e s t , s ig n ific a n t difference i m por tan ce of presidents employed b e f o r e 1974. .7 99 , which i t was found t h a t be in g d i v o r c e d between excee ded the .05 in the level no perceptions of the academic o f f i c e r s and tw o-tailed p ro b a b ility was chief The t h e r e was established for statistical 141 sig n ifican ce. See Appendix I, Table 89, for the im portance ( f r e q u e n c y and p e r c e n t a g e ) o f t h i s f a c t o r in t h e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s . W it h the statistically t-test al so f o u n d s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e in im p o r t a n c e of presidents employed .3 3 6 , i t was which being divorced sig n ifican ce. See the there perceptions was no of the between c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s and a f t e r 1974. exc e ed ed the th at .05 The level Appendix I, tw o-tailed established Table 89, for p r o b a b i l i t y was for statistical the im portance ( f r e q u e n c y and p e r c e n t a g e ) o f t h i s f a c t o r in t h e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s . C hildren. statistically Using t h e t - t e s t , s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e in importance o f having c h i ld r e n presidents employed b e f o r e .4 5 2 , i t was found t h a t which exc e ed ed sig n ifican ce . See the between 1974. .05 I, perceptions c h i e f academic The t w o - t a i l e d level Appendix the t h e r e was no established Table 90, for of the o f f i c e r s and probability was for statistical the im portance ( f r e q u e n c y and p e r c e n t a g e ) o f t h i s f a c t o r in t h e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s . With the statistically t-te st i t was s ig n ific a n t difference i m p o r ta n c e o f having c h i ld r e n presidents employed .2 0 6 , which al so f o u n d exc e ed ed sig n ifican ce. See between a f t e r 1974. the .05 Appendix The level I, in the th at there perceptions c h i e f academic tw o-tailed established Table 90, for was no of the o f f i c e r s and p r o b a b i l i t y was for statistical the im portance ( f r e q u e n c y and p e r c e n t a g e ) o f t h i s f a c t o r in t h e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s . Communication sk ills. Using th e t-test, it was found that t h e r e was no s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e i n t h e p e r c e p t i o n s 142 of the i m p o r ta n c e officers and of communication presidents skills employed before p r c b a b i l i t y was .9 5 7, which ex ce ede d t h e statistical significance. im portance (frequency See and between chief 1974. The .05 l e v e l academic tw o-tailed established Table 91, for for Appendix I, the percentage) of th is factor in found th at there was no of the the s e le c tio n process. With the statistic ally t-test it significant im p o r t a n c e o f communication was a l so difference which exceeded sig n ifican ce. See the perceptions s k i l 1s between c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s and p r e s i d e n t s employed a f t e r 1974. .5 7 3 , in t h e .05 Appendix The t w o - t a i l e d p r o b a b i l i t y was level I, established for Table 91, for statistical the im portance ( f r e q u e n c y and p e r c e n t a g e ) o f t h i s f a c t o r in t h e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s . Leadership. statistic ally im portance presidents .7 9 6 , of Using t h e t - t e s t , significant leadership employed before which exce eded significance. See i t was found t h a t t h e r e was no difference in between chief 1974. t h e .05 Appendix the perceptions I, the o fficers and probability was academic The t w o - t a i l e d level of established for Table 92, for statistical the im portance ( f r e q u e n c y and p e r c e n t a g e ) o f t h i s f a c t o r in t h e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s . With the statistically im portance presidents .1 2 2 , of t-test it significant leadership employed which exceeded after was a l so found difference in between chief 1974. t h e .05 The level the th at there perceptions academic was of the offi cers and tw o-tailed p ro b ab ility established for no was statistical 143 significance. See Appendix I, Table 92, fo r the im portance ( f r e q u e n c y and p e r c e n t a g e ) o f t h i s f a c t o r in t h e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s . M aturity. statistically im portance .2 94 , m aturity employed which t-test, sig n ifican t of presidents Using t h e sig n ifican ce. See was found t h a t difference between before exceeded it .05 perceptions academic The t w o - t a i l e d level Appendix the chief 1974. the in I, t h e r e was no 93, the officers and probability was established for Table of fo r the statistical im portance ( f r e q u e n c y and p e r c e n t a g e ) o f t h i s f a c t o r in t h e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s . With the statistically im portance presidents t-te st it was sig n ifican t of m aturity employed difference between after 1974. .0 05 , which was l e s s t h a n t h e (frequency and found in the chief The that there was perceptions academic of officers tw o-tailed p ro b ab ility a the and was .05 l e v e l e s t a b l is h e d f o r s t a t i s t i c a l s i g n i f i c a n c e between two g r o u p s . im portance also See Appendix I , T a b l e 93, percentage) of th is factor fo r the in the selec tio n process. B e l i e f in community was found t h a t t h e r e was co lle g e philosophy. Using t h e t-test,it no s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e in t h e p e r c e p t i o n s o f t h e i m p o r t a n c e o f b e l i e f in t h e community c o l l e g e p h i l o s o p h y between c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s b e f o r e 1974. the .05 lev el and p r e s i d e n t s employed The t w o - t a i l e d p r o b a b i l i t y was estab lish ed for statistical .40 9, which ex ce ede d significance. See Appendix I , T a b l e 94, f o r t h e impo rta nce ( f r e q u e n c y and p e r c e n t a g e ) o f t h i s f a c t o r in th e s e l e c t i o n process. 144 With the t-test it statistically significant im p o r ta n c e belief of in probability also fo u n d difference the c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s tw o-tailed was in established for s ta t i s t i c a l the .1 42, significance. was of philosophy employed which there perceptions community c o l l e g e and p r e s i d e n t s was that after exceeded the between 1974. the no The .0 5 level See Appendix I , T a b l e 94, f o r t h e im p o r ta n c e ( f r e q u e n c y and p e r c e n t a g e ) o f t h i s f a c t o r in t h e selectio n process. A ttitude. statistically im portance significant of presidents .8 60 , Using t h e t - t e s t , a t t i tude employed which before exceeded sig n ifican ce. the it difference between 1974. .05 See A p p e n d i x was in chi e f found t h a t the perceptions ac a d e m i c The t w o - t a i l e d level I, established Table 95, th ere for was no of the o ffi cers and probability was for statistical the im portance ( f r e q u e n c y and p e r c e n t a g e ) o f t h i s f a c t o r in t h e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s . With the statistically im portance presidents .2 78, which t-test it significant of a t t i tude employed exceeded sig n ifican ce. after the was al so difference between 1974. .05 See A p p e n d i x in chi e f The level I, found the th at was no of the o ffi cers and probability was perceptions ac a d e m i c tw o-tailed established Table there 95, for for statistical the im portance ( f r e q u e n c y and p e r c e n t a g e ) o f t h i s f a c t o r i n t h e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s . A b i l i t y t o work w i t h o t h e r s . that there was no statistically Using t h e t - t e s t , significant it was found difference in the 145 p e r c e p t i o n s o f t h e im p o r t a n c e o f a b i l i t y t o work w i t h o t h e r s between c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s and p r e s i d e n t s tw o-tailed was .091, probability established for s t a t i s t i c a l employed b e f o r e which exceeded significance. 1974. the .05 The level See Appendix I , T a b l e 96, f o r t h e im p o r ta n ce ( f r e q u e n c y and p e r c e n t a g e ) o f t h i s f a c t o r in t h e selec tio n process. With the statistically im p o r ta n c e o ffi cers t-test it significant of a b ility and was also difference found in th a t th ere the to work w ith others presid en ts employed after significance. im portance (frequency See between 1974. Appendix and p e r c e n t a g e ) I, of no of the perceptions chief The p r o b a b i l i t y was .8 61, which exceeded t h e .05 l e v e l statistical was t w o - t a i 1 ed established Table th is academic 96, for for the in the factor selec tio n process. Summary o f f i n d i n g s c o n c e r n i n g t h e i m p o r t a n c e o f f a c t o r s in t h e selection process as perceived bv chief academic officers p r e s i d e n t s employed b e f o r e 1974 a t p u b l i c community c o l l e g e s . and Those f a c t o r s t h a t 50% o r more o f t h e 23 c h i e f aca demic o f f i c e r s and t h e 23 to public c o m m u n it y c o l 1ege presidents who responded q u e s t i o n n a i r e and were employed b e f o r e 1974 p e r c e i v e d a s i n t h e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s we re: the im portant 146 C h ief Academic O f f i c e r s P r e s id e n ts 94.7% 94.7% 94.7% Communication s k i l l s L e a d e r s h ip A ttitude A b i l i t y t o work w ith others M aturity B e l i e f in community c o lle g e philosophy L e a d e r s h ip B e l i e f in community c o lle g e philosophy A ttitude A b i l i t y t o work w it h others M aturity Communication s k i l l s M aster’s degree Community c o l l e g e t e a c h ­ ing e x p e r i e n c e A ssistant/associate dean e x p e r i e n c e Dean e x p e r i e n c e Doctorate 94.7% 89.5% 84.2% 87.5% 87.5% 87.5% 81.3% 81.3% 81.3% 75.0% 68.8% 56.3% 50.0% 50.0% In i d e n t i f y i n g t h e s e key f a c t o r s in t h e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s , the f i r s t s i x f a c t o r s were t h e same in both grou ps b u t n o t in i d e n t i c a l order. I t sh oul d be n o t e d t h a t ou t o f t h e 32 f a c t o r s , chief academic o f f i c e r s co u l d o nl y identify/agree on 50% o f t h e six factors t h e y th o u g h t were ve ry im p o r t a n t in t h e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s . nine of 32 significant chief factors were differences between academic o f f i c e r s before 1974. The identified the as showing perceptions and community c o l l e g e three factors that were no of Twenty- statistically im p o r ta n c e presidents identified by employed as bei ng a c t i v i t y - - p u b l i c a t i o n s - - 3 1 .6% o f t h e chief s t a t i s t i c a l l y d i f f e r e n t were: 1. demic Scholarly officers activity was who were im p o r t a n t employed and before 42.1% t h o u g h t 1974 it thought was not scholarly im portant, compared t o 12.5% o f t h e community c o l l e g e p r e s i d e n t s 1 i s t i n g i t as important and 50% s t a t i n g it was unimportant. Chief academic o f f i c e r s b e l i e v i n g t h i s f a c t o r was im p o r t a n t may have p l a c e d more o f aca­ 147 an emphasis on i t t h a n p r e s i d e n t s when s e l e c t i n g a c a n d i d a t e f o r t h e position. 2. Source--how t h e c a n d i d a t e l e a r n e d o f t h e p o s i t i o n v a c a n c y - - 36.9% o f the chief academic officers thought l e a r n e d o f an open p o s i t i o n was i m p o r t a n t , community college presidents. how an individual compared t o none o f t h e Presidents employed before 1974 t h o u g h t i t was o f no co n se qu en ce , and y e t 36.9% o f t h o s e c a n d i d a t e s for chief academic officer th o u g h t it s e l e c t e d how one h e a r d abo ut t h e j o b . questionnaire as publication, from t h e i n s t i t u t i o n , internal was in So u rc es were 1 i s t e d n o m i n a ti o n , porting, c a n d i d a t e who knew someone a t t h e important word external institution, of on t h e mouth, posting, be in g contact external and en co ur ag ed to app ly f o r t h e p o s i t i o n by someone from t h e i n s t i t u t i o n . 3. Internal candidate--36.9% of the chief academic officers t h o u g h t t h i s was an i m p o r t a n t f a c t o r , w i t h 10.5% o f them 1 i s t i n g i t as u n i m p o r t a n t ; conversely, 12.6% o f t h e im p o r t a n t , w ith 50% s t a t i n g process. Pre-1974 c a n d i d a t e s o f f i c e r th o u g h t t h a t presidents i t was n o t i m p o r t a n t fo r the position bei ng an i n t e r n a l 1isted in t h e of chief c a n d i d a t e was it as selection academic important in t h e i r s e l e c t i o n as c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s . These t h r e e f a c t o r s in a s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s would n o t have been viewed in t h e same way by t h e c a n d i d a t e and t h e p r e s i d e n t do in g t h e hiring, and t h u s t h e d e c i s i o n may have been i n f l u e n c e d w i t h o u t t h e candidate’s rea liz in g i t . Three of the 32 factors showed a statistically d i f f e r e n c e , b u t t h e p r ep o n d er an c e o f t h e f a c t o r s d i d n o t . significant Thus, t h e 148 decision affected. concerning the acceptability The h y p o t h e s i s tested of and t h e the hypothesis decision was not concerning its a c c e p t a b i l i t y ba se d on t h e r e s u l t s o f t h e a n a l y s e s o f d a t a g a t h e r e d in t h i s s t u d y w e r e : Hypothesis 3 : There w i l l be no s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e (p < .05) in t h e f a c t o r s t h a t i n f l u e n c e d t h e s e l e c t i o n o f c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s as p e r c e i v e d by community c o l l e g e p r e s i d e n t s employed pr e-1974 and by c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s employed p r e - 1 9 7 4 . Decision: Do n o t r e j e c t t h e n u l l hypothesis. As a r e s u l t o f not r e j e c t i n g t h e n u l l h y p o t h e s i s ( t h e r e i s no s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t difference in the factors), the research hypothesis (there is a s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e in t h e f a c t o r s ) was r e j e c t e d . Summary o f f i n d i n g s c o n c e r n in g t h e im p o r ta n ce o f f a c t o r s in t h e selection process as perceived bv chief academic officers p r e s i d e n t s employed a f t e r 1974 a t p u b l i c community c o l l e g e s . and Those f a c t o r s t h a t 50% o r more o f t h e 42 c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s and t h e 33 to public c o m m u n it y q u estio n n aire and c o l 1e g e who w e r e presidents em p lo y ed who after responded 1974 the perceived as i m p o r t a n t in t h e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s were: C h i e f Academic O f f i c e r s Communication s k i l l s Leadership A b i l i t y t o work w i t h others M aturity B e l i e f in community c o lle g e philosophy A ttitude Community c o l l e g e t e a c h ­ ing e x p e r i e n c e Dean e x p e r i e n c e D octorate Presidents 95.2% 95.2% 90.5% 88.1% 88.1% 78.6% 59.5% 57.1% 54.8% Communication s k i l l s B e l i e f i n community co llege philosophy Lea d ers hi p A ttitude A b i l i t y t o work w it h others Community c o l l e g e admin­ i s t r a t i v e experience M a tu r i ty D o c to r a t e Master’s degree 92.0% 88.6% 88.0% 88.0% 88.0% 88.0% 84.0% 80.0% 80.0% 149 C h ief Academic O f f i c e r s D epartm ent/division c h a ir experience Community c o l l e g e admin­ i s t r a t i v e experience Twenty-seven 32 Dean e x p e r i e n c e Community c o l l e g e t e a c h ing e x p e r i e n c e A s s i s t a n t / a s s o c i a t e dean experience Division/department ch a ir experience 54.8% 52.4% were 64.0% 56.0% the perceptions of im po rta n ce in t h e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s by c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s and differences i d e n t i f i e d as 64.0% no significant factors 72.0% showing statistically of P r e sid e n ts between p u b l i c community c o l l e g e p r e s i d e n t s employed a f t e r 1974. The f i v e f a c t o r s showing s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s were: 1. to the Having a m a s t e r ’ s d e g r ee -- 8 0% o f t h e p r e s i d e n t s r e s p o n d in g questionnaire none 1 i s t e d it as n o t academic o f f i c e r s thought a m a s t e r ’ s d e g r e e was im portant, 1i s t i n g it important compared w it h 45.2% o f t h e as im p o r ta n t and 42.9% s t a t i n g and chief i t was not important. 2. in the compared G en der -- no ne o f t h e p r e s i d e n t s 1 i s t e d g en d er as i m p o r t a n t selection to 7.1% process of the and 64% s t a t e d chief academic it was n o t important, o f f i c e r s 1i s t i n g it as i m p o r t a n t and 78.6% 1 i s t i n g i t as n o t i m p o r t a n t . 3. of the Being m a r r i e d - - 4 . 8 % o f t h e c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s presidents stated being m a rr i e d compared t o 60% o f t h e p r e s i d e n t s was an important and 4% factor, and 76.2% o f t h e c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s s t a t i n g i t was n o t i m p o r t a n t . 4. R a c e - -92% o f t h e p r e s i d e n t s l i s t e d r a c e as b ei ng n o t impor­ t a n t o r Does Not Apply i n t h e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s , compared t o 88.1% 150 of the c h i e f aca dem ic o f f i c e r s . Only 4.8% o f t h e chief academic o f f i c e r s and 4% o f t h e p r e s i d e n t s p e r c e i v e d i t as i m p o r t a n t . rity 5. M a t u r i t y - - 8 8 . 1 % o f t h e c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s 1 i s t e d matu­ as i m p o r t a n t and 7.1% s a i d 88% o f t h e p r e s i d e n t s 1 i s t e d i t was n o t i m p o r t a n t ; conversely, i t as i m p o r t a n t and none s a i d it was show the not im portant. When dealing with these factors, the percentages c a n d i d a t e f o r t h e c h i e f academic o f f i c e r and t h e p r e s i d e n t d o in g t h e h i r i n g f o r t h e p o s i t i o n would have viewed t h e s e f a c t o r s d i f f e r e n t l y . Only t h e f a c t o r o f h a v i n g a m a s t e r ’ s d e g r e e was p e r c e i v e d t o be an im portant f a c t o r in the s e le c tio n process. Five of the 32 factors showed a statistically significant d i f f e r e n c e , but th e preponderance of the f a c t o r s did not. decision affected. concerning the The h y p o t h e s i s acceptability tested of and t h e the Thus, t h e hypothesis decision was no t concerning its a c c e p t a b i l i t y b a s e d on t h e r e s u l t s o f t h e a n a l y s e s o f d a t a g a t h e r e d in t h i s s t u d y we re: Hypothesis 4 : T he r e w i l l be no s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e (p < .0 5 ) in t h e f a c t o r s t h a t i n f l u e n c e d t h e s e l e c t i o n o f c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s as p e r c e i v e d by community c o l l e g e p r e s i d e n t s employed p o s t- 1 9 7 4 and by c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s employed p o s t - 1 9 7 4 . Decision: Do n o t r e j e c t t h e n u l l hypothesis. As a r e s u l t o f not r e j e c t i n g t h e n u l l h y p o t h e s i s ( t h e r e i s no s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t difference in the factors), the research hypothesis (there is s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e in t h e f a c t o r s ) was r e j e c t e d . a 151 C a r e e r P at h s o f C h i e f Academic O f f i c e r s Th is s e c t i o n o f t h e q u e s t i o n n a i r e was d e s i g n e d t o examine t h e c a r e e r p a t h s t h a t c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s employed b e f o r e 1974 and those employed after chief academic officer Seven career in d iv id u al models was 1974 f o l 1 owed t o in were asked a Michigan 1i s t e d to arrive on in d icate public the the individual the position community model most of college. questionnaire, which re fle c te d his or her ca re e r experiences. applicable, at and each accurately I f none o f t h e models was was d i r e c t e d t o 1i s t his or her career p o s i t i o n s in t h e s pa ce p r o v i d e d . As seen in Ta b l e 4 . 1 1 , diverse career patterns (1986) s t u d y . of positions colleges. the models were d e v e l o p e d and were p a t t e r n e d after to those reflect in Arman’ s I t was n e c e s s a r y t o use models b e c a u s e o f t h e number t h a t go by s e v e r a l Thus, if all the different respondents titles had a t the d if f e r e n t listed th eir career p o s i t i o n s , i t would have been d i f f i c u l t t o c a t e g o r i z e them. In t h e gr oup o f c h i e f aca demic o f f i c e r s employed b e f o r e 1974, 19 i n d i v i d u a l s re s p o n d ed t o t h e q u e s t i o n n a i r e by c i r c l i n g models and 2 1is te d variations un d e r the comments section. In employed a f t e r 1974, 42 r e s p o n d e d t o t h e q u e s t i o n n a i r e the group by c i r c l i n g model s . Summary of findings concerning the academic o f f i c e r s . The p u r p o s e o f t h i s clarify paths the career most commonly career paths of chief s e c t i o n was t o examine and taken by chief academic o f f i c e r s employed a f t e r 1974 a t Michigan p u b l i c community c o l l e g e s so as to be able to dissem inate this inform ation to graduate 152 T a b le 4 . 1 1 . - - C a r e e r p a th models (N = 6 3 ) . C a r e e r Model Pre-1974 Respondents N % P o s t- 1 9 7 4 Respon den ts N % Model A Dean o r V i c e - P r e s i d e n t Department o r D i v i s i o n C h a i r F ul l-T im e F a c u l t y 3 14. 3 20 47.6 Model B Dean o r V i c e - P r e s i d e n t Mid-Level A d m i n i s t r a t i v e P o s i t i o n E nt r y- L ev el A d m i n i s t r a t i v e P o s i t i o n 2 9.5 7 16. 7 Model C Dean o r V i c e - P r e s i d e n t F u ll- T im e Work O u t s i d e o f Education 1 4.8 1 2.4 Model D Dean o r V i c e - P r e s i d e n t F ull -T im e F a c u l t y in Community C o ll e g e F ul l-T im e F a c u l t y in K-12 S e t t i n g 4 1 9 .0 6 1 4 .3 Model E Dean or V i c e - P r e s i d e n t F ull -T im e F a c u l t y in Community C o ll e g e 4 19 .0 2 4.8 Model F Dean o r V i c e - P r e s i d e n t F a c u l t y in Community C o ll e g e F ull -T im e Work O u t s i d e o f Education 1 4.8 2 4.8 Model G Dean in C o l l e g e o r V i c e - P r e s i d e n t F a c u l t y a n d / o r S u p e r i n t e n d e n t in K-12 S e t t i n g Faculty or A d m inistrative Positions in K-12 S e t t i n g 4 1 9 .0 4 9.5 Comments 2 9.5 Total 21 aT o t a l s do n o t equa l 100% due t o r o u n d i n g . 9 9.9a 42 1 0 0 . 1 a 153 programs and i n d i v i d u a l s who may have t h e p o s i t i o n as a c a r e e r g o a l . career those paths of chief employed after chief academic A s e c o n d a ry f o c u s was t o academic 1974, officers thus employed determining compare t h e before w h e th e r o fficer a 1974 trend to was v i s i b l e t h a t co ul d be p r o j e c t e d t o t h e n e x t d e c a d e . The d a t a r e p o r t e d in t h i s s e c t i o n i n d i c a t e d t h a t o f t h o s e c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s employed b e f o r e 1974, 71.3% s t a r t e d t h e i r c a r e e r s as t e a c h e r s / f a c u l t y - -33.3% as t e a c h e r s in a K-12 s e t t i n g . faculty in a college and 38% as These numbers changed in t h e p o s t - 1 9 7 4 gro up, with 52.3% o f t h e c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s s t a r t i n g as c o l l e g e f a c u l t y and 23.8% as t e a c h e r s in a K-12 s e t t i n g , b r i n g i n g t o 76.1% t h e t o t a l p e r c e n t a g e o f c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s s t a r t i n g as f a c u l t y or teachers. The t r e n d seems t o be away from t e a c h i n g in a K-12 s e t t i n g (38% pr e- 1 97 4 t o 23.8% p o s t - 1 9 7 4 ) t o t h a t o f s t a r t i n g as a f a c u l t y member in a c o l l e g e (33.3% p r e- 1 97 4 t o 52.3% p o s t - 1 9 7 4 ) . change was in t h e p e r c e n t a g e o f i n d i v i d u a l s A no th er d e f i n i t e starting a t an e n t r y - level ad m in istrativ e p o s itio n : In t h e p re - 1 9 7 4 g r o u p , 9.5% s t a r t e d t h e i r c a r e e r s a t an e n t r y - l e v e l position, group 16. 7%. thi s respondents, figure it has was up been to taking more w hereas in t h e p o s t - 1 9 7 4 Al s o , career a c c o r d i ng positions to to the reach academic o f f i c e r a f t e r 1974 th a n i t d i d b e f o r e 1974. In t h e p r e - 1974 gr ou p, to 19% o f t h e vice-president, contrast, r e s p o n d e n t s went from f a c u l t y dean compared t o 4.8% o f t h o s e employed a f t e r 1974. i n t h e pr e-1 974 gr o u p , 14.3% were f a c u l t y , or In department or 154 division ch air, and th e n dean o r v i c e - p r e s i d e n t ; in t h e after-1974 gr o u p , 47.6% to o k t h i s p a t h . Given t h a t t h e d a t a were nominal and t h a t t h e r e were small c e l l s i z e s in t h e s t a t i s t i c a l d a t a , t h e r e was n o t a s t a t i s t i c a l t e s t t h a t co ul d be u s e d . The c h i-s q u a re t e s t re q u ire s t h a t th e expected fre q u e n c ie s in each c e l l sh ould n o t be t o o s m a l l . When t h i s requirem ent is v io la te d , the r e s u l t s of the t e s t are m e a n i n g l e s s . Cochran recommends t h a t f o r c h i - s q u a r e t e s t s w it h d f l a r g e r th a n 1 ( t h a t i s , when e i t h e r k o r r i s l a r g e r th a n 2 ) , fe w er th a n 20 p e r c e n t o f t h e c e l l s s ho u ld have an e x p e c t e d f r e q u e n c y o f l e s s t h a n 5, and no c e l l s h o u ld have an e x p e c t e d f r e q u e n c y o f l e s s th a n 1. (p. 178). ( E j j ’ s) Therefore, the data fo r th i s and p e r c e n t a g e s . its acceptabil it y s e c t i o n were r e p o r t e d in frequencies The h y p o t h e s i s t e s t e d and t h e d e c i s i o n c o n c e r n i n g based on t h e results of the analyses of data g a t h e r e d in t h e s t u d y were: H y p o th e s is 5 : There w i l l be no d i f f e r e n c e in t h e c a r e e r p a t h s o f t h e c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s s e l e c t e d pr e- 1 97 4 and p o s t - 1 9 7 4 , as r e p o r t e d by t h e c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s . Decision: lack of H y p o th e s is 5 c a n n o t be r e j e c t e d statistical tests. Am ajority ac c o u n te d f o r in any o f t h e models. o r n o t r e j e c t e d due t o (50% o r more) was not CHAPTER V SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE Summary The p u r p os e o f t h i s s t u d y was t o i d e n t i f y and a n a l y z e s e l e c t e d f a c t o r s r e l a t e d t o t h e c a r e e r p a t h s and s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s e s o f c h i e f academic officers in Michigan public community colleges. The f a c t o r s were a n a l y z e d f o r t h e i r p e r c e i v e d i m p o r t a n c e / u n i m p o r t a n c e in the se le c tio n p r o c e s s and compared o v e r two time periods--1960 1974 and 1975 t o t h e p r e s e n t - - t o d e t e r m i n e i f t h e y had changed. to The c a r e e r p a t h s o f c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s were examined t o d e t e r m i n e i f t h e r e were changes in the two t i m e periods or if iden tifiab le t r e n d s seemed t o be d e v e l o p i n g . Q u e s t i o n n a i r e s were d e v e l o p e d and s e n t t o all individuals (92 c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s / 8 2 p r e s i d e n t s ) who have bee n ( s i n c e 1960) or are now a p r e s i d e n t or chief academic Michigan p u b l i c community c o l l e g e s . q u e s t i o n n a i r e s ran ge d from 54.8% o fficer The r e t u r n to at one rate 82.5% f o r of the 29 o f com p le te d the four g ro u p s surveyed. The 32 f a c t o r s r e l a t i n g t o t h e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s t h a t were used on t h e q u e s t i o n n a i r e s were s e l e c t e d from p o s i t i o n vacancy n o t i c e s in the Chronicle o f H igh er E d u c a ti o n and n o t i c e s t h r o u g h o u t t h e U n it e d S t a t e s . 155 from human resource The c a r e e r - p a t h office models for 156 chief academic o f f i c e r s (1986). were d e v e l o p e d from models used by Arman These models were d e s i g n e d t o c o r r e s p o n d t o s e v e r a l p e r c e p ­ t i o n s o f what c a r e e r p a t h s c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s were most l i k e l y to follow. The f o l l o w i n g h y p o t h e s e s were a c c e p t e d . 1. T he re was no s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e in t h e f a c t o r s t h a t i n f l u e n c e d t h e s e l e c t i o n o f c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s p r e - 1 9 7 4 compared t o p o s t - 1 9 7 4 , as p e r c e i v e d by c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s . 2. Th ere was no s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e in t h e f a c t o r s t h a t i n f l u e n c e d t h e s e l e c t i o n o f c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s p r e - 1 9 7 4 compared t o p o s t - 1 9 7 4 , as p e r c e i v e d by college presid en ts. 3. Th ere was no s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e in t h e f a c t o r s t h a t i n f l u e n c e d t h e s e l e c t i o n o f c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s a s p e r c e i v e d by co m m u n it y c o l l e g e p r e s i d e n t s employed p r e - 1 9 7 4 and by c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s employed pre-1974. 4. Th ere was no s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e in t h e f a c t o r s t h a t i n f l u e n c e d t h e s e l e c t i o n o f c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s a s p e r c e i v e d by c o m m u ni ty c o l l e g e p r e s i d e n t s employed p o s t - 1 9 7 4 and by c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s employed post-1974. 5. Th ere was no d i f f e r e n c e in t h e c a r e e r p a t h s o f t h e c h i e f a c a d e m i c o f f i c e r s s e l e c t e d p r e - 1 9 7 4 and p o s t - 1 9 7 4 , as r e p o r t e d by t h e c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s . Conclusions I m p o r t a n c e / U n i m p o r ta n c e o f F a c t o r s in t h e S e l e c t i o n P r o c e s s 1. Those f a c t o r s deemed i m p o r t a n t by t h e m a j o r i t y o f t h e c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s employed b e f o r e 1974 a r e s t i l l t h o s e employed a f t e r 1974. deemed i m p o r t a n t by 157 P r e -1 9 7 4 P o s t-1 9 7 4 Communication s k i l l s Leadership A ttitude A bility Maturity B e l i e f in community c o lle g e philosophy 2. before More th a n 94.7% 94.7% 94.7% 94.7% 89.5% 84.2% 50% o f and e m p l o y e d after the 1974 Communication s k i l l s Leadership A bility M aturity B e l i e f in community c o l le g e philosophy A ttitude Community c o l l e g e t e a c h ­ ing e x p e r i e n c e Dean e x p e r i e n c e Doctorate D epartm ent/division c h a ir experience Community c o l l e g e admin­ i s t r a t i v e experience chief academic listed having officers 95.2% 95.2% 90.5% 88.1% 88.1% 78.5% 59.5% 57.1% 54.8% 54.8% 52.4% employed ch ild ren ; being d i v o r c e d , s i n g l e , o r m a r r i e d ; r a c e ; g e n d e r ; a ge ; and w h e th e r one had public school teaching experience as n o t at all important in the s e lec tio n process. 3. The f a c t o r s 50% o r more o f t h e p r e s i d e n t s employed b e f o r e 1974 and t h o s e employed a f t e r 1974 p e r c e i v e d as essen tially i m p o r t a n t remained t h e s am e. P r e-1 97 4 Leadership B e l i e f in community c o lle g e philosophy A ttitude A b i l i t y t o work w it h others M aturity Communication s k i l l s M aster’s degree Community c o l l e g e t e a c h ­ ing e x p e r i e n c e A ssistant/associate dean e x p e r i e n c e Post-1974 87.5% 87.5% 87.5% 81.3% 81.3% 81.3% 75.0% 68.8% 63.0% Communication s k i l l s B e l i e f in community c o lle g e philosophy Leadership A ttitude A b i l i t y t o work w i t h others Community c o l l e g e admin­ i s t r a t i v e experience M aturity Doctorate M aster’ s degree Dean e x p e r i e n c e 92.0% 88.6% 88.0% 88.0% 88.0% 88.0% 84.0% 80.0% 80.0% 72.0% 158 P re -1 9 7 4 P o s t-1 9 7 4 Dean e x p e r i e n c e Doctorate 4. 50.0% 50.0% The p r e s i d e n t s Community c o l l e g e t e a c h ing e x p e r i e n c e Assi s t a n t / a s s o c i a t e dean e x p e r i e n c e D ivision/departm ent ch air experience employed before 1974 and after 64.0% 64.0% 56.0% 1974 per­ c e i v e d t h e f o l l o w i n g as t h e l e a s t i m p o r t a n t f a c t o r s in t h e s e l e c t i o n process: public publications, school offices teaching held in experience, scholarly state/national activity-- organizations, age, g e n d e r , r a c e , m a r r i e d , s i n g l e , d i v o r c e d , and h a v in g c h i l d r e n as t h e l e a s t im portant f a c t o r s . 5. o fficers The s i x f a c t o r s and t h e 1974 i n d i c a t e d as 23 t h a t 50% o r more o f t h e 23 c h i e f academic community c o l l e g e Communication s k i l l s Leadership A ttitude A b i l i t y t o work with others M aturity B e l i e f in community c o l l e g e ph il o so p h y degree, presidents community employed before im p o r t a n t were t h e same: Chief Academic O f f i c e r s The presidents Presidents 94.7% 94.7% 94.7% 94.7% 89.5% 84.2% also college a s s i s t a n t / a s s o c i a t e dean, indicated teaching L e a d e r s h ip B e l i e f in community c o lle g e philosophy A ttitude A b i l i t y t o work w i t h others M aturity Communication s k i l l s M aster’ s degree Community col l e g e t e a c h ­ ing e x p e r i e n c e Assi s t a n t / a s s o c i a t e dean e x p e r i e n c e Dean e x p e r i e n c e Doctorate that a m aster’s experience, or 87.5% 87.5% 81.3% 81.3% 81.3% 75.0% 68.8% 56.3% 50.0% 50.0% doctorate experience and e x p e r i e n c e as a dean were 87.5% as an im portant. 159 The l e a s t important were gender, a ge , factors race, as perceived married, by t h e s e divorced, h av i n g adm inistrators children, and be in g s i n g l e . 6. perceived The f a c t o r s as important chief and the academic factors officers employed presidents employed after after 1974 p e r c e i v e d as i m p o r t a n t have been c o n s i s t e n t . C h ief Academic O f f i c e r s Communication s k i l l s L e a d e r s h ip A b i l i t y t o work w ith others M aturity B e l i e f in community c o lle g e philosophy A ttitude Community c o l l e g e t e a c h ­ ing e x p e r i e n c e Dean e x p e r i e n c e Doctorate D e p a r tm e n t/ d i vi s i on c h a ir experience Community c o l l e g e admin­ i s t r a t i v e experience The presid en ts P r e s id e n t s 95.2% 95.2% Communication s k i l l s B e l i e f in community c o lle g e philosophy Leadership A ttitude A b i l i t y t o work w i t h others Community c o l l e g e admin­ i s t r a t i v e experience M aturity Doctorate M aster’ s degree Dean e x p e r i e n c e Community c o l l e g e t e a c h ­ ing e x p e r i e n c e A s s i s t a n t / a s s o c i a t e dean experience D ivision/departm ent c h a ir experience 90.5% 88.1% 88.1% 78.6% 59.5% 57.1% 54.8% 54.8% 52.4% also included presidents colleges employed seemed to after agree 1974 th at 88.6% 88.0% 88.0% 88.0% 88.0% 84.0% 80.0% 80.0% 72.0% 64.0% 64.0% 56.0% assistan t/asso ciate e x p e r i e n c e and hav in g a m a s t e r ’ s d e g r e e . and 92.0% at Chief academic o f f i c e r s Michigan ad d itio n al dean public community experience as an a d m i n i s t r a t o r i s i m p o r t a n t in t h e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s , as i s h a vi ng a doctorate. The l e a s t i m p o r t a n t f a c t o r s were l i s t e d as age, g e n d e r , r a c e , m a r r i e d , d i v o r c e d , ha v i n g c h i l d r e n , and b e i n g s i n g l e . 1974 160 Comparison o f S e l e c t i o n F a c t o r s Between P r e-1 974 and P o s t- 1 9 7 4 Groups There was minimal s u p p o r t in t h e s t u d y t o i n d i c a t e ch ang es in t h e p e r c e p t i o n s o f t h e im p o r ta n c e o f t h e 32 f a c t o r s in t h e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s b e f o r e 1974 and a f t e r 1974. Although t h r e e t o f i v e f a c t o r s in each s e c t i o n showed a s t a t i s t i c a l l y preponderance of th e f a c t o r s did n o t. sig n ifican t difference, One o f 20 f a c t o r s c o u l d show a s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e by chan ce a l o n e . the study did not provide the conclusive evidence that Therefore, factors have changed in t h e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s . 1. In academic comparing o fficers, the 29 p r e- 19 74 of 32 and post-1974 factors showed s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s between grou ps in t h e im portant. The f a c t o r o f " s o u r c e " o r how t h e g ro u p s no of chief statistic ally factors perceived individual as heard of t h e p o s i t i o n v ac a nc y , a d m i n i s t r a t i v e e x p e r i e n c e o t h e r th a n community college, and scholarly important before a c t i v i t y - - publications 1974 t o b ei ng significantly changed less from be i n g im portant after of the im po r­ 1974. 2. I t was foun d, in comparing t h e p e r c e p t i o n s tance of se le c tio n f a c t o r s by p r e s i d e n t s in t h e p r e - 1 9 7 4 and p o s t - 1974 four statistically groups, that factors showed d i f f e r e n c e s between t h e two g r o u p s . college ad m in istrativ e Having a d o c t o r a t e , experience, significant community division/departm ent chair e x p e r i e n c e , and a s s o c i a t e / a s s i s t a n t dean e x p e r i e n c e were c o n s i d e r e d t o be s t a t i s t i c a l l y more i m p o r t a n t by t h e p r e s i d e n t s employed a f t e r 1974 t h a n by t h o s e employed b e f o r e 1974. 161 3. In t h e t h i r d p residents and grouping, chief T w e n ty - n i n e o f t h e the academic 32 f a c t o r s co m p ar is o n s were made between o fficers employed before showed no s t a t i s t i c a l l y 1974. significant d i f f e r e n c e s in t h e i r p e r c e i v e d im p o r ta n c e in t h e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s . The f a c t o r s w hether of they perceived scholarly were as not a c t iv it y - - p u b lic a t ions, internal im portant o f f i c e r by t h e p r e s i d e n t s candidates in the were selection the of sources, and three factors a chief academic in t h e p r e - 1 9 7 4 group b u t were c o n s i d e r e d i m p o r t a n t by t h o s e s e e k i n g a p o s i t i o n as c h i e f academic o f f i c e r in t h a t time p e rio d . 4. The f o u r t h comp ariso n was made between c h i e f academic o f f i ­ c e r s and p r e s i d e n t s employed a f t e r 1974. degree, gender, statistic ally race, being F iv e f a c t o r s - - t h e m a s t e r ’ s m arried, and m aturity--show ed s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e in p e r c e i v e d a i m p o r ta n c e in t h e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s between t h e two g r o u p s . Comparison o f C a r e e r P a t h s o f C h i e f Academic O f f i c e r s P r e- 19 74 t o P o s t- 1 9 7 4 The since career there were statistical m ajority), paths test. were not analyzed enough by responses Based on t h e e v i d e n c e frequency for each and percentage model to use a (none o f t h e models had a c a r e e r p a t h s have n o t changed s i g n i f i c a n t l y pre-1974 to post-1974. 1. 1974 The m a j o r i t y selected representing three th eir of models own: chief as Model academic the D--19% career officers paths (full-tim e employed most faculty before closely in K-12 162 setting, full-tim e president), Model faculty in community E --19% ( f u l l - t i m e college, faculty dean or vice- in community c o l l e g e , dean o r v i c e - p r e s i d e n t ) , and Model G--19% ( f a c u l t y o r a d m i n i s t r a t i v e positions in K-12 setting, faculty and/or superintendent in K-12 s e t t i n g , dean i n c o l l e g e o r v i c e - p r e s i d e n t ) . 2. In t h e p o s t- 1 9 7 4 g r o u p , Model A ( f u l l - t i m e f a c u l t y , d e p a r t ­ m ent/division increase chair, d ean /v ice-p resid en t) in r e s p o n d e n t s c h o o s i n g it showed t h e as comp ara ble t o g reatest th eir career l a d d e r and a l s o had t h e g r e a t e s t f r e q u e n c y (47.6%) in t h e p o s t - 1 9 7 4 g r ou p. Im plications fo r P ractice 1. ing The d a t a from t h i s s t u d y w i l l programs associations to sponsored assist by be u s e f u l c o m m un it y individuals in in p l a n n i n g t r a i n ­ colleges acquiring the and related knowledge and s k i l l s needed f o r h i g h - l e v e l a d m i n i s t r a t i v e p o s i t i o n s . 2. An u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f t h e c a r e e r l a d d e r most o f t e n used by c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s w i l l be h e l p f u l t o g r a d u a t e s t u d e n t s who a r e interested in becoming management p e r s o n n e l chief in academic co m m u n it y officers colleges and to who h a v e middlegoals of becoming c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s . 3. F a c u l t y members o f community c o l l e g e s and members o f s e l e c ­ t i o n co m m it te es need t o know what q u a l i f i c a t i o n s h i r e i n d i v i d u a l s who w i l l a r e b e i n g used t o be p r o v i d i n g t h e l e a d e r s h i p and d i r e c t i o n f o r t h e academic a r e a s o f t h e i r c o l l e g e s . 163 4. C o ll e g e and u n i v e r s i t y graduate programs w i l l be a b l e to ap p l y t h e r e s u l t s t o ongoing and f u t u r e g r a d u a t e c u r r i c u l a . 5. I n d i v i d u a l s a s p i r i n g t o be c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s need t o have an u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f t h e c u r r e n t r e c r u i t m e n t / s e l e c t i o n process so as t o make t h e m s e l v e s as m a r k e t a b l e as p o s s i b l e . 6. I n s t i t u t i o n s need an u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f t h e f a c t o r s i m p o r t a n t in t h e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s a s t h e y compete w it h o t h e r i n s t i t u t i o n s f o r the best candidates to f i l l positions. I m p l i c a t i o n s f o r F u r t h e r R es ear ch The r e s u l t s this area is of th is n ee de d. study indicated Although little that further change was research found in in the s e l e c t i o n - p r o c e s s f a c t o r s o f c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s d u r i n g t h e p a s t 25 y e a r s , t h e f o l l o w i n g comments show a d e f i n i t e variation in t h e f e e l i n g s o f p r e s i d e n t s and c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s on t h e s e l e c t i o n process: A w e l l - r e g a r d e d i n t e r n a l c a n d i d a t e g e n e r a l l y i s most s u c c e s s f u l in t h e p o s i t i o n . Because o f p o l i t i c a l and d i s c i p l i n a r y g r o u p s , i t takes a super external candidate to f i t in. The a b i l i t y t o d e a l w i t h t e a c h e r u n io n s and c o l l e c t i v e b a r g a i n i n g i s o f ut m o st im po r ta nc e in lo o k i n g a t a c a n d i d a t e ’ s q u a l i f i c a t i o n s . Being on t h e s ce n e o b v i o u s l y h e l p e d b e c a u s e I was known and t h e p r e s i d e n t and o t h e r s wanted me. The d e c i s i o n f o r an i n t e r n a l c a n d i d a t e was n o t a p o l i t i c a l one as i t i s sometimes, h e r e and elsewhere. I t was an a c c i d e n t t h a t t h e t i m i n g and e x p e r i e n c e were matched t o bo th o u r n e e d s . Knowledge o f t h e r e a l world o f work e x p e r i e n c e . The p e r s o n s e l e c t e d had i n d u s t r i a l e x p e r i e n c e , c o l l e g e t e a c h i n g and a d m i n i s t r a t i v e e x p e r i e n c e . plus community E d u c a t i o n a l i n s t i t u t i o n s have u n s u i t a b l e s e l e c t i o n p r a c t i c e s . Instead of actu ally preparing selected em ployees for advancement, c o l l e g e s stew o v e r f a v o r i t i s m . Result o ften is 164 i n s u f f i c i e n t l y t r a i n e d a p p o i n t e e s and i n e x c u s a b l e d e l a y s making c h o i c e s , and t h e a c t i v i t i e s o f t h e p o s i t i o n l a n g u i s h . The r a t i n g f o r e x t e r n a l c a n d i d a t e does n o t mean c o n s i d e r a t i o n - - i t sim p l y means e x t e r n a l i s n o t consideration. it a in is not a favorable What p e o p l e th o u g h t was p r o b a b l y n o t what was r e a l l y r e a l . A ccom plishm ents success. rath er than cred en tials were the keys to In my o p i n i o n t h e r e a r e o n l y c a r e e r e d u c a t o r s - - c a r e e r a d m i n i s t r a t o r s a r e an abo m in ati on t o t h e p r o f e s s i o n . I f you a r e a t t e m p t i n g t o l e a r n how t h e o ld boy n et wo rk w or k s, I wish you l u c k . I f you t h i n k t h i s i s a powerful f o r c e , w a i t u n t i l you t r y t o become p r e s i d e n t . The i n n e r c i r c l e o f p r e s i d e n t s i s t h e most powerful o f a l l . Most i m p o r t a n t i n my a d m i n i s t r a t i v e background in b u s i n e s s and i n d u s t r y . " experience was "my All o f t h e s e p o s i t i o n s were o b t a i n e d bec a u se o f (a ) r e p u t a t i o n , (b) p o l i t i c s , and ( c ) p e r s i s t e n c e . M a t u r i t y and a t t i t u d e were weak, so I g o t him "promoted" c h i e f community c o l l e g e a d m i n i s t r a t o r in a n o t h e r s t a t e . I t i s h ar d f o r me t o imagine c o n s i d e r i n g anyone f o r academic o f f i c e r w i t h a n y t h i n g l e s s th a n a d o c t o r a t e . Due to the wide v ariatio n u n im p o rt a n c e o f t h e s e l e c t i o n from factors the chief academic based on i n t e r v i e w s officers p o s i t i o n s s in c e 1 9 8 0 . who are chief im portance/ and t h e op en -en de d r e s p o n s e s o f t h e p r e s i d e n t s and c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s , a s t u d y be c o n d u c t e d , 1isted to it is suggested th a t involving p r e s id e n t s now h o l d i n g or have held and their APPENDICES APPENDIX A POSITION VACANCY DESCRIPTION SUMMARIES 165 REGION: EAST S0’ J TH_ MIDWEST SOUTHWEST" WEST “ SCHOOL TOTAL COLLEGES - 3 M date citv vice Pres Academics vice Pres Scu Ser Dean I Dean | Dean g Dean Academics Istu Ser.I Occ Ed 1 Gen Ed utner POSITION Is ic the highest academic officer, assistant, etc. FUNCTION OF POSITION 0 - 1 000 SIZE OF COLLEGE (enrollment) 1 1 000 - 5 0000 5 000 - 10 000 B 10.000-15.000 1 15.000 + Community College Experience Reouired College Teaching Reauired (years) If area is preferred give area. Note if community college teaching Bachelor's 1 Masters Doctorate I fc m s m ife GIVE AREA PREFERRED College Administration Experience Reouired dears' If on area in Administration is preferred give area Note if Comm. College Admin, is reouired I Give area that is preferred and years reauired. College Work Experience other Chan Administration Work experience other than college S a m * exptniencj ,n Counstliny. | Does it state C^atl women and minorities! are urged to aoolv o tner SKILLS | SPECIFIED j OTHER OYIiCR 8 Give area that is preferred and years required 10 o^Vo*0 \I^£a^(3n 4,^ S o U r u H Wdlfc- 1 £xpRn'.en0 ! YES NO 5irv]U uiarven 3 5 - 0 CCiDOINICATIO;, iTupiikVISORY INTERPERSONAL BILINGUAL WORK WITH (language) MINORITIES 166 REGION: EAST SO’JTH_^ MIDWEST SOUTHWEST" WEST “ SCHCC’L TOTAL COLLEGES - 3 _ jdate M. state citv Dean vice Pres vice Pres Academics Utner POSITION Is it Che highest academic officer, assistant, etc. FUNCTION OF POSITION O - 1 000 SIZE OF COLLEGE (enrollment) 5 000 - 10 000 1 10.000-15.000 15.000 + Ccramiunity College Experience Reauired College Teaching Required (years) If area is preferred give area. Note if community college teaching •VO/? Bachelor's Master s 8Doc to rate ftoad?<7\; e. aneas/ fiacouMin ptA.encj? in + e c h n i c a D - f i e l d s n a c j i s s a j i c / Work experience other than college Give area that Is preferred and years required Does it state that women and minorities | are uraed to aoolv | other SKILLS SPECIFIED YES NO ifLpSkrisoRY “ INTERPERSONAL I BILINGUAL WORK WITH (language) MINORITIES i OTHER OTHER r i ------------ n 167 REGION: EAST SO’J T S j] MIDWEST southwest" WEST “ SCHCC’L TOTAL COLLEGES - 5 date state citv Vice Pres Stu Ser Vice Pres Academics I POSITION | Dean Dean Academics jScu^Ser. 1 CD ( i ) Dean Occ Ed Dean | Utner Gen Ed ' ^31 Is it the highest academic officer, assistant, etc. OF position uacokm J j k c h n i e j fis tud( | f i i o f / n a m s u jM inelud/ 1 000 SIZE o f COLLEGE (enrollment) 1 000 - 5 000 acad em ic u/oif: ^ 5 000 - 10 000 I 10.000-15.000 15.000 + Community College Experience Reauired other College Teaching Reauired (years) If area is preferred give area. Note if conmunity college teaching Onn' **or? Bachelor's I Master's JDoctorate I (j P ,e /d i +,e/as DEGREE ® College Administration Experience Reauired dears' College Work Experience other than Administration 1-3 GIVE AREA PREFERRED (£ ) 5-7 3 - I 7 - 10 10+ If an area in Administration is preferred give area Note if Consn. College Admin. is required ( Give area that is preferred and years reauired. Work experience other than college Give area that is preferred and years required Does it state that! women and minorities I are ureed to aoolv | o cner SKILLS SPECIFIED TES I OTHER OTHER NO communication SUPERVISORY 3 _ j I WORK Wirri bilingual (language) MINORITIES 16 8 REGION': EAST SO’ JTH_^ MIDWEST SOUTHWESTWEST “ SCHOOL TOTAL COLLEGES-5 \% < o date stace Cl tv Vice Pres Stu Ser Vice Pres Academics j Dean T Dean f Dean I Academics |Stu Ser.I Occ Ed _....... 1 a lJ — L_. POSITION Dean g (Jtner Gen Ed 1 l . . Is it the highest academic officer, assistant, etc. FUNCTION OF POSITION X o Respotfibb -fc o J U p f a ^ 5 of ins4 f2ucfi0 )'?/ d e o e b p C u J i n ' t c u l u r n ' 0 - 1 000 SIZE OF COLLEGE (enrollment) 1 000 - 5 0001 5 000 - 10 000 | 10.000-15.000 | < §> YES j Community College Experience Reauired 1 NO 1 15.000 + 1 (jc r -i-r , •twic*/) r (D 1 - 3 College Teaching Reauired (years) other 3 - 5 If area is preferred give area. Note if community college teaching rl^ -Tim-/* ......... .... * Bachelor's Master’s TP |Doctorate GIVE AREA PREFERRED College Administration Experience Renuired fvearsM 1-3 5-7 1 3-5 7 - 10 I 9 1 — 10 + If an area in Administration is preferred give area Note if Comm. College Admin. is reouired ^ - M A E Give area that is preferred and years required. College Work Experience other than Administration Work experience other than college Give area that is preferred and years required Does it state that vomen and minorities are urred to aoolv 1 ocner SKILLS SPECIFIED YES OTHER OVHCR NO CCMMUN1 CATION Sipi^tlt'lSORY INTERPERSONAL BILINGUAL WORK WITH (language) MINORITIES 169 REG10N: EAST SO’JTHj^ SCHOOL TOTAL COLLEGES -10 MIDWEST SOUTHWESTWEST " __B£L dace Cl tv Vice Pres Scu Ser Vice Pres Academics g Dean | Academics Dean | Dean g Dean Stu Ser.J Occ Ed 1 Gen Ed Ucner POSITION _ Is it the highest academic officer, assistant, etc. FUNCTION OF POSITION SlucWd faciUTW/fd, CLounseVip^, (WifllAsorA adiifiV><\ *, CouO^if.o. GIVE AREA PREFERRED College Administration Experience Renui red 6 ® e l u m C m ix b p iV J S r Master's DEGREE GIVE AREA PREFERRED If an area in Administration is preferred give area Note if Coram. College Admin. is reauired i Y«zviru.ss;ste)'ii3 +UfO fo 'Etna P O i W / n p, •.fl.SoYiJCOTTbd" U)|d: nol£ \ ppjyspc\ ■J? cW-diT. v(\ putUc fida&Os |Mm'.i-uik.1 A kLfiCRu'.-Vrruw ■\U \ luiloi'ou- * * eMi rui acaderr.ic piry^aiv., -mciiZ iiM Cor,+\riiLihQ e a . icaVion. \>t-viojv \ \ ifiStt-UCV:r |Ui:»V 1 irodia. Xo-ieRxsi >n C h d U Z. educaiifflT'oS ptap .ams fJ-Oii'fjid |-.neduo fiOAoJ Vjiadxvskup. 173 REGION: EAST _ SOUTH_ MIDWEST southwest” WEST ” SCHOOL T OTAL COLLEGES - 14 IT H date ci ty Vice Pres | Academics 9 Ocher Dean Dean Vice Pres Scu Ser POSITION Is it the highest academic officer, assistant, etc. FUNCTION OF POSITION 0 - 1 SIZE OF COLLEGE (enrollment) _ 1 000 - 5 000 000 NO YES J 5 000 0 C!c?Jr*'r'' r VMosopUj Community College Experience Keauirea g College Teaching Reauired (years) 3 1 1 | J - 10 000 | 10.000-15.000 opeflj^ooe- | 3-5.1 1-3 J7 5-7 •?uw>insR uld'ulnci s i t c W eariad other - 10 ] | © Bachelor's DEGREE 1. . . I Master's M College 8 Administration 1 Experience 1 Reauired ("veers'll 3-5 1-3 If area is preferred ,give area. Note if community college teaching 1 © Cnlleee Work H\a Experience other than Administration T Work experience other than college ^- in jU Does it state that! women and minorities! are ureed to aoolv Iother SKILLS SPECIFIED ^ ........ EfiaulEed-JS"” jDoctorate S GIVE AREA PREFERRED I (l) T • 7 - 10 I 10+ 1 5-7 1 f~ \ < © I 1 © Bf!| 1 — j S^ brjaAier.c? 1 If an area in Administration 1 Is Preferre4 give area 1 Wote if Comm. College Admin. | is reauired ^G S n -.11„ Give area that is preferred and years reauired. feud Give area that is preferred and years required LCixniLCuiunA CituilqfnierTV iWctfi E-flViVioft*;, Saao YES )au<3vQ-lLmc^ NO COMMUNICATION Dynamic ItJHSflSORYi INTERPERSONAL 0 © BILINGUAL WORK WITH (language) MINORITIES -..... .......JL Coof^illolt jjinouoA-i uS OTHER & ] t'- a t l c '- j / \ , p 1 i 1 1 1 74 REGION: EAST _ SO’ JTH_I MIDWEST SOUTHWEST_ WEST ~ SCKCOL TOTAL COLLEGES - 24 m - Dean I Dean 1 Other Dean Stu Ser.| Occ Ed 1 Gen Ed Dean | Academics Vice Pres Stu Ser Vice Pres. Academics £ date state city POSITION .Is it the highest academic officer, assistant etc, • PluoRafl, aaiAaivo VoptActa® Q^trnP'i'sWb, \1vxW1nortr holier, Va&b'Mi TiY^fi'iS^eaVvy* FUNCTION OF POSITION SIZE OF COLLEGE (enrollment) 0 - 1 000 1 000 - 5 000J 5 000 - 10 000 © <3 1 I YES NO j 10.000-15.000i 15.000 + @ |0 | 0 (.'(T/i/r, 5 kj3n^ C o m m H f i u ^ \ PMyLopI'* of -fv< don(vp(u.WoLiif corrmun'riuj Community College Experience Reauired © C o l U ^ g is e s s e f i t i d 3-5 College Teaching Required (years) I 7 - 10 U other Cteia=o^ 5-7 © © 1® Bachelor s p A & m ) If area is preferred .give area Note if community college teaching -xmiixsd.•I4~. y / s f \ U Q t leach ^ Doctorate GIVE AREA PREFERRED m College Administration Experience Reouired fvearsl College Work Experience other than Administration If an area in Administration is preferred give area Note if Comm. College Admin. is reauired ~ J ______ © prea that is preferred and years reauired. of h l f h i A U a j i n i t y e > p e n ,e n G P j tjAo m a c c c j i d & J 'm s M a i? fitjnkn fippaloch'i)] M ia Work experience other than college Give area that is preferred and years required Does it state that women and minorities are ureed to aonlv i other SKILLS 8 SPECIFIED j YES 1 OTHER I OVLCR j ll’v K 1 COMMUNICATION K J fiu fijo a X n ^n n s §Up E W ! s o r 7 INTERPERSONAL 1 BILINGUAL WORK WITH | (language) MINORITIES © Xnnooarl^ C?d,'CaV>an Citia-fu? ii-aue.'-j/i, p ® < T) j j 1 1 175 REGION: EAST _ S0UTH_ MIDWEST southwest” WEST SCKCOL T O T A L COLLEGES - 30 _ j£ Z & i date state city Dean ce Pres Stu Ser Academi Dean POSITION _ Is it the highest academic officer, assistant, etc, FUNCTION OF POSITION CfiOj AcfidW'O • l i U w l & k fin e %&&&> 0 - 1 000 SIZE OF COLLEGE (enrollment) . {deuekp insl. p/z&fj&w, ft!/ ftQftdemc o+ffiips, 1 000 - 5 0001 5 000 - 10 000 1 1 0 .0 0 0 -1 5 .0 0 0 © 1 ® I (?) 1 s i YES NO | C(~'r7'r>' 1 5 .0 0 0 + <$) ^ ply o f j f a CinrpieherE/iP &>/vaiMrry P oliter Community College Experience Reauired I ® I College Teaching Required (years) 1 3 - 5 1 - 3 © 5 -7 | © ) Bachelor s | [ Master's other 17-10 IEaJ f l j q k u e J ^ ‘Cr) If area is preferred give area Note if community college teaching J JDoctorate \d u B e < '(lij/a /n O eZ d Jo f. DEGREE S GIVE AREA PREFERRED t u f& io i- s o y C>p in -iASfteu /S’ /Z/rt, € 0 / fid /r. College 8 Administration i Experience | Reauired ( vears''® 1 -3 i 5 -7 ^ I © ft') 1 '— ' | 10+ If an area in Administration is preferred give area Note if Comm. College Admin, is reauired 1 0 - i+As . rw u.ous- Give area that is preferred and years required. / / II fls (Juiaiv of Zua Calbs>, & (w i e/ia> io//r,u>ai,'fZir, handicapptc< Qyrhv 3 tu d e /)fs. % ^ p a d 7 e t y in a /u jr n g 5 (fia -fpaeJi <3 /, ptplnv/i p n P j. d c A ’. | | 3 ^ | other SKILLS 1 SPECIFIED J ^ Give area that is preferred and years required i0L+',4utTon <£ Kaftfly, SO&&I' ‘ 1 0 .0 0 0 -1 5 .0 0 0 SIZE OF COLLEGE (enrollment) YES 1 5 .0 0 0 + NO Community College Experience Reaui red 5-7 3-5 College Teaching Required (years) I 7 - 10 other If area is preferred give area Note if community college teaching mmix-ed. Bachelor's S Master's iDoctorate DEGREE GIVE AREA PREFERRED College Administration Experience Reauired (years’ll College Work Experience other than Administration Work experience other than college Does it state that women and minorities are ureed to aoolv other OTHER O L iC R 1-3 3 - 5 | 5-7 7-10 10+ 3 j j } If an area in Administration is preferred give area Note if Comm. College Admin. is reauired 1- Give area that is preferred and years reauired. Give area that is preferred and years required COMMUNICAT10 gtfpfrKri'SORY INTERPERSONAL BILINGUAL IWORK WITH (language)! MINORITIES 177 REGION: EAST _ SOT JTH_ MIDWEST southwest” WEST ” SCKCOL TOTAL COLLEGES - 3 : j £ 2 l date state ci t y Vice Pres Stu Ser Vice Pres Academics I POSITION I Dean 1 Dean I Dean 1 Dean Academics jstu Ser. Occ Ed I Gen Ed I ( z ) Is it the highest academic officer, assistant, etc, FUNCTION OF POSITION j. s c h U .K l i f chx*** p to fn d 'm l & b n j & r f M flcrtdtwic a m * , eu/tluafty s i f f f ■. , _ fesfxm ihk f*? p / u p m h n of buJ$« ' o - i ooo J SIZE OF COLLEGE (enrollment) NO 5 1 000 - 1 0 0 0 j 5 000 - 10 000 ^ 1 0 .0 0 0 -1 5 ,0 0 0 ^ 1 5 .0 0 0 + CC>~u n . M i f u r Pontktf Community College Experience Reauired Qom^Efl-kins/Lf£’ Gomrriunrfy College Teaching Required (years) cq IU qo acnce^. If area is preferred give area Note if community college teaching Master s .— Bachelo UDoctorate 2- GIVE AREA PREFERRED f4J.(V3TtirwT in edaCtriTorv fDurhi/U£^ If nan area in Administration is preferred give area Note if Comm. College Admin, is requi red College Administration Experience Required (years'1 College Work § Give area that is preferred and years reauired. Experience other J ExpiAitttOB \C. OOCdd'.aiTU i 4-echfiiCC^ £ ^ U C i x W i c U S i f l a b l ? than Administration Work experience other than college Give area that is preferred and years required Does it state that women and minorities YES SKILLS SPECIFIED OTHER OTHER 1 other I f 1 1 NO COFWUNICATlOii /" \ 8 V J I SlJp£iMsO®j| j I /-"Oilc f\,p | iNTCKPERSONALjj / o \ I \ ) 1 MLINGUAL IWORK WITH (language)! MINORITIES I 17 8 REGION: EAST _ SOUTH_ MIEWEST SOUTHWEST_ WEST SCHOOL TOTAL COLLEGES - 3 jm date ci ty Vice Pres I Academics 1 Vice Pres Stu Ser POSITION Ac, Dean | Dean | Dean Stu Ser.1 Occ Ed 1 Gen Ed Other 0 Is it the highest academic officer, assistant, etc, FUNCTION OF POSITION Ch'tcF J n s J t v d c n a / 0 SIZE OF COLLEGE (enrollment) - m a n a f A fb . f i d Z f i r ^ f U S inskudsanaJ f/lO fj& r n s 1 000 - 5 0 0 0 B 5 000 - 10 000 g 1 0 .0 0 0 -1 5 .0 0 0 1 1 5 .0 0 0 + 1 000 Community College Experience Reaui red other College Teaching Required (years) If area is preferred give area Note if community college teaching rn m ijx i * Bachelor s DEGREE GIVE AREA PREFERRED College Administration Experience Reauired If an area in Administration is preferred give area Note if Comm. College Admin, is reauired / l / ' S I . j ^_Give area that is preferred and years reauired College Work O^VlxticBuJ ) fiaJwi'CaD eJrpMid/lC cUSi&ibLe Experience other than Administration work experience other than college Give area that is preferred and years required Does it state that women and minorities areur^dt^apjh o th e r OTHER OTtiER COMMUNICA INTERPERSONALb BILINGUAL IWORK WITH (language)!MINORITIES APPENDIX B COLLEGES INVOLVED IN THE STUDY _ L ____ « sr II J r I! © i b J - l 7 SI I'll' J h 180 1. Alpena Community C o l l e g e E s t a b l i s h e d in 1952 E n r o l lm e n t i s 1 ,8 7 8 Loc ate d in Alpena County T i t l e : Dean o f I n s t r u c t i o n 2. Bay de Noc Community C o l l e g e E s t a b l i s h e d in 1962 E n r o l l m e n t i s 1,801 Loca ted in D e l t a County T i t l e : Dean o f I n s t r u c t i o n 3. C. S. Mott Community C o l l e g e E s t a b l i s h e d in 1923 E n r o l l m e n t i s 11,15 8 Located in Genesee County T i t l e : V i c e - P r e s i d e n t Academic A f f a i r s 4. D e l t a C o ll e g e E s t a b l i s h e d in 1961 E n r o l lm e n t i s 10,243 Loca ted in Bay County T i t l e : V i c e - P r e s i d e n t o f I n s t r u c t i o n and L e a r n i n g S e r v i c e s 5. Glen Oaks Community C o l l e g e E s t a b l i s h e d in 1965 E n r o l lm e n t i s 1,213 Located in S a i n t J o s e p h County T itle: V i c e - P r e s i d e n t f o r Academic A f f a i r s 6. Gogebic Community C o ll e g e E s t a b l i s h e d in 1931 E nr o lI m en t i s 1,60 0 Located in Gogebic County T itle: Dean o f I n s t r u c t i o n 7. Grand Rapids J u n i o r C o ll e g e E s t a b l i s h e d in 1914 E n r o l lm e n t i s 8, 9 1 3 Located in Kent County T itle: E x e c u t i v e V i c e - P r e s i d e n t / C h i e f Academic O f f i c e r 8. Henry Ford Community C o ll e g e E s t a b l i s h e d in 1938 E n r o l lm e n t i s 15,500 Located in Wayne County T i t l e : Dean o f Academic E duc at ion 181 9. Highland Park Community C o l l e g e E s t a b l i s h e d in 1918 E n r o l lm e n t i s 2,41 6 Located in Wayne County T itle: Executive V ice-P resid e n t 10. J a ck s o n Community C o l l e g e E s t a b l i s h e d in 1928 E n r o l lm e n t i s 6,07 4 Located in J a c k s o n County T itle: V i c e - P r e s i d e n t f o r Academic A f f a i r s 11. Kalamazoo V a l l e y Community C o l l e g e E s t a b l i s h e d in 1966 E n r o l lm e n t i s 8,281 Located in Kalamazoo County T itle: Dean o f I n s t r u c t i o n - - A c a d e m i c A f f a i r s 12. Kellogg Community C o l l e g e E s t a b l i s h e d in 1956 E n r o l lm e n t i s 4,55 3 Located in Calhoun County T itle: Dean A r t s and S c i e n c e s D i v i s i o n 13. K i r t l a n d Community C o ll e g e E s t a b l i s h e d in 1966 En ro l lm en t i s 1,333 Located in Roscommon County T itle: Dean o f I n s t r u c t i o n 14. Lake Michigan C o l l e g e E s t a b l i s h e d in 1946 E n r o l lm e n t i s 3,19 9 Located in B e r r i e n County T itle: V ice-President of In stru ctio n 15. Lansing Community C o ll e g e E s t a b l i s h e d in 1957 E n r o l lm e n t i s 19,157 Located in Ingham County T itle: V ice-P resident fo r Adm inistration 16. Macomb Community C o ll e g e E s t a b l i s h e d in 1954 E n r o l lm e n t i s 30,892 Located in Macomb County T itle: V i c e - P r e s i d e n t o f Academic A f f a i r s 182 17. Mid Michigan Community College E s t a b l i s h e d i n 195 E n r o l lm e n t i s 1,751 Loca ted in C l a r e County T itle: Dean of I n s t r u c t i o n 18. Monroe County Community C o ll e g e E s t a b l i s h e d i n 1954 E n r o l lm e n t i s 2,88 0 Located in Monroe County T itle: Dean of I n s t r u c t i o n 19. Montcalm Community Co ll ege E s t a b l i s h e d i n 1965 E n r o l lm e n t i s 1,398 Located in Montcalm County T itle: Dean of A r t s and S c ie n c e s 20. Muskegon Community C ol le g e E s t a b l i s h e d i n 1926 E n r o l lm e n t i s 4,623 Located in Muskegon County T itle: Dean of F a c u l t y 21. No rth C e n t r a l Michigan College E s t a b l i s h e d i n 1958 E n r o l lm e n t i s 1,692 Located in Emmet County T itle: Dean of I n s t r u c t i o n 22. N o r th w e s te rn Michigan Colleg e E s t a b l i s h e d i n 1951 E n r o l lm e n t is 3,222 Located in Grand T r av e r se County T itle: V ice-President of I n s tr u c ti o n a l Services 23. Oakland Community C o ll e g e E s t a b l i shed i n 1964 En ro l lm en t is 26,609 Located in Oakland County T itle: V i c e - C h a n c e l l o r o f Academic and S t u d e n t A f f a i r s 24. S t . C l a i r County Community Colle ge E s t a b l i shed i n 1923 E nr o l lm en t is 3,885 Located in S a in t C l a i r County T itle: Dean o f I n s t r u c t i o n 183 25. S c h o o lc ra ft College E s t a b l i s h e d in 1951 E n r o l lm e n t i s 8,51 2 Located in Wayne County T i t l e : V ice-President fo r In stru ctio n 26. S o u th w e s te r n Michigan C o ll e g e E s t a b l i s h e d in 1954 E n r o l lm e n t i s 2,365 Located in Cass County T i t l e : V ice-President fo r In stru ctio n 27. Washtenaw Community C ol l e g e E s t a b l i s h e d in 1965 En r o l lm e n t i s 7,858 Located in Washtenaw County T itle: V i c e - P r e s i d e n t o f I n s t r u c t i o n and S t u d e n t S e r v i c e s 28. Wayne County Community C o ll e g e E s t a b l i s h e d in 1967 E n r o l lm e n t i s 12,505 Located in Wayne County T i t l e : V i c e - P r e s i d e n t o f Academic A f f a i r s / P r o v o s t 29. West Shore Community C o l l e g e E s t a b l i s h e d in 1967 E n r o l lm e n t i s 1,083 Located in Mason County T itle: Dean o f I n s t r u c t i o n - - A c a d e m i c s APPENDIX C LETTER TO COLLEGES TO OBTAIN MAILING LIST 184 January 8, 1987 Dear Colleague: I am working on my dissertation at Michigan State University. To complete my study I need to send a questionnaire to individuals who have held or are now holding the position of chief academic officer or president at one of the twenty-nine Michigan community colleges from 1960 to 1987. In order to contact these individuals I need a current mailing address . I have attached a list of chief academic officer's and presidents at your college since 1960. Would you please take a moment to forward addresses if they are available. The list was obtained from The Higher Education Directory. If an individual has been left off the list or included on it erroneously, would you please simply insert the correct name and address and mail the list back to me using the self-addressed stamped envelope enclosed. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at my office at Delta College, (517-686-9027). Sincerely, Patricia Esmond Associate Professor Attachment APPENDIX D QUESTIONNAIRES 185 C hief A cad em ic O fficer B io g ra p h ic al D ata 1. A g e w h e n hired a s th e C hief A c a d e m ic O fficer _ 2. Sex . M al e .F em ale 3. D a t e h i r e d a s t h e C h i e f A c a d e m i c O f f i c e r --------4. W h a t is y o u r e t h n i c o r r a c i a l g r o u p ? B lack/N egro/A fro-A m erican W hite/C aucasian H isp an ic 5. W h e n y o u w e r e h i r e d a s t h e C h i e f A c a d e m i c O f f ic e r , w h a t w a s y o u r : M ajo r, M ajor. H i g h e s t D e g r e e ....... ....... U nd erg radu ate D egree 6. .N a tiv e A m e r i c a n /A m e r ic a n Indian . O r ie n t a l . O t h e r ( p l e a s e s p e c i f y ) _____________ Institution . Institution . F rom w h a t s o u r c e o r s o u r c e s did y o u learn of t h e p osition o p e n i n g ? P u b lic a tio n (w hich o n e ) — _ N om ination W ord of m o u th C o n t a c t f r o m t h e in s t i t u t i o n COMMENTS: . In t e r n a l p o s t i n g .E x t e rn a l p osting . O th e r (p le a se explain) __________ ________ _____ 7. P l e a s e s t a t e t h e p o s i t i o n a n d i n s t i t u t i o n y o u w e r e e m p l o y e d a t w h e n y o u w e r e s e l e c t e d a s C h i e f A c a d e m i c Offi cer : P o s i t i o n _____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 8. B e l o w a r e p r e s e n t e d s e v e n m o d e l s of c a r e e r s in h i g h e r e d u c a t i o n . P l e a s e c i r c l e t h e m o d e l t h a t m o s t c l o s e l y r e s e m b l e s t h e p a t h y o u r c a r e e r h a s t a k e n . A s w it h all m o d e l s , t h e s e a r e g e n e r a l i z a t i o n s t h a t m a y n o t p r e c i s e l y fit t h e e x p e r i e n c e of all r e s p o n d e n t s to t h e s u r v e y . If y o u r c a r e e r h a s h a d a m a j o r v a r i a t i o n , f r o m t h e c l o s e s t m o d e l , p l e a s e n o t e t h e d i f f e r e n c e In t h e c o m m e n t s s e c t i o n . M odel A D e a n o r V ic e -P re sid e n t D e p a r t m e n t o r D iv is io n C h a ir F u ll- T im e F a c u lty M odel C D e a n o r V ic e - P r e s id e n t F u ll- T im e W o rk O u ts id e o f E d u c a tio n M odel B D e a n o r V ic e -P re s id e n t M id -L e v e l A a m i m s tr a tiv e P o s itio n E n tr y - L e v e l A d m in is tr a tiv e P o s itio n M od el D D e a n o r V ic e - P r e s id e n t F u ll- T im e F a c u lty in C o m m u n ity C o lle g e F u ll-T im e F a c u lty in K -1 2 S e ttin g COMMENTS: 9. M odel E D e a n o r V ic e -F V e s id e n t M o d el G F u ll-T im e F a c u lty in C o m m u n ity C o lle g e D e a n in C o lle g e o r V ic e - P r e s id e n t p F a c u l t y a n d / o r S u p e r i n t e n d e n t in K -1 2 S e ttin g D e a n o r V ic e - P r e s id e n t F a c u " ’' o r A d m i n i s t r a t e P o s i t i o n s in K -1 2 S e ttin g F a c u lty in C o m m u n ity C o lle g e F u ll-T im e W o rk O u t s i d e o f E d u c a tio n __________________________________________ — List w h a t y o u c o n s i d e r t o b e t h e t h r e e ( r an k ) m o s t i m p o r t a n t a t t r i b u t e s t h a t c o n t r i b u t e d t o y o u r s e l e c t i o n a s C h ie f A c a d e m i c Officer: .d e g re e _ p rev io u s a d m inistra tive ex p e rie n c e _ n o n ed u c atio n ex perience _ a d m i n i s t r a t i v e e x p e r i e n c e o u t s i d e of e d u c a t i o n -faculty -age . o t h e r ( e x p l a in ) ---------------------------------------------------- . m e n to r/sp o n so r . internal c a n d id ate .ex tern al candidate . co m m u n ity college e x p e rien ce . sex race .n o m in a te d COMMENTS: 10. If y o u w e r e a n e x t e r n a l c a n d i d a t e , d i d y o u k n o w s o m e o n e a t t h e c o l l e g e ? _________ a. If s o . w h a t w a s t h e h i g h e s t a d m i n i s t r a t i v e - l e v e l p o s i t i o n h e l d b y s o m e o n e w h o k n o w y o u ? _____ b. Did t h i s p e r s o n e n c o u r a g e y o u t o a p p l y f o r t h e p o s i t i o n o f C h i e f A c a d e m i c O f f i c e r ? COMMENTS: Ye s ------------------------------------------------------- — — -------------------------------------------------------------------------- . No 186 T o w h a t e x t e n t d i d t h e f o l l o w i n g v a r i a b l e s p l a y a r o l e in y o u r s e l e c t i o n a s t h e C h i e f A c a d e m i c O f f i c e r ? P l e a s e c h e c k t h e b o x t h a t b e s t r e f l e c t s y o u r o p i n i o n o n e a c h it e m b e l o w . R atin g S c a le N o t Im p o rta n t At All: M in im ally Im p o rta n t: O f A v e ra g e Im p o r ta n c e : 1 2 3 Im p o rta n t: V ery Im p o rta n t: N o t A p p lic a b le : E xp eriential V ariables 4 5 NA D o e s no t a p p ly S e le c tio n Variables in H iring D ecisio n ___________________________________________________________ 1 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. D o c to ra te M a s te r's M a jo r d is c ip lin e a r e a of M a s te r's o r D o c to ra te P u b lic s c h o o l te a c h in g e x p e rie n c e C o m m u n ity c o lle g e te a c h in g e x p e rie n c e A d m in is tra tiv e e x p e r ie n c e ( o th e r t h a n c o lle g e ) P u b lic s c h o o l B u s in e s s /in d u s tr y O th e r ( p le a s e s p e c ify ) 7. C o m m u n ity c o lle g e a d m in is tra tiv e e x p e rie n c e D iv is io n /D e p a rtm e n t C h a ir A s s o c ia te /A s s is ta n t D e a n D ean V ic e -P r e s id e n t O th e r ( p le a s e s p e c ify ) 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14 15. 2 3 4 5 NA N o n e d u c a tio n e x p e r ie n c e ( p le a s e s p e c ify ) S c h o la r ly a c tiv ity /p u b lic a tio n s O ffic e s h e ld in s ta t e /n a tio n a l o r g a n iz a tio n s S o u r c e s (h o w y o u h e a r d a b o u t th e p o s itio n ) In te rn a l c a n d id a te E x te rn a l c a n d id a te O th e r ( p le a s e s p e c ify ) O th e r ( p le a s e s p e c ify ) COM M ENTS S e le c tio n Variables In Hiring D e c isio n P e r so n a l V ariables -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------1 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 2 3 4 5 A ge Sex R ace M a rrie d S in g le D iv o rc e d C h ild re n C o m m u n ic a tio n S k ills L e a d e rs h ip M a tu rity B e lie f in c o m m u n ity c o lle g e p h ilo s o p h y A ttitu d e A bility to w o rk w ith o th e r s CO M M EN TS: ______________________________ If you have any fu rth e r co m m en ts on the selection p ro c e s s of the chief acad em ic officer, p le ase attach your com m ents. NA 187 P resident S ize o f I n s t i t u t i o n ___________________________ 1. W h a t w a s t h e d a t e that y o u h ired t h e ch ief a c a d e m i c o f f i c e r ? ______________________ a. b. c. If y o u h ir e d m o r e t h a n o n e C A O b e t w e e n 1960 a n d 1974 p l e a s e u s e t h e c a n d i d a t e h ir e d first. If m o r e t h a n o n e b e t w e e n 1974 to t h e p r e s e n t u s e t h e c a n d i d a t e h i r e d last. If y o u h i r e d C A O 's in b o t h t i m e p e r i o d s , p l e a s e restrict y o u r c o m m e n t s t o t h o s e hir e d f ro m 1974 to t h e p r e s e n t . 2. W a s t h e s e l e c t e d c a n d i d a t e a n internal c a n d i d a t e __________ o r e x t e r n a l ___________ 3. Did t h e in stitu tion utilize a s e l e c t i o n c o m m i t t e e ? If so : yes no a. W hi ch o f the follo w in g m o s t c l o s e l y r e s e m b l e d its c o m p o s i t i o n ? ( C h e c k all that ap p ly ) Faculty w e r e r e p r e s e n t e d P ro f e s s i o n a l staff w e r e r e p r e s e n t e d First line a d m in is tr a tiv e level w a s r e p r e s e n t e d M id-m anagem ent w as rep resen ted C lassified w a s r e p r e s e n t e d Minorities w e r e r e p r e s e n t e d B o th s e x e s w e r e r e p r e s e n t e d O t h e r ( p l e a s e s p e c i f y ) _______________________________________________________________________________ O t h e r ( p l e a s e s p e c i f y ) _______________________________________________________________________________ COM MENTS: _____________________________________________________________________________________________________ b. W h a t w a s the s e l e c t i o n c o m m i t t e e ’s role in t h e final s e l e c t i o n ? c. H ow lo ng did t h e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s t a k e ? less t h a n a m o n t h d. ____ 9 m o n t h s o r l e s s 3 m onths or less ____ 12 m o n t h s o r l e s s 6 m o n th s o r less ____ m o r e t h a n 1 y e a r W h a t w e r e t h e t h r e e m o s t i m p o r t a n t c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of y o u r s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s t h a t h a d th e m o s t im p a c t o n th e h irin g of t h e c a n d i d a t e ? 4. List w h a t yo u c o n s i d e r e d t o b e t h e t h r e e ( ra n k ) m o s t im p o r t a n t a t t r i b u t e s t h a t h e l p e d in t h e s e l e c t i o n of t h e c a n d i d a t e for t h e c h i e f a c a d e m i c o f ficer p ositio n , ( e x a m p l e s of d e g r e e , e x p e r i e n c e , t h e s e l e c t i o n of c o m m i t t e e , etc.) 188 5. Did t h e institution d e v e l o p a p o s i t i o n d e s c r i p t i o n ? yes no If so , w h a t q u a l i f ic a t i o n s w e r e s o u g h t ? P l e a s e c o m p l e t e the following rating sc ale: R a tin g S c a le N o t I m p o rta n t At All: M m im ally Im p o rta n t: O t A v e ra g e Im p o rta n c e : 1 2 3 Im p o rta n t: V ery Im p o rta n t: N ot A p p lica b le : E xp eriential V ariables 4 5 NA D o e s n o t a p p ly S electio n V ariables in Hiring D e c isio n ___________________________________________________________ 1 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. D o c to ra te M a ste r's M ajor d is c ip lin e a r e a o f M a s te r's o r D o c to ra te P u b lic s c h o o l te a c h in g e x p e rie n c e C o m m u n ity c o lle g e t e a c h in g e x p e rie n c e A d m in is tra tiv e e x p e r i e n c e ( o th e r t h a n c o lle g e ) P u b lic s c h o o l B u s in e s s /in d u s tr y O th e r ( p le a s e s p e c ify ) 7 C o m m u n ity c o lle g e a d m in istra tiv e e x p e r ie n c e D iv is io n /D e p a rtm e n t C h a ir A s s o c ia te /A s s is ta n t D e a n D ean V ic e -P re s id e n t O th e r ( p le a s e s p e c ify ) 8. 9, 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. N o n e d u c a tio n e x p e r i e n c e ( p le a s e sp e cify ) S c h o la r ly a c tiv ity /p u b lic a tio n s O ffic e s h e ld in s ta te /n a tio n a l o r g a n iz a tio n s S o u r c e s (h o w y o u h e a rd a b o u t th e p o s itio n ) In te rn a l c a n d id a te E x te rn a l c a n d id a te O th e r ( p le a s e s p e c ify ) 15 O th e r ( p le a s e s p e c ify ) 2 3 4 5 NA COM M ENTS S e le c tio n V a ria b le s in H irin g D e c isio n P e r s o n a l V a ria b le s________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________ 1 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 2 3 4 5 A ge Sex R ace M arried S in g le D iv o rce d C h ild re n C o m m u n ic a tio n S k ills L e a d e rs h ip M aturity B elief in c o m m u n ity c o lle g e p h ilo s o p h y A ttitu d e A bility to w ork w ith o t h e r s C O M M E N T S: ______________________________ If you have an y further com m ents o n the s ele ctio n p ro cess of the chief academ ic officer, p le ase a tta c h y o u r co m m en ts. NA APPENDIX E LETTERS SENT TO PRESIDENTS AND CHIEF ACADEMIC OFFICERS TO PILOT TEST THE QUESTIONNAIRES 189 DELTA COLLEGE SToucAcrg/ ty/ou r October 6, 1987 Dear Ms. I am working on my dissertation at Michigan State University on the preparation, recruitment and selection methods of chief academic officer's at Michigan community colleges. To complete my study I need to send a questionnaire to individuals who have held or are now holding the position of chief academic officer or president at all of Michigan's community colleges. Enclosed is the questionnaire the president's will be asked to complete. Would you be a part of the pilot testing of this questionnaire by reading it and commenting on the clarity, ease of understanding and readability of the questions. If you feel any of the questions are inappropriate and should be deleted or if you feel questions should be added please indicate this on the questionnaire. Would you then mail the questionnaire back to me using the self-addressed stamped envelope enclosed. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at my office at Delta College, (517-686-9027). Thank you very much for your assistance. Sincerely Patricia Esmond Associate Professor UNIVERSITY CENTER ■MICHIGAN 48710 • PHONE 15171 6 8 6 - 9 0 0 0 DELTA COLLEGE fyourjAfky O c to b er 6 , 1987 Dear Dr. I am working on my dissertation at Michigan State University on the preparation, recruitment and selection methods of chief academic officer's at Michigan community colleges. To complete my study I need to send a questionnaire to individuals who have held or are new holding the position of chief academic officer or president at all of Michigan's community colleges. Enclosed is the questionnaire the chief academic officer's will be asked to complete. Would you be a part of the pilot testing of this questionnaire by reading it and commenting on the clarity, ease of understanding and readability of the questions. If you feel any of the questions are inappropriate and should be deleted or if you feel questions should be added please indicate this on the questionnaire. Would you then mail the questionnaire back to me using the self-addressed stamped envelope enclosed. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at my office at Delta College, (517-686-9027). Thank you very much for your assistance. Sincerely, Patricia Esmond Associate Professor UNIVERSITY CENTER • MICHIGAN 48710 • PHONE 15171 6 8 6 - 9 0 0 0 APPENDIX F PERMISSION LETTER FROM UNIVERSITY COMMITTEE ON RESEARCH INVOLVING HUMAN SUBJECTS 191 M I C H I G A N STATE U N I V E R S I T Y UNIVERSITY COMMITTEE ON RESEARCH INVOLVING EAST LANSING • MICHIGAN • 48824-1111 HUMAN SUBJECTS (UCRIHS) 206 BERKEY HALL (517) 353-9738 March 18, 1988 Patricia Esmond Delta College University Center, MI 48710 Dear Ms. Esmond: Subject: "CAREER PATHS AND SELECTION PROCESSES OF CHIEF ACADEMIC OFFICERS IN MICHIGAN COMMUNITY COLLEGES #88-031" UCRIHS' review of the above referenced project has I am pleased to advise that the rights and welfare subjects appear to be adequately protected and the therefore, approved this project at its meeting on now been completed. of the human Committee, March 7, 1988. You are reminded that UCRIHS approval is valid for one calendar year. If you plan to continue this project beyond one year, please make provisions for obtaining appropriate UCRIHS approval prior to March 7, 1989. Any changes in procedures involving human subjects must be reviewed by the UCRIHS prior to initiation of the change. UCRIHS must also be notified promptly of any problems (unexpected side effects, complaints, etc.) involving human subjects during the course of the work. Thank you for bringing this project to our attention. If we can be of any future help, please do not hesitate to let us know. Sincerelv, John K. Hudzik, Ph.D. Chair, UCRIHS JKH/sar cc: E. Nonnamaker M SU is an A ffir m a tiv e A ction/E qual O p p o rtu n ity Institution APPENDIX G LETTERS SENT TO PRESIDENTS AND CHIEF ACADEMIC OFFICERS 192 Dear Colleague: The career paths and sel e c t i o n processes of c hief academic o f f icers in M i c h i g a n c o m m u n i t y c o l l e g e s is the topic of m y d i s s e r t a t i o n at M i c h i g a n State Univer s i t y . The substantial increase in the nu m b e r of community colleges in the 1960's and 70 ' s r e s u l t e d in a large n umber of a d m i n i s t r a t o r s of the same g e n e r a l age being hired at the same time. These a d m i n i s t r a t o r s are all starting to think about retir e m e n t no w or in the n ear future and will, thus, create vac a n c i e s in the a c a d e m i c area. Hopefully, the resu l t s of this proj e c t w i l l aid i ndividuals in their p r e p a r a t i o n for these posit i o n s . In o rder to fi n i s h this study, I am asking all the i n d i v iduals who have held or are no w h o l d i n g the p o s i t i o n of p r e s i d e n t at a n y of the c o m m u n i t y c o l l e g e s to c o m plete a short questionnaire regarding the c hief academic officers they have hired. I feel that it is extremely important to have the p r e s i d e n t ' s p e r s e p c t i v e on the s e lection of chief a c a d e m i c officers. Would yo u take a few minu t e s to c o m plete the attached questionnaire and return it to me. I have e n c l o s e d a self-addressed, stamped e n v e l o p e for your convenience. You can be a s s u r e d that you w i l l not be i d e n t i f i e d in the s t u d y b y name or institution. If you have any questions, p l e a s e feel free to contact me at m y o f f i c e at D e l t a Coll e g e (517-686-9027). T h a n k you v er y much for y our assistance. Sincerely, Patricia Esmond A s s o c i a t e Professor Delta College U n i v e r s i t y Center, MI A ttachm ent 48710 193 Dear Colleague: The ca r e e r p a t h s and selection processes of chief a c a demic o f f icers in M i c h i g a n c o m m u n i t y c o l l e g e s is the topic of m y d i s s e r t a t i o n at M i c h i g a n State University. The substantial incre a s e in the number of community colleges in the 1960's and 7 0 ' s r e s u l t e d in a large number of a d m i n i s t r a t o r s of the same gene r a l age being hired at the same time. These a d m i n i s t r a t o r s are all s t a rting to t hink about r e t i r e m e n t no w or in the near future and will, thus, create v a c a n c i e s in the academic area. Hopefully, the resu l t s of this project w ill aid individuals in their p r e p a r a t i o n for t hese positions. In order to f i n i s h this study, I am asking all the individuals who have held or are n o w h o l d i n g the p o s i t i o n of chief academic officer at any of the community colleges to c o m p l e t e a short questionnaire regarding chief a c a d e m i c officers. Wo u l d you take a few m i n u t e s to c o m p l e t e the attac h e d qu e s t i o n n a i r e and r e t u r n it to me. I have e n c l o s e d a self-addressed, stamped e n v e l o p e for your convenience. You can be assu r e d that you w i l l not be ident i f i e d in the study b y name or institution. If you have any questions, p l e a s e feel free to contact me at m y office at D elta C o l l e g e (517-686-9027). T h a n k you v e r y m u c h for your a ssistance. Sincerely, Pa t r i c i a Esmond As s o c i a t e P r ofessor Delta C o l l e g e U n i v e r s i t y Center, MI A ttachm ent 48710 APPENDIX H FOLLOW-UP LETTERS TO CHIEF ACADEMIC OFFICERS AND PRESIDENTS 194 P a t r i c i a E sm o n d D e lt a C o l l e g e U n i v e r s i t y C en t er Michigan, 48 710 D e ar C ol l e ag u e : R e c e n t l y I sent you a q u e s t i o n n a i r e as part of a s t u d y on the c a r e e r p a th s and s e l e c t i o n p r o cess es of Chief A c a d e m i c O ff i ce r ' s at M i c h i g a n C o m m u n i t y C o l l e g e s . T he r e is i n t e r e st in this topic b e c a u s e it a p p e a r s that m a n y C om m u n i t y College A d m i n i s t r a t o r s are in the same g e n e r a l age c a t e g o r y and , when they as a group reach r e t i r e m e n t age, a s i g n i f i c a n t v o i d will exist w h i c h m u st be filled by c o m p e t e n t n ew p e o pl e . In a s t u d y such as this it is i m p orta nt to receive input from as m a n y P r e s i d e n t s and Chief A c a d e m i c O f fice rs as p o ss i b l e . The final r e p o r t w i l l be m u c h m o r e m e a n i n g f u l if we are abl e to inclu de your r e s p o n s e s to our q u e s t i o n s . Would you pleas e take just a few m in ut es n o w to s u p p l y the r e q u e s t e d i n f o r m a ti o n and send the co mpl et e d form b a ck to us in the r e p l y e n v e l o p e w h i c h is i n c l u d e d with it? If you ha ve any q u e s t i o n s , feel free to c o n t a c t me at my o f f ic e at Delta C ol l e g e , (517) 6 8 6 - 90 27 . Sincerely, P a t r i c i a E sm ond As sociate Professor 195 Dear Colleague: I have enclosed envelopes with questionnaires to be completed by individuals who have held the position of president or chief academic officer at your college. I am asking your help with my study on career paths and selection processes of chief academic officer. It will enhance the study to have as many individuals respond as possible. Would you please forward these questionnaires to these individuals as I have been unable to obtain an address. Thank you very much for your assistance. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at my office at Delta College (517-686-9027). Sincerely, Patricia Esmond Associate Professor APPENDIX I IMPORTANCE OF FACTORS IN THE SELECTION PROCESS 196 T a b le 1 . - - Im p o r t a n c e o f t h e d o c t o r a t e in t h e s e l e c t i o n p ro c e s s , as p e r c e iv e d by c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s . Im p o r t a n t Group P re -1 9 74 P o s t- 1 9 7 4 Not I m p o r t a n t Cases 19 42 N % N % 4 13 21.1 54.8 7 10 36.8 23.8 Does Not A p p ly / No Response N % 8 9 42.1 21.4 T a b l e 2 . - - ■Importance o f t h e m a s t e r ’ s d e g r e e in t h e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s , as p e r c e i v e d by c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s . Important Group Pre -1 974 P o s t- 1 9 7 4 Not I m p o r t a n t Cases 19 42 N % N 9 19 4 7 .3 4 5 .2 7 18 % 36.9 42.9 Does Not Apply/ No Response N % 3 5 15.8 11.9 Ta b le 3 . - - I m p o r t a n c e o f t h e ma jor d i s c i p l i n e a r e a o f t h e m a s t e r ’ s o r d o c t o r a t e in t h e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s , as p e r c e i v e d by c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s . Important Group Pre-1974a P o s t- 1 9 7 4 Not I m p o r t a n t Cases 19 42 N % N % 8 15 42.1 35.7 10 25 5 2 .7 59.5 aDoes n o t t o t a l 100.0% due t o ro u n d in g . Does Not A pp ly / No Response N % 1 2 5.3 4.8 197 T a b le 4 . - -Im p o r t a n c e o f p u b l i c school t e a c h in g e x p e r ie n c e in th e s e l e c t i o n p ro c e s s , as p e r c e iv e d by c h i e f academ ic o f f i c e r s . Important Group P re-1974 P o s t- 1 9 7 4 Not I m p o r t a n t Cases 19 42 N % N 2 3 1 0 .5 7.2 10 27 % 52.6 64.3 Does Not Ap ply/ No Response N % 7 12 36.9 28.5 Ta b l e 5 . - - Importance o f community c o l l e g e t e a c h i n g e x p e r i e n c e in t h e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s , as p e r c e i v e d by c h i e f academic officers. Important Group Pre-1974a P os t- 1 97 4 Not Im p o r t a n t Cases 19 42 N % N % 9 25 47.4 59. 5 7 11 36.9 26. 2 Does Not A p pl y / No Response N % 3 6 1 5. 8 14. 3 a Does; n o t t o t a l 100.0% due t o r o u n d i n g . T a b l e 6 . - •Importance o f a d m i n i s t r a t i v e e x p e r i e n c e o t h e r t h a n com­ munity c o l l e g e in t h e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s , as p e r c e i v e d by c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s . Important Group Pre-1974a P o s t- 1 9 7 4 Not I m p o r t a n t Cases 19 42 N % N % 9 10 4 7 .4 23.8 2 12 1 0. 6 28.6 aDoes n ot t o t a l 100.0% due t o r o u n d in g . Does Not App ly/ No Response N % 8 20 42.1 47.6 198 T a b le 7 . - - Im p o r t a n c e o f p u b l i c school a d m i n i s t r a t i v e e x p e r ie n c e in t h e s e l e c t i o n p ro c e s s , as p e r c e iv e d by c h i e f academ ic o ffic e rs . Important Group N P r e-1 974 P o s t- 1 9 7 4 Not I m p o r t a n t Cases 19 42 4 7 % 21.0 16 .7 N 4 12 % 21.1 2 8. 6 Does Not A ppl y/ No Response % N 11 23 57.9 54.7 T a b l e 8 . - - -I m p or ta n ce o f b u s i n e s s / i n d u s t r y e x p e r i e n c e i n t h e s e l e c ­ t i o n p r o c e s s , as p e r c e i v e d by c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s . Important Group P r e-1 974 P o s t- 1 9 7 4 Not I m p o r t a n t Cases 19 42 N % N % 2 3 1 0 .6 7.1 3 13 1 5. 8 31.0 Does Not App ly/ No Response N % 14 26 73.6 61.9 T a b l e 9 . - - I m p o r t a n c e o f community c o l l e g e a d m i n i s t r a t i v e e x p e r i ­ ence in t h e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s , as p e r c e i v e d by c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s . Important Group Pre-1974a P o s t- 1 9 7 4 Not I m p o r t a n t Cases 19 42 N % N 7 22 36.8 52. 4 2 5 aDoes n o t t o t a l 100.0% due t o ro u n d in g . % 10. 6 11. 9 Does Not A pp ly/ No Response N % 10 15 52.7 35.7 199 T a b l e 1 0 . - -I m p o r ta n ce o f d i v i s i o n / d e p a r t m e n t c h a i r e x p e r i e n c e in t h e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s , as p e r c e i v e d by c h i e f academic officers. Important Group N Pre-1974a Post-1974a Not I m p o r t a n t Cases 19 42 aDoes n o t t o t a l 4 23 % N % 21.1 5 4. 8 2 5 10.6 12.0 Does Not App ly/ No Response N % 13 14 68.4 33.4 100.0% due t o r o u n d i n g . Tab le 1 1 . - - I m p or ta n ce o f a s s o c i a t e / a s s i s t a n t dean e x p e r i e n c e i n t h e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s , as p e r c e i v e d by c h i e f academic o fficers. Important Group Pre-1974a Po st -1 9 74 Not I m p o r t a n t Cases 19 42 N % N % 4 14 21.1 3 3 .3 3 7 1 5. 9 16. 7 Does Not Apply/ No Response N % 12 21 63 .1 50.0 aDoes n o t t o t a l 100.0% due t o r o u n d i n g . Ta bl e 1 2 . - -I m p o r ta n ce o f dean e x p e r i e n c e i n t h e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s , as p e r c e i v e d by c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s . Important Group Pre-1974 P o s t- 19 74 Not I m p o r t a n t Cases 19 42 N % N % 7 24 36.9 57.1 1 4 5.3 9.6 aDoes n ot t o t a l 100.0% due t o ro u n d in g . Does Not Apply/ No Response N % 11 14 57.9 33 .3 2 00 T a b le 1 3 . - - I m p o r t a n c e o f v i c e - p r e s i d e n t e x p e r ie n c e i n th e s e l e c ­ t i o n p ro c e s s , as p e r c e iv e d by c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s . Important Group Pre-1974a P o s t- 1 9 7 4 Not I m p o r t a n t Cases 19 42 N % N % 1 7 5.3 1 6 .7 1 6 5.3 14.3 Does Not Ap ply/ No Response N % 17 29 89.5 69.0 a Does n o t t o t a l 100.0% due t o r o u n d i n g . T ab l e 1 4 . - - I m p o r t a n c e o f n o n e d u c a t i o n e x p e r i e n c e in t h e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s , as p e r c e i v e d by c h i e f aca demic o f f i c e r s . Important Group N Pre-1974a P o s t- 1 9 7 4 Not I m p o r t a n t Cases 19 42 a Does n o t t o t a l 3 14 % 1 5. 8 3 3. 3 N 2 12 % 10.6 2.4 Does Not A ppl y/ No Response N % 14 16 73. 7 38.1 100.0% due t o r o u n d i n g . T ab l e 1 5 . - - - I m p or ta n ce o f s c h o l a r l y a c t i v i t y - - p u b l i c a t i o n s in t h e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s , as p e r c e i v e d by c h i e f academic o fficers. Important Group N P r e-1 974 Post-1974a Not I m p o r t a n t Cases 19 42 6 5 % 31.6 1 1. 9 N % 8 31 42.1 73.8 aDoes n o t t o t a l 100.0% due t o ro u n d in g . Does Not A p pl y / No Response N % 5 6 26.3 14.2 201 T a b le 1 6 . - - Im p o r t a n c e o f o f f i c e s h e ld i n s t a t e / n a t i o n a l o r g a n i z a ­ t i o n s in th e s e l e c t i o n p ro c e s s , as p e r c e iv e d by c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s . Im p o r t a n t Group Pre-1974a P o s t- 1 9 7 4 Not I m p o r t a n t Cases 19 42 N % N % 4 9 21.1 2 1 .4 9 23 47.4 54.8 Does Not A pp ly/ No Response N % 6 10 31.6 23.8 a Does n o t t o t a l 100.0% due t o r o u n d i n g . T a b l e 1 7 . -- - I m p or ta n ce o f s o u r c e s in t h e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s , as p e r ­ c e i v e d by c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s . Important Group Pre-1974a P o s t- 1 9 7 4 Not I m p o r t a n t Cases 19 42 N % N % 7 6 36.9 14.3 2 18 1 0 .6 42.9 Does Not Ap ply/ No Response N % 10 18 5 2 .5 42.9 a Does no t t o t a l 100.0% due t o r o u n d i n g . T ab l e 1 8 . - - I m p or ta n ce o f i n t e r n a l c a n d i d a t e in t h e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s , as p e r c e i v e d by c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s . Important Group Pre -1 974 P os t- 1 97 4 Not I m p o r t a n t Cases 19 42 N % N % 7 15 3 6. 9 3 5 .7 2 9 10.5 21.4 Does Not A ppl y/ No Response N % 10 18 5 2. 6 42.9 202 T a b le 1 9 . - - I m p o r t a n c e o f e x t e r n a l c a n d id a t e in th e s e l e c t i o n p ro c e s s , as p e r c e iv e d by c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s . Important Group Pre- 19 74 Post-19743 Not I m p o r t a n t Cases 19 42 N % N % 4 8 21.1 19.0 4 9 2 1 .0 2 1 .4 Does Not Apply/ No Response N % 11 25 5 7 .9 5 9 .5 a Does n o t t o t a l 100.0% due t o r o u n d i n g . T ab l e 2 0 . - - - I m p or ta n ce o f age in t h e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s , as p e r c e i v e d by c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s . Important Group Pre- 19 74 P o s t- 1 9 7 4 Not I m p o r t a n t Cases 19 42 N % N % 2 7 1 0 .5 1 6 .7 14 25 73. 7 5 9 .5 Does Not App ly/ No Response N % 3 10 15.8 23.8 T ab l e 21 . - - I m p o r t a n c e o f g e n d e r in t h e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s , as p e r ­ c e i v e d by c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s . Important Group Pre- 19 74 Post-19743 Not I m p o r t a n t Cases 19 42 N % N % 2 3 1 0. 5 7.1 14 33 73 .7 78. 6 aDoes n ot t o t a l 100.0% due t o ro u n d in g . Does Not Apply/ No Response N % 3 6 15.8 14. 2 203 T a b le 2 2 . - - Im p o r t a n c e o f ra c e in t h e s e l e c t i o n p ro c e s s , as p e r c e iv e d by c h i e f academ ic o f f i c e r s . Important Group Pre-1974 P o s t- 1 9 7 4 Not I m p o r t a n t Cases 19 42 N % 1 2 5.3 4.8 N 15 32 % 7 8 .9 76. 2 Does Not Apply; No Response N % 3 8 15.8 19.0 Ta bl e 2 3 . - - I m p o r t a n c e o f b ei n g m a r r i e d in t h e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s , as p e r c e i v e d by c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s . Important Group Pre-1974 P o s t- 1 9 7 4 Not I m p o r t a n t Cases 19 42 N % N % 3 2 1 5. 8 4.8 15 32 78. 9 76.2 Does Not Apply/ No Response N % 1 8 5.3 19.0 Tabl e 2 4 . - - I m p o r t a n c e o f b ei n g s i n g l e in t h e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s , as p e r c e i v e d by c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s . Important Group N Pre-1974a P o s t- 1 9 7 4 Not I m p o r t a n t Cases 19 42 0 0 % 0 0 N % 10 17 5 2 .6 40.5 a Does n o t t o t a l 100.0% due t o ro u n d in g . Does Not Apply/ No Response N % 9 25 47.3 59.5 204 T a b le 2 5 . - - Im p o r t a n c e o f b e in g d iv o r c e d in t h e s e l e c t i o n p ro c e s s , as p e r c e iv e d by c h i e f academ ic o f f i c e r s . Important Group % N Pre- 19 74 P o s t- 19 74 Not I m p o r t a n t Cases 19 42 0 0 0 0 N % 8 17 42.1 40.5 Does Not App ly/ No Response N % 11 25 5 7 .9 5 9 .5 T a b l e 2 6 . - - I m p o r t a n c e o f c h i l d r e n in t h e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s , , as p e r c e i v e d by c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s . Important Group Pre-1974a Post-1974a Not I m p o r t a n t Cases 19 42 N % N % 2 3 1 0 .6 7.2 15 26 79.0 61.8 Does Not Ap ply/ No Response N % 2 13 10.6 30.9 a Does n o t t o t a l 100.0% due t o r o u n d i n g . Ta bl e 2 7 . - - I m p o r t a n c e o f communication s k i l l s in t h e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s , as p e r c e i v e d by c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s . Important Group P r e-1 974 Post-1974a Not I m p o r t a n t Cases 19 42 N % N % 18 40 94.7 95.3 0 0 0 0 a Does n o t t o t a l 1 0 0.0% due t o ro u n d in g . Does Not A pp ly / No Response N % 1 2 5.3 4.8 205 T a b le 2 8 . - -Im p o r t a n c e o f l e a d e r s h i p in th e s e l e c t i o n p ro c e s s , as p e r c e iv e d by c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s . Im p o r t a n t Group N P re -1 97 4 P o s t- 1 9 7 4 Not I m p o r t a n t Cases 19 42 18 39 % 9 4 .7 92.8 N 0 0 % Does Not A ppl y/ No Response N % 1 3 0 0 5.3 7.1 T a b l e 2 9 . - -I m p o r ta n ce o f m a t u r i t y in t h e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s , as p e r c e i v e d by c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s . Important Group P . t '- 1 9 7 4 a P o s t- 1 9 7 4 Not I m p o r t a n t Cases 19 42 N % N % 17 37 89.5 88.1 1 3 5.3 7.1 Does Not A p pl y / No Response N % 1 2 5.3 4.8 aDoes n o t t o t a l 100.0% due t o r o u n d i n g . T a b l e 3 0 . - -I m p o rt a n ce o f b e l i e f in t h e community c o l l e g e p h i l o s o p h y in t h e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s , as p e r c e i v e d by c h i e f academic officers. Important Group N Pr e- 1 9 7 4 P o s t- 1 9 7 4 Not I m p o r t a n t Cases 19 42 16 37 % 84.2 88.1 N % 1 4 5.3 9.5 Does Not A p pl y / No Response N % 2 1 10.5 2.4 206 T a b le 3 1 . - - I m p o r t a n c e o f a t t i t u d e in t h e s e l e c t i o n p ro c e s s , as p e r c e iv e d by c h i e f academ ic o f f i c e r s . Important Group N Pre-1974 Post-1974a Not I m p o r t a n t Cases 19 42 18 38 % 94.7 90.5 N % 0 2 0 4.8 Does Not A ppl y/ No Response N % 1 2 5.3 4.8 aDoes n o t t o t a l 100.0% due t o r o u n d i n g . Ta b le 3 2 . - - I m p o r t a n c e o f t h e a b i l i t y t o work w i t h o t h e r s i n t h e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s , as p e r c e i v e d by c h i e f academic o fficers. Important Group Pre-1974 P o s t- 19 74 Not I m p o r t a n t Cases 19 42 N % N 18 38 94.7 90.5 0 0 % 0 0 Does Not A ppl y/ No Response N % 1 4 5.3 9.5 Ta bl e 3 3 . - - I m p o r t a n c e o f t h e d o c t o r a t e i n t h e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s , as p e r c e i v e d by p r e s i d e n t s . Important Group N P re -1 9 7 4 a P os t-1 97 4 ... a n „ ^ " Not I m p o r t a n t Cases 16 25 8 20 % 5 0. 0 80.0 N % 6 5 37.6 2 0 .0 Does Not Apply, No Response N % 2 0 1 2 .5 0 207 T a b le 3 4 . - - Im p o r t a n c e o f th e m a s t e r ’ s d e g re e in th e s e l e c t i o n p ro c e s s , as p e r c e iv e d by p r e s i d e n t s . Important Group Pre-1974a P o s t- 1 9 7 4 Not I m p o r t a n t Cases 16 25 N % N % 12 20 75. 0 80.0 1 0 6.3 0 Does Not A ppl y/ No Response N % 3 5 18.8 20.0 aDoes n o t t o t a l 100.0% due t o r o u n d i n g . T a b l e 3 5 . - - I m p o rt a n c e o f t h e major d i s c i p l i n e a r e a o f t h e m a s t e r ’ s o r d o c t o r a t e i n t h e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s , as p e r c e i v e d by presidents. I m p o rt a n t Group Pre-1974a P os t- 1 97 4 Not I m p o r t a n t Cases 16 25 a Does n o t t o t a l N % N % 6 12 37.6 4 8 .0 8 11 50. 0 44.0 Does Not A p pl y / No Response N % 2 2 12.6 8.0 100.0% due t o r o u n d i n g . T ab l e 3 6 . - - I m p o r t a n c e o f p u b l i c sch ool t e a c h i n g e x p e r i e n c e in t h e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s , as p e r c e i v e d by p r e s i d e n t s . Important Group Pre-1974a P os t- 1 97 4 Not I m p o r t a n t Cases 16 25 N % N % 1 3 6.3 12. 0 12 15 75.1 7 6. 0 aDoes n o t t o t a l 100.0% due t o ro u n d in g . Does Not Apply, No Response N % 3 3 18.8 1 2. 0 208 T a b le 3 7 . - - I m p o r t a n c e o f community c o l l e g e t e a c h in g e x p e r ie n c e in th e s e l e c t i o n p ro c e s s , as p e r c e iv e d by p r e s i d e n t s . Important Group Pre-1974a P o s t- 1 9 7 4 Not I m p o r t a n t Cases 16 25 N % N % 11 16 68.8 64.0 4 6 25.1 24.0 Does Not A pp ly/ No Response N % 1 3 6.3 12.0 a Does n o t t o t a l 100.0% due t o r o u n d i n g . T ab l e 3 8 . - - I m p o r t a n c e o f a d m i n i s t r a t i v e e x p e r i e n c e o t h e r th a n community c o l l e g e in t h e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s , a s p e r ­ c e i v e d by p r e s i d e n t s . Im p o r t a n t Group Pre-1974a P o s t- 1 97 4 Not I m p o r t a n t Cases 16 25 a Does n o t t o t a l N % N % 7 9 43.8 36.0 3 7 18.9 28.0 Does Not App ly/ No Response N % 6 9 37.6 36.0 100.0% due t o r o u n d i n g . T ab l e 3 9 . - - I m p o r t a n c e o f p u b l i c sch ool a d m i n i s t r a t i v e e x p e r i e n c e in t h e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s , as p e r c e i v e d by p r e s i d e n t s . Important Group Pre-1974a P o s t- 1 9 7 4 Not I m p o r t a n t Cases 16 25 N % N % 2 4 12.6 1 6 .0 5 12 31.3 48.0 aDoes n o t t o t a l 100.0% due t o ro u n d in g . Does Not App ly/ No Response N % 9 9 56.3 36.0 209 T a b le 4 0 . - - Im p o r t a n c e o f b u s i n e s s / i n d u s t r y e x p e r ie n c e in th e s e l e c t i o n p ro c e s s , as p e r c e iv e d by p r e s i d e n t s . Important Group N Pre-1974a P o st- 1 97 4 Not I m p o r t a n t Cases 16 25 5 3 % 31.3 1 2 .0 N 2 9 % 12.6 36.0 Does Not Apply, No Response N % 9 13 5 6 .3 52 . 0 aDoes n o t t o t a l 100.0% due t o r o u n d i n g . T a b l e 4 1 . - - I m p o r t a n c e of community c o l l e g e a d m i n i s t r a t i v e e x p e r i ­ ence in t h e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s , as p e r c e i v e d by p r e s i ­ dents . Important Group Pre-1974a P os t- 1 97 4 Not I m p o r t a n t Cases 16 25 N % N % 7 22 43.8 88.0 2 3 1 2 .6 1 2. 0 Does Not A ppl y/ No Response N % 7 43.8 7 28.0 aDoes n o t t o t a l 100.0% due t o r o u n d i n g . T ab l e 4 2 . - - I m p o r t a n c e of d i v i s i o n / d e p a r t m e n t c h a i r e x p e r i e n c e in t h e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s , as p e r c e i v e d by p r e s i d e n t s . Important Group Pre- 19 74 P os t- 1 97 4 Not Im p o r t a n t Cases 16 25 N % N % 6 14 37.5 5 6 .0 6 4 37.5 16. 0 aDoes n ot t o t a l 1 0 0 .0% due t o ro u n d in g . Does Not A pp ly / No Response N % 4 7 25.0 28.0 210 T a b le 4 3 . - - Im p o r t a n c e o f a s s o c i a t e / a s s i s t a n t dean e x p e r ie n c e in t h e s e l e c t i o n p ro c e s s , as p e r c e iv e d by p r e s i d e n t s . Important Group Pre-1974a P o s t- 19 74 Not I m p o r t a n t Cases 16 25 N % N % 9 16 5 6 .3 64.0 4 2 25.0 8.0 Does Not App ly/ No Response N % 3 7 18.8 28.0 aDoes n o t t o t a l 100.0% due t o r o u n d i n g . Ta b l e 4 4 . - -I m po r ta nc e o f dean e x p e r i e n c e in t h e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s , as p e r c e i v e d by p r e s i d e n t s . Important Group Pre-1974a P o s t- 19 74 Not I m p o r t a n t Cases 16 25 N % N % 8 18 50.0 72.0 3 1 1 8 .9 4.0 Does Not A ppl y/ No Response N % 5 6 3 1 .3 24.0 aDoes n o t t o t a l 100.0% due t o r o u n d i n g . T ab l e 4 5 . - - I m p o r t a n c e o f v i c e - p r e s i d e n t e x p e r i e n c e in t h e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s , as p e r c e i v e d by p r e s i d e n t s . Important Group N Pre-1974a P o s t- 19 74 Not I m p o r t a n t Cases 16 25 4 7 % 25.0 2 8. 0 N % 5 6 31.3 24.0 aDoes n o t t o t a l 100.0% due t o ro u n d in g . Does Not A pp ly/ No Response N % 7 12 43.8 48.0 211 T a b le 4 6 . - - Im p o r t a n c e o f n on ed u c a tio n e x p e r ie n c e in t h e s e l e c t i o n p ro c e s s , as p e r c e iv e d by p r e s i d e n t s . Important Group Pre-1974a P o s t- 1 9 7 4 Not I m p o r t a n t Cases 16 25 N % N % 2 4 1 2 .5 16 .0 6 9 5 0. 0 36.0 Does Not Apply, No Response N % 6 12 37.6 48.0 aDoes no t t o t a l 100.0% due t o r o u n d in g . T a b l e 4 7 . - - I m p o r t a n c e o f s c h o l a r l y a c t i v i t y - - p u b l i c a t i o n s in t h e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s , as p e r c e i v e d by p r e s i d e n t s . Important Group Pre-1974a P o s t- 19 74 Not I m p o r t a n t Cases 16 25 N % N % 2 5 12.5 20. 0 8 15 50.1 6 0. 0 Does Not Apply, No Response N % 6 5 37.5 20.0 aDoes no t t o t a l 100.0% due t o r o u n d i n g . T a b l e 4 8 . - - I m p o r t a n c e o f o f f i c e s h e l d in s t a t e / n a t i o n a l o r g a n i z a ­ t i o n s i n t h e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s , as p e r c e i v e d by p r e s i ­ dents. I m p o rt a n t Group Pre-1974a P o s t- 19 74 Not I m p o r t a n t Cases 16 25 N % N % 2 6 12. 5 2 4. 0 9 14 56. 4 5 6 .0 aDoes not t o t a l 100.0% due t o ro u n d in g . Does Not Apply, No Response N % 5 5 31.3 20.0 212 T a b le 4 9 . - - Im p o r t a n c e o f so u rc e s in th e s e l e c t i o n p ro c e s s , as p e r c e iv e d by p r e s i d e n t s . Important Group Pre-1974a Po st -1 9 73 Not I m p o r t a n t Cases 16 25 N % N % 0 3 0 12.0 5 12 31.3 48.0 Does Not A ppl y/ No Response N % 11 10 6 8 .8 40. 0 a Does n o t t o t a l 100.0% due t o r o u n d i n g . Ta bl e 5 0 . - - - Im po rta n ce o f i n t e r n a l c a n d i d a t e in t h e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s , as p e r c e i v e d by p r e s i d e n t s . Important Group Pre-1974a Po st -1 9 74 Not I m p o r t a n t Cases 16 25 N % N % 2 7 1 2. 6 28.0 8 8 50.1 32.0 Does Not A p pl y / No Response N % 6 10 37 .5 4 0 .0 aDoes n o t t o t a l 100.0% due t o r o u n d i n g . Tabl e 5 1 . - - I m p o r t a n c e o f e x t e r n a l c a n d i d a t e in t h e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s , as p e r c e i v e d by p r e s i d e n t s . Important Group Pre-1974a Po st -1 9 74 Not I m p o r t a n t Cases 16 25 N % N % 2 6 12.6 24.0 8 9 50.1 36.0 aDoes n ot t o t a l 100.0% due t o ro u n d in g . Does Not Apply, No Response N % 6 10 3 7. 5 4 0. 0 213 T a b le 5 2 . - - I m p o r t a n c e o f age in th e s e l e c t i o n p ro c e s s , as p e r ­ c e iv e d by p r e s i d e n t s . Im p o r t a n t Group Pre-1974a P o s t- 1 9 7 4 Not Im p o r t a n t Cases 16 25 N % N % 1 2 6.3 8.0 11 13 68.9 5 2 .0 Does Not Ap ply/ No Response N % 4 10 25.1 40.0 a Does n o t t o t a l 100.0% due t o r o u n d i n g . T a b l e 5 3 . - - -I m p o rt a n ce o f g e n d e r in t h e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s , as p e r ­ c e i v e d by p r e s i d e n t s . Important Group Pre-1974a P o s t- 1 9 7 4 Not I m p o r t a n t Cases 16 25 N % N % 2 0 12.6 0 8 16 5 0 .0 64.0 Does Not A pp ly / No Response N % 6 9 37.6 36.0 aDoes n o t t o t a l 100.0% due t o r o u n d i n g . T a b l e 5 4 . - - -I m p o r ta n ce o f r a c e in t h e s e l e c t i o n p r o ce s s ;, as p e r c e i v e d by p r e s i d e n t s . Important Group Pre-1974a P o s t- 1 9 7 4 Not I m p o r t a n t Cases 16 25 N % N % 0 1 0 4.0 9 15 56 .3 60.0 aDoes n o t t o t a l 100.0% due t o ro u n d in g . Does Not A p pl y / No Response N % 7 9 43.8 36.0 214 T a b le 5 5 . - - Im p o r t a n c e o f b e in g m a r r ie d in t h e s e l e c t i o n p ro c e s s , as p e r c e iv e d by p r e s i d e n t s . Important Group Pre-1974a Po st -1 9 74 Not I m p o r t a n t Cases 16 25 N % N % 1 1 6.3 4.0 8 15 50.1 60.0 Does Not Apply, No Response N % 7 9 43.8 36.0 a Does n o t t o t a l 100.0% due t o r o u n d i n g . T ab l e 5 6 . - - I m p o r t a n c e o f be in g s i n g l e in t h e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s , as p e r c e i v e d by p r e s i d e n t s . Important Group Pre-1974a P o st- 1 97 4 Not I m p o r t a n t Cases 16 25 N % N % 0 1 0 4.0 9 14 5 6. 4 5 6 .0 Does Not App ly/ No Response N % 7 10 43.8 40.0 a Does n o t t o t a l 100.0% due t o r o u n d i n g . T ab l e 5 7 . - - I m p o r t a n c e o f b e i n g d i v o r c e d i n t h e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s , as p e r c e i v e d by p r e s i d e n t s . Important Group N Pre-1974a Po st -1 9 74 Not Im p o r t a n t Cases 16 25 0 0 % 0 0 N % 10 15 62.6 60.0 aDoes n ot t o t a l 100.0% due t o ro u n d in g . Does Not Apply, No Response N % 6 10 37.6 40.0 215 T a b le 5 8 . - - Im p o r t a n c e o f c h i l d r e n i n t h e s e l e c t i o n p ro c e s s , as p e r c e iv e d by p r e s i d e n t s . Important Group Pre-1974a P o s t- 1 9 7 4 Not I m p o r t a n t Cases 16 25 a Does n o t t o t a l N % 1 1 6.3 4.0 N % 8 15 50.1 60.0 Does Not A pp ly/ No Response N % 7 9 43.8 36.0 100.0% due t o r o u n d i n g . T a b l e 5 9 . - -I m p o r ta n ce o f communication s k i l l s in t h e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s , a s p e r c e i v e d by p r e s i d e n t s . Important Group N Pre-1974a P o s t- 1 9 7 4 16 25 aDoes n o t t o t a l 13 23 N % N % 81. 3 92 .0 1 1 6.3 4.0 2 1 1 2 .5 4.0 100.0% due t o r o u n d i n g . Im p o r t a n t in t h e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s , as Not I m p o r t a n t Cases N P r e-1 974 P o s t- 1 9 7 4 16 25 Does Not Ap ply/ No Response % T a b l e 6 0 . - -I m p o r ta n ce o f l e a d e r s h i p p e r c e i v e d by p r e s i d e n t s . Group Not I m p o r t a n t Cases % N 14 8 7 . 5 22 8 8 . 0 0 0 % 0 0 Does Not A pp ly/ No Response N % 2 3 12.5 1 2. 0 216 T a b le 6 1 . - - I m p o r t a n c e o f m a t u r i t y in th e s e l e c t i o n p ro c e s s , as p e r c e iv e d by p r e s i d e n t s . Important Group Pre-1974a Post-1974 Not I m p o r t a n t Cases 16 25 N % N % 13 21 8 1 .3 84.0 0 0 0 0 Does Not Apply; No Response N % 3 4 18.8 16.0 aDoes n o t t o t a l 100.0% due t o r o u n d i n g . T a b l e 6 2 . - - I m p o r t a n c e o f b e l i e f in community c o l l e g e p h i l o s o p h y in t h e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s , as p e r c e i v e d by p r e s i d e n t s . Important Group Pre-1974 Post-1974 Not I m p o r t a n t Cases 16 25 N % N 14 22 87.5 88.0 0 0 % 0 0 Does Not A pp ly / No Response N % 2 3 12.5 12.0 T a b l e 6 3 . - - I m p o r t a n c e o f a t t i t u d e in t h e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s , as p e r c e i v e d by p r e s i d e n t s . I m po r ta nt Group Pre-1974a Post-1974 Not I m p o r t a n t Cases 16 25 N % N 14 22 87.6 88.0 0 0 aDoes n o t t o t a l 100.0% due t o ro u n d in g . % 0 0 Does Not Apply/ No Response N % 2 3 12.5 12.0 217 T a b le 6 4 . - - Im p o r t a n c e o f a b i l i t y t o work w i t h o th e r s in t h e s e l e c ­ t i o n p ro c e s s , as p e r c e iv e d by p r e s i d e n t s . Important Group Pre-1974a P o s t- 1 9 7 4 Not I m p o r t a n t Cases 16 25 N % N 13 22 81.3 88.0 0 0 % Does Not A ppl y/ No Response N % 0 0 3 3 18.8 12.0 aDoes n o t t o t a l 100.0% due t o r o u n d i n g . T a b l e 6 5 . - - I m p o r t a n c e o f t h e d o c t o r a t e in t h e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s , as p e r c e i v e d by c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s and p r e s i d e n t s . Important Group Not Important Cases N % N % Does Not A pp ly/ No Resp. N % Pre-CAOs Pre-presidents 19 16 4 8 21.1 5 0 .0 7 6 36.8 37.6 8 2 42.1 12 .5 Post-CAOs P ost-presidents 42 25 13 20 5 4. 8 80.0 10 5 23.8 2 0 .0 9 0 21 .4 0 218 Ta bl e 6 6 . - - I m p o r t a n c e o f t h e m a s t e r ’ s d e g r e e in t h e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s , as p e r c e i v e d by c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s and presidents. Important Group Not Important Cases N % N % Does Not A pp ly / No Resp. N % Pre-1974 CAOs Pr e-1974 p r e s i d e n t s 19 16 9 12 47.3 75.0 7 1 36.9 6.3 3 3 15.8 18.8 P os t-1 97 4 CAOs P os t-1 97 4 p r e s i d e n t s 42 25 19 20 45.2 80.0 18 0 2 4. 9 0 5 5 1 1 .9 20.0 Tabl e 6 7 . - - I m p o r t a n c e o f t h e m a jo r d i s c i p l i n e a r e a o f t h e m a s t e r ’ s o r d o c t o r a t e d e g r e e in t h e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s , as p e r ­ c e i v e d by c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s and p r e s i d e n t s . Important Group Not Important Cases N % N % Does Not A pp ly / No Resp. N % Pre-1974 CAOs Pr e-1974 p r e s i d e n t s 19 16 8 6 42.1 37.6 10 8 5 2. 6 5 0. 0 1 2 5.3 1 2. 6 P os t-1 9 74 CAOs P o s t- 1 97 4 p r e s i d e n t s 42 25 15 12 35.7 48.0 25 11 5 9. 5 44.0 2 2 4.8 8.0 219 T a b le 6 8 . - - I m p o r t a n c e o f p u b li c school t e a c h in g e x p e r ie n c e in th e s e l e c t i o n p ro c e s s , as p e r c e iv e d by c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s and p r e s i d e n t s . Important Group Not Important Cases N % N % Does Not A pp ly/ No Resp. N % Pr e- 1 97 4 CAOs Pr e- 1 97 4 p r e s i d e n t s 19 16 2 1 10.5 6.3 10 12 52. 7 75.1 7 3 36.9 18.8 P o s t - 1 9 7 4 CAOs P o s t- 1 9 7 4 p r e s i d e n t s 42 25 3 3 7.1 12.0 27 15 64.3 60.0 12 3 28.5 12.0 Ta b l e 6 9 . - - I m p o r t a n c e o f community c o l l e g e t e a c h i n g e x p e r i e n c e in t h e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s , as p e r c e i v e d by c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s and p r e s i d e n t s . Important Group Not Important Cases N % N % Does Not Apply / No Resp. N % P r e-1 974 CAOs P r e-1 974 p r e s i d e n t s 19 16 9 11 47.4 68.8 7 4 36.9 25.1 3 1 15.8 6.3 P o s t - 1 9 7 4 CAOs P o s t- 1 9 7 4 p r e s i d e n t s 42 25 25 16 5 9 .5 64.0 11 6 2 6 .2 24.0 6 3 1 4 .3 12.0 220 T a b le 7 0 . - -Im p o r t a n c e o f a d m i n i s t r a t i v e e x p e r ie n c e o t h e r tha n community c o l l e g e in th e s e l e c t i o n p ro c e s s , as p e r ­ c e iv e d by c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s and p r e s i d e n t s . Important Group Not Important Cases N % N % Does Not Apply/ No Resp. N % Pre -1 974 CAOs P r e-1 974 p r e s i d e n t s 19 16 9 7 4 7 .4 43.8 2 3 10.6 18.9 8 6 42.1 37.6 P o s t- 1 9 7 4 CAOs P o s t- 1 9 7 4 p r e s i d e n t s 42 25 10 9 2 3 .8 36.0 12 7 28.6 2 8. 0 20 9 4 7 .6 36.0 T a b l e 7 1 . - - I m p o r t a n c e o f p u b l i c school a d m i n i s t r a t i v e e x p e r i e n c e in t h e s e l e c t i on p r o c e s s , as p e r c e i v e d by c h i e f a c a demic o f f i c e r s and p r e s i d e n t s . Important Group Not Important Cases N % N % Does Not A pp ly/ No Resp. N % P r e-1 974 CAOs Pre- 19 74 p r e s i d e n t s 19 16 4 2 21.1 12. 6 4 5 21.1 3 1. 3 11 9 5 7 .9 56. 3 P o s t- 1 9 7 4 CAOs P o s t- 1 9 7 4 p r e s i d e n t s 42 25 7 4 16.7 16. 0 12 12 28.6 48.0 23 9 54 .7 36.0 221 T a b le 7 2 . - - Im p o r t a n c e o f b u s i n e s s / i n d u s t r y e x p e r ie n c e in th e s e l e c t i o n p ro c e s s , as p e r c e iv e d by c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s and p r e s i d e n t s . Im p o r t a n t Group Not Important Cases N % N % Does Not A pp ly/ No Resp. N % P r e- 19 74 CAOs P r e- 19 74 p r e s i d e n t s 19 16 2 5 10 .6 31.3 3 2 1 5. 8 1 2 .6 14 9 7 3 .6 56 .3 P o s t - 1 9 7 4 CAOs Post-1974 p r e s id e n t s 42 25 3 3 7.1 12.0 13 9 31.0 36.0 26 13 61.9 5 2. 0 T a b l e 7 3 . - - I m p o r t a n c e o f community c o l l e g e a d m i n i s t r a t i v e e x p e r i ­ ence in t h e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s , a s p e r c e i v e d by c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s and p r e s i d e n t s . Important Group Cases N P re -1 97 4 CAOs P re -1 97 4 p r e s i d e n t s P o s t - 1 9 7 4 CAOs Post-1974 p r e s i d e n t s Not Important 19 16 42 25 % 7 7 36.8 43.8 22 22 52.4 88.0 N 2 2 5 3 % Does Not App ly/ No Resp. N % 10. 6 12. 6 10 7 1 1 .9 1 2. 0 15 3 5 . 7 7 28.0 52 .7 43.8 222 T a b le 7 4 . - - Im p o r t a n c e o f d iv i s i o n / d e p a r t m e n t c h a i r e x p e r ie n c e in t h e s e l e c t i o n p ro c e s s , as p e r c e iv e d by c h i e f academ ic o f f i c e r s and p r e s i d e n t s . Important Group Not Important Cases N % N % Does Not A p p ly / No Resp. N % P re -1 9 7 4 CAOs P re - 19 74 p r e s i d e n t s 19 16 4 6 21.1 37.5 2 6 1 0. 6 37.5 13 4 68.4 25.0 P o s t - 1 9 7 4 CAOs Post-1974 p r e s i d e n t s 42 25 2 17 54.8 56 .0 5 4 1 2. 0 1 6. 0 14 7 33.4 28.0 T a b l e 7 5 . - - I m p o r t a n c e o f a s s o c i a t e / a s s i s t a n t dean e x p e r i e n c e in t h e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s , as p e r c e i v e d by c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s and p r e s i d e n t s . Important Group Not Important Cases N % N % Does Not A pp ly / No Resp. N % P re - 19 74 CAOs P r e-1 974 p r e s i d e n t s 19 16 4 9 21.1 53.3 3 4 1 5. 9 2 5. 0 12 3 63.1 18.8 P o s t - 1 9 7 4 CAOs Post-1974 p r e s i d e n t s 42 25 14 16 3 3. 3 64.0 7 2 1 6. 7 8.0 21 7 50.0 28.0 223 T a b le 7 6 . - - Im p o r t a n c e o f dean e x p e r ie n c e in t h e s e l e c t i o n p ro c e s s , as p e r c e iv e d by c h i e f academ ic o f f i c e r s and p r e s i d e n t s . Important Group Not Important Cases N % N % Does Not A p p ly / No Resp. N % P r e-1 974 CAOs P r e-1 97 4 p r e s i d e n t s 19 16 7 8 39.9 50.0 1 3 5.3 1 8. 9 11 5 5 7. 9 31.3 P o s t- 1 9 7 4 CAOs P o s t- 1 9 7 4 p r e s i d e n t s 42 25 24 18 57.1 72.0 4 1 9.6 4.0 14 6 33.3 24.0 Ta b l e 7 7 . - - I m p o r t a n c e o f v i c e - p r e s i d e n t e x p e r i e n c e in t h e s e l e c ­ t i o n p r o c e s s , as p e r c e i v e d by c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s and p r e s i d e n t s . Important Group Not Important Cases N % N % Does Not A p pl y / No Resp. N % P r e-1 974 CAOs P r e-1 97 4 p r e s i d e n t s 19 16 1 4 5.3 2 5. 0 1 5 5. 3 3 1. 3 17 7 89.5 43.8 P o s t- 1 9 7 4 CAOs P o s t- 1 9 7 4 p r e s i d e n t s 42 25 7 7 16. 7 2 8 .0 6 6 14.3 2 4. 0 29 12 69.0 48.0 224 Ta b l e 78. - I m p o r t a n c e o f n o n e d u c a ti o n e x p e r i e n c e in t h e s e l e c ­ t i o n p r o c e s s , as p e r c e i v e d by c h i e f aca demic o f f i c e r s and p r e s i d e n t s . Important Group Not Important Cases N % N % Does Not Ap ply / No Resp. N % Pre- 19 74 CAOs P r e-1 974 p r e s i d e n t s 19 16 3 2 15.8 12.5 2 6 10.6 50.0 14 6 7 3 .7 37.6 P o s t- 1 9 7 4 CAOs P o s t- 1 9 7 4 p r e s i d e n t s 42 25 14 4 33.3 16.0 12 9 28.6 36.0 16 12 38.1 48.0 Ta b l e 7 9 . - - I m p o r t a n c e o f s c h o l a r l y a c t i v i t y - - p u b l i c a t i o n s in t h e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s , as p e r c e i v e d by c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s and p r e s i d e n t s . Important Group Not Important Cases Does Not A p p ly / No Resp. N % N % N % P re-1974 CAOs Pre- 19 74 p r e s i d e n t s 19 16 6 2 31.6 1 2. 5 8 8 42.1 50.1 5 6 26 .3 3 7. 5 P o s t- 1 9 7 4 CAOs P o s t- 1 9 7 4 p r e s i d e n t s 42 25 5 5 1 1. 9 20.0 31 15 73.8 60.0 6 5 14 .2 20.0 225 Ta b l e 8 0 . - - I m p o r t a n c e o f o f f i c e s h e l d i n s t a t e / n a t i o n a l o r g a n i z a n a t i o n s in t h e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s , as p e r c e i v e d by c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s and p r e s i d e n t s . Important Group Not Important Does Not Apply Cases N % N % N % Pre- 19 74 CAOs Pre-1 97 4 p r e s i d e n t s 19 16 4 2 21.1 12.5 9 9 47.4 56.4 6 5 31.6 31.3 P o s t- 1 9 7 4 CAOs P o s t- 1 9 7 4 p r e s i d e n t s 42 25 9 6 2 1. 4 2 4. 0 23 14 54.8 56.0 10 5 23.8 20.0 Tab le 8 1 . - - I m p o r t a n c e o f s o u r c e s i n t h e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s , as p e r c e i v e d by c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s and p r e s i d e n t s . Important Group Not Important Cases N % N % Does Not A pp ly/ No Resp. N % Pre- 19 74 CAOs Pre- 19 74 p r e s i d e n t s 19 16 7 0 36.9 0 2 5 10.6 31.3 10 11 52.6 68.8 P o s t- 1 9 7 4 CAOs P o s t- 1 9 7 4 p r e s i d e n t s 42 25 6 3 14.3 1 2. 0 18 12 42.8 48.0 18 42.9 40.0 226 T ab le 8 2 . - - I m p o r t a n c e o f i n t e r n a l c a n d i d a t e i n t h e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s , as p e r c e i v e d by c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s and presidents. Im p o r t a n t Group Not Important Cases N % N % Does Not A pp ly/ No Resp. N % Pre- 19 74 CAOs Pre- 19 74 p r e s i d e n t s 19 16 7 2 36.9 12 .6 2 8 10.5 50.1 10 6 5 2 .6 37.5 P o s t- 1 9 7 4 CAOs P o s t- 1 9 7 4 p r e s i d e n t s 42 25 15 7 3 5. 7 28.0 9 8 21.4 32.0 18 10 42.9 40.0 T ab l e 8 3 . - - I m p o r t a n c e o f e x t e r n a l c a n d i d a t e i n t h e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s , as p e r c e i v e d by c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s and presidents. Important Group Not Important Cases N % N % Does Not Apply/ No Resp. N % Pre-1 97 4 CAOs Pre-1 97 4 p r e s i d e n t s 19 16 4 2 21.1 1 2 .6 4 8 21.0 50.1 11 6 5 7 .9 37.5 P o s t- 19 74 CAOs P o s t- 1 9 7 4 p r e s i d e n t s 42 25 8 6 19.0 2 4 .0 9 9 2 1. 4 36.0 25 10 59. 5 40.0 227 T a b le 8 4 . - - Im p o r t a n c e o f age in t h e s e l e c t i o n p ro c e s s , as p e r ­ c e iv e d by c h i e f academ ic o f f i c e r s and p r e s i d e n t s . Important Group Not Important Cases N % N % Does Not A pp ly/ No Resp. N % P r e-1 974 CAOs P r e-1 97 4 p r e s i d e n t s 19 16 2 1 1 0 .5 6.3 14 11 7 3 .7 68.9 3 4 15.8 25.1 P o s t- 1 9 7 4 CAOs P o s t- 1 9 7 4 p r e s i d e n t s 42 25 7 2 1 6. 7 8.0 25 13 59.5 5 2 .0 10 10 23.8 40.0 Ta b l e 8 5 . - - I m p o r t a n c e o f g e n d e r in t h e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s , as p e r ­ c e i v e d by c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s and p r e s i d e n t s . Important Group Not Important Cases N P r e-1 97 4 CAOs Pre-1 97 4 p r e s i d e n t s 19 16 P o s t- 1 9 7 4 CAOs P o s t- 1 9 7 4 p r e s i d e n t s 42 25 2 2 3 0 % N % Does Not A p pl y / No Resp. N % 1 0 .5 1 2 .6 14 8 73 .7 5 0. 0 3 6 15.8 37.6 7.1 0 33 16 7 8. 6 64.0 6 9 14 .2 36.0 228 T a b le 8 6 . - - I m p o r t a n c e o f r a c e in th e s e l e c t i o n p ro c e s s , as p e r ­ c e iv e d by c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s and p r e s i d e n t s . Important Group Not Important Cases N % N % Does Not A p p ly / No Resp. N % P r e- 1 9 7 4 CAOs P r e- 1 9 7 4 p r e s i d e n t s 19 16 1 0 5.3 0 15 9 7 8. 9 56.3 3 7 15.8 43.8 P o s t - 1 9 7 4 CAOs P o s t- 1 9 7 4 p r e s i d e n t s 42 25 2 1 4.8 4.0 32 15 76 .2 60.0 8 9 19.0 36.0 T a b l e 8 7 . - - I m p o r t a n c e o f b e i n g m a r r i e d in t h e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s , as p e r c e i v e d by c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s and p r e s i d e n t s . Im p o r t a n t Group Not Important Cases N % N % Does Not A pp ly / No Resp. N % P r e- 19 74 CAOs Pr e - 1 9 7 4 p r e s i d e n t s 19 16 3 1 1 5. 8 6.3 15 8 78 .9 50.1 1 7 5.3 43.8 P o s t -1974 CAOs P o s t- 1 9 7 4 p r e s i d e n t s 42 25 2 1 4.8 4.0 32 15 76. 2 60.0 8 9 19.0 36.0 229 T a b le 8 8 . - - Im p o r t a n c e o f b ein g s i n g l e in t h e s e l e c t i o n p ro c e s s , as p e r c e iv e d by c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s and p r e s i d e n t s . Important Group Not Important Cases N % N % Does Not A ppl y/ No Resp. N % Pre- 19 74 CAOs P r e-1 974 p r e s i d e n t s 19 16 0 0 0 0 10 9 52.6 56.4 9 7 47.3 43.8 P o s t- 1 9 7 4 CAOs P o s t- 1 9 7 4 p r e s i d e n t s 42 25 0 1 0 4.0 17 14 40.5 56.0 25 10 59.5 40.0 T ab l e 8 9 . - - I m p o r t a n c e o f b ei ng d i v o r c e d in t h e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s , as p e r c e i v e d by c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s and p r e s i d e n t s . Im p o r t a n t Group Not Important Cases N % N % Does Not A p p ly / No Resp. N % Pre-1974 CAOs Pr e-1974 p r e s i d e n t s 19 16 0 0 0 0 8 10 42.1 62.5 11 6 57.9 37.6 P o s t- 1 9 7 4 CAOs P o s t- 1 9 7 4 p r e s i d e n t s 42 25 0 0 0 0 17 15 40.5 60.0 25 10 5 9. 5 40.0 230 T a b le 9 0 . - - Im p o r t a n c e o f h av in g c h i l d r e n in t h e s e l e c t i o n p ro c e s s , as p e r c e iv e d by c h i e f academ ic o f f i c e r s and p r e s i d e n t s . Important Group Not Important Cases N % N % Does Not App ly/ No Resp. N % P re -1 97 4 CAOs P re -1 97 4 p r e s i d e n t s 19 16 2 1 1 0 .6 6.3 15 8 79.0 50.1 2 7 1 0. 6 43.8 P o s t- 1 9 7 4 CAOs P o s t- 1 9 7 4 p r e s i d e n t s 42 25 3 1 7.1 4.0 26 15 61.9 60.0 13 9 30.9 36.0 T ab l e 9 1 . - - I m p o r t a n c e o f communication s k i l l s i n t h e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s , as p e r c e i v e d by c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s and presidents. Important Group Not Important Cases Does Not A pp ly/ No Resp. N % N % N % Pre-1 97 4 CAOs Pre-1 97 4 p r e s i d e n t s 19 16 18 13 9 4 .7 81.3 0 1 0 6.3 1 2 5. 3 12. 5 P o s t- 1 9 7 4 CAOs Post-1974 p r e s id e n t s 42 25 40 23 9 5 .2 92.0 0 1 0 4.0 2 1 4.8 4.0 231 T a b le 9 2 . - - Im p o r t a n c e o f l e a d e r s h i p in th e s e l e c t i o n p ro c e s s , as p e r c e iv e d by c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s and p r e s i d e n t s . Important Group Not Important Cases N % N % Does Not A p p ly / No Resp. N % Pre-1974 CAOs Pre-1974 p r e s i d e n t s 19 16 18 14 9 4 .7 87.5 0 0 0 0 1 2 5.3 12.5 P o s t- 1 9 7 4 CAOs P o s t- 19 74 p r e s i d e n t s 42 25 39 22 92.8 88.0 0 0 0 0 3 3 7.1 1 2 .0 Ta b l e 9 3 . - - I m p o r t a n c e o f m a t u r i t y in t h e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s , as p e r c e i v e d by c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s and p r e s i d e n t s . I m p o rt a n t Group Not Important Cases N % N % Does Not A pp ly / No Resp. N % Pr e-1974 CAOs Pr e-1974 p r e s i d e n t s 19 16 17 13 89.5 8 1. 3 1 0 5.3 0 1 3 5.3 18.8 P o s t- 1 97 4 CAOs P o s t- 1 97 4 p r e s i d e n t s 42 25 37 21 88.1 84.0 3 0 7.1 0 2 4 4.8 1 6. 0 232 T a b l e 9 4 . - - I m p o r t a n c e o f b e l i e f i n t h e community c o l l e g e p h i l o s ­ ophy i n t h e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s , as p e r c e i v e d by c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s and p r e s i d e n t s . Important Group Not Important Cases N % N % Does Not A p p ly / No Resp. N % P re-1974 CAOs Pre- 19 74 p r e s i d e n t s 19 16 16 14 84.2 87.5 1 0 5.3 0 2 2 1 0. 5 1 2. 5 P os t- 1 97 4 CAOs P o s t- 1 9 7 4 p r e s i d e n t s 42 25 37 22 88.1 88.0 4 0 9.5 0 1 3 2.4 12.0 Ta bl e 9 5 . - - I m p o r t a n c e o f a t t i t u d e in t h e s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s , as p e r c e i v e d by c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s and p r e s i d e n t s . Important Group Not Important Cases N % N % Does Not A pp ly/ No Resp. N % Pre -1 974 CAOs Pre-1974 p r e s i d e n t s 19 16 18 14 94.7 87.5 0 0 0 0 1 5.3 2 1 2 .5 P o s t- 19 74 CAOs P o s t- 1 9 7 4 p r e s i d e n t s 42 25 38 22 78.6 88.0 2 0 4.8 0 2 4.8 3 12.0 233 Ta b l e 9 6 . - - I m p o r t a n c e o f a b i l i t y t o work w it h o t h e r s i n t h e s e l e c ­ t i o n p r o c e s s , as p e r c e i v e d by c h i e f academic o f f i c e r s and p r e s i d e n t s . Important Group Not Important Cases N % N % Does Not A pp ly / No Resp. N % P re - 19 74 CAOs Pre -1 974 p r e s i d e n t s 19 16 18 13 94.7 81.3 0 0 0 0 1 3 5.3 18.8 P o s t- 1 9 7 4 CAOs P o s t- 1 9 7 4 p r e s i d e n t s 42 25 38 22 90.5 88.0 0 0 0 0 4 3 9.5 12.0 APPENDIX J RESPONSES TO OPEN-ENDED QUESTIONS 234 C h i e f Academic O f f i c e r s . P r e - 1 9 7 4 and P o s t - 1 9 7 4 " I f your ca re er had a major v a r i a t i o n from t h e c l o s e s t c a r e e r path model, p l e a s e n o t e t h e d i f f e r e n c e . " Pre-1974 F u l l - t i m e f a c u l t y member, d e p a r t m e n t head a t S t a t e C o l l e g e . Left adm inistration to retu rn to fa c u lty , re c r u ite d to a d m in istra tio n . Was n o t a chai rm an. F ull-tim e teaching. U n i v e r s i t y p o s i t i o n in between. E x p e r i e n c e in e d u c a t i o n a l (World War I I ) . resp o n sib i1itie s in m i l i t a r y serv ice L e f t e d u c a t i o n f o r f o u r y e a r s t o work in i n d u s t r y . Back i n t o K - l 2 / community c o l l e g e t e a c h i n g , f u l l - t i m e f a c u l t y , d e a n . S u p e r v i s i o n b u s i n e s s and i n d u s t r y / v o c a t i o n a l . Ed uc a tio n s e c o n d a r y / c o l l e g e a d m i n i s t r a t i o n - c o o r d i n a t o r . Dean o f i n s t r u c t i o n / d i r e c t o r c o n s u lt a n t firm. of m arketing-business/supervision/ High s c h o o l f a c u l t y , u n i v e r s i t y c o u n s e l i n g a d v i s o r ) , d e a n o f men ( c o m m u n i t y c o l l e g e ) , (community c o l l e g e ) , dean o f a r t s and s c i e n c e s . (fo reig n student dean of s tu d e n ts In my o p in i o n t h e r e a r e o n ly c a r e e r e d u c a t o r s - - c a r e e r a d m i n i s t r a t o r s a r e an abom ina ti on t o t h e p r o f e s s i o n . P o s t- 1 97 4 F u l l - t i m e f a c u l t y K - l 2. Department head and p r o v o s t . Full-tim e fa c u lty at four-year co lleg e. High school t e a c h i n g p r i o r t o c o l l e g e t e a c h i n g . Community de an . college faculty member, coordinator, director, acting 235 "What do you c o n s id e r t o be the t h r e e most important a t t r i b u t e s t h a t c o n t r ib u t e d t o your s e l e c t i o n as c h i e f academic o f f i c e r ? " Pre-1974 A community c o l l e g e ’ s i n s t r u c t i o n a l program must always be more i m p o r t a n t th a n t h e i n d i v i d u a l e n t r u s t e d w it h c h a r t i n g i t s c o u r s e . All a d m i n i s t r a t i o n s u s u a l l y t r y t o promote from w i t h i n b e c a u s e o u t s i d e r s have p eo p le l i e f o r them w h e t h e r i n w r i t i n g o r on t h e phone about how g r e a t t h e y a r e . T rust. B e l i e f in f a c u l t y . De mo ns tra te d p h i l o s o p h y in e d u c a t i o n . B e l i e v e work w it h h i g h l y competent l e a d e r s o f i n d u s t r y , l a b o r , and c i t i z e n s o f t h e l a r g e s t p o p u la te d c o u n t y in Michigan was i m p r e s s i v e . E x p e r i e n c e in a v a r i e t y o f j o b s . Reputation. I n t e r n a l c o n t a c t s were most i n s t r u m e n t a l . Reputation. P olitics. Persistence. P o s t- 1 9 7 4 Good p e o p l e - r e l a t i o n s s k i l l s . U n i v e r s i t y , c o l l e g e and government e x p e r i e n c e . Knowledge o f continuity. college and college’s desire to keep a level of 236 S e l e c t i o n com m ittees s t r e s s com m unication s k i l l s , l e a d e r s h i p , m a t u r i t y , b e l i e f i n community c o l l e g e p h i l o s o p h y , a t t i t u d e , a b i l i t y t o work w i t h o t h e r s . A w e l l - r e g a r d e d i n t e r n a l c a n d i d a t e g e n e r a l l y i s most s u c c e s s f u l in the p o sitio n . Because o f p o l i t i c a l and d i s c i p l i n a r y g r o u p s , i t ta k es a super external candidate to f i t in . The a b i l i t y t o deal w i t h t e a c h e r u n i o n s and c o l l e c t i v e b a r g a i n i n g i s o f u t m o s t i m p o r t a n c e in lo o k i n g a t a c a n d i d a t e ’ s q u a l i f i c a t i o n s . Being on t h e s ce ne o b v i o u s l y he l p e d b e c a u s e I was known and t h e p r e s i d e n t and o t h e r s wanted me. The d e c i s i o n f o r an i n t e r n a l c a n d i d a t e was n o t a p o l i t i c a l one as i t i s som et im es , h e r e and elsewhere. I t was an a c c i d e n t t h a t t h e t i m i n g and e x p e r i e n c e were matched t o bo th o u r n e e d s . I d id not apply. 237 P r e s i d e n t s , P r e -1 9 7 4 and P o s t- 1 9 7 4 "What was t h e s e l e c t i o n c o m m i t t e e ’ s r o l e i n t h e f i n a l s e l e c t i o n ? " Pre- 19 74 I do n o t remember t h e p r o c e d u r e s and d e g r e e o f inv olvement t h a t we used in t h e s e v e r a l i n s t a n c e s where an academic o f f i c e r was chos en. To recommend t o t h e p r e s i d e n t . To recommend no fewer t h a n two f i n a l i s t s . Recommending body to t h e p r e s i d e n t . To p r e s e n t ranked l i s t o f c a n d i d a t e s t o t h e p r e s i d e n t . A d v is o r y . They made recommendation t o p r e s i d e n t , who recommended t o t h e Board of Trustees. I recommended by s e l e c t i o n t o t h e Board. U s u a l l y t h e c o m m i t t e e ’ s recommendation was c o n s i d e r e d . In some p l a c e s t h e g e n e r a l en vi ron m ent t h a t has dev el op ed o v e r a p e r i o d o f t i m e may r e q u i r e a high d e g r e e o f in vol vem ent by a l l t h e v a r i o u s c a te g o rie s of personnel. In o t h e r p l a c e s a minimum o f involvement would be e x p e c t e d by t h e v a r i o u s c a t e g o r i e s o f p e r s o n n e l . P o s t- 1 9 7 4 A d v i s o r y , t o . recommend t h r e e president. o r more a c c e p t a b l e candidates to the Recommend t o p t h r e e c a n d i d a t e s . A d v is or y t o t h e p r e s i d e n t . Recommend to p two c a n d i d a t e s . Ranking. Recommend selection. at least two fin alists to the president for final Narrowed f i n a l i s t ( i n c l u d i n g i n t e r v i e w s ) t o l a s t two c a n d i d a t e s . 238 Recommend f i n a l i s t t o t h e p r e s i d e n t . Interview f in a l is t- - m a d e p r e s i d e n t and b o a r d . Sc r e e n e d a l l recommendation based on points to the a p p l i c a n t s and s e l e c t e d t h r e e c a n d i d a t e s . To s c r e e n a p p l i c a n t s , s e l e c t t h o s e t o be i n t e r v i e w e d , i n t e r v i e w them and recommend t o p r e s i d e n t a l l t h o s e t h e y deemed t o be q u a l i f i e d . "What w e r e t h e t h r e e most i m p o r t a n t c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f yo ur s e l e c t i o n p r o c e s s t h a t had t h e most impact on t h e h i r i n g o f the candidate?" Pre- 19 74 E x p e r i e n c e , com puter knowledge, s t r e n g t h . Don’ t remember. Resume and t r a n s c r i p t , i n t e r v i e w , ans we rs t o q u e s t i o n s . Background e x p e r i e n c e , academic q u a l i f i c a t i o n s . Sex ( f e m a l e ) , academic c r e d e n t i a l s , pr oven t r a c k r e c o r d . D e t e r m i n a t i o n t o make an i n t e r n a l s e l e c t i o n , inv ol v em en t o f f i r s t l i n e a d m i n i s t r a t o r s , f i r s t - h a n d knowledge o f t h e ( i n t e r n a l ) candidate’s q u a lific a tio n s. No co m m it te e . Education, e x p erien ce, all c o n stitu en ts. perceived ability t o work e f f e c t i v e l y w it h N a t i o n a l a d v e r t i s i n g f o r c a n d i d a t e s , b ro a d - b a s e d in vol vem ent screening, c le a r d e fin itio n of can d id ate s’ q u a lific a tio n s . Academic g r ou nd . leadership, com patibility, curriculum-development in back­ Committee p a r t i c i p a t i o n in s e t t i n g c r i t e r i a / g u i d e l i n e s , academic c r e d e n t i a l s h e a v i l y emphasized ( e d u c a t i o n , teaching experience, h i g h e r e d u c a t i o n e x p e r i e n c e ) , c a n d i d a t e ’ s s a t i s f a c t i o n w it h small r u r a l community. 239 A cq u ir in g job. first-hand knowledge of his/her pe r fo r m a n c e on current My p e r s o n a l p h i l o s o p h y in h i r i n g was t o l o o k f o r c r e d e n t i a l s , p r o b e d u r i n g i n t e r v i e w s , and the n go w ith t h e g u t f e e l i n g s as t o which c a n d i d a t e wo ul d make t h e b e s t team p l a y e r b a s e d on t h e q u a l i f i c a t i o n s of the f i e l d of can d id ate s. P os t-1 97 4 Formal i n t e r v i e w . C r e d e n t ia l s , experience, personal t r a i t s . S e l e c t i o n committee recommendation. Own e v a l u a t i o n o f c a n d i d a t e ’ s c a p a b i l i t i e s . Own e v a l u a t i o n o f c a n d i d a t e ’ s e x p e r i e n c e . A dm inistrative experience. Teaching e x p e r i e n c e . A ttitude. Background and e x p e r i e n c e - - p a s t s u c c e s s e s . P e r s o n a l i t y , pe op le s k i l l s . Match between c a n d i d a t e ’ s s k i l l s and t h e needs o f t h e c o l l e g e . Broad bas e from s t a f f . D e t e r m i n a t i o n o f c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s th o u g h t i m p o r t a n t . Open d i s c u s s i o n about c a n d i d a t e s f o l l o w i n g i n t e r v i e w s . E x t e n s i v e s t a f f improvement, co ns ens us on one c a n d i d a t e . P r e v i o u s performance e s p e c i a l l y in academic m a t t e r s . Esteem o f f e l l o w employees. His i d e a s f o r p er f o r m a n c e . future direction of education. Knowledge E x c e l l e n t r e l a t i o n s h i p s w ith f a c u l t y . A b i l i t y t o c o n c e p t u a l i z e and broad academic u n d e r s t a n d i n g . of past 240 S t a f f r e c e p t i o n , a l l s t a f f had open o p p o r t u n i t y t o meet c a n d i d a t e s . S c r e e n i n g co m m it te e. S p e n t a l o t o f ti m e (BEFORE we a d v e r t i s e d ) bac kgr oun d and e x p e r i e n c e we wanted. talking Reached agree men t on p r o f i l e b e f o r e f i l e s were r e v ie w e d . Everyone saw and ra n k ed t h e f i l e s . In vo lv em en t o f s t a f f . Track reco rd . Appropriate experience. Had pe rf or m e d well as a c t i n g dean. R e s p e c t e d by f a c u l t y . K no wledgeable. Broad r a n g e o f academic l e a d e r s h i p . T e a c h in g e x p e r i e n c e . Personal s t y l e . Interpersonal s k i l l s . Knowledge o f c u r r i c u l u m . P ast performance. Range o f co m m it te e. Faculty input. Anyone c o u l d no min ate a c a n d i d a t e . A b i l i t y t o r e l a t e well w i t h o t h e r s . P r i o r work r e c o r d . Academic p r e p a r a t i o n . Knowledge o f c o l l e g e and i t s needs. Academic programs as t o p p r i o r i t y . abo ut what A u t h o r i t y of c h i e f academic o f f i c e r t o c a r r y o u t r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s . C r e d e n t i a l s and resume. I n t e r v i e w per formance. R e f e r e n c e s t h a t were ge nui ne. Broad t e a c h i n g and a d m i n i s t r a t i v e and t e c h n i c a l e d u c a t i o n . experience in b o th liberal arts "What d id you c o n s i d e r t o be t h e t h r e e most i m p o r t a n t a t t r i b u t e s t h a t h e l p e d i n t h e s e l e c t i o n o f t h e c a n d i d a t e f o r t h e c h i e f aca dem ic o f f i c e r position?" Pre-1974 Degree, e x p e r i e n c e , recommendations and p e r s o n a l h a n d l i n g in v i s i t a ­ tion. S k i l l s , e x p e r i e n c e , a c c e p t a n c e by f a c u l t y . E x p e r i e n c e , known by a l l and r e s p e c t e d . E x p e r i e n c e , computer knowledge, s t r e n g t h . P e rs o n a lity , education, experience. E x p e r i e n c e , academic a b i l i t y , a d v i s o r y co m m it te e . Sex--female, academic c r e d e n t i a l s , proven t r a c k r e c o r d . A b i l i t y t p communicate w ith f a c u l t y and a d m i n i s t r a t i v e academic t e a c h i n g background, l e a d e r s h i p p o t e n t i a l . Background o f e x p e r i e n c e , background p e r s o n a l knowledge o f c a n d i d a t e . Education, experience, all constituents. perceived of educational ability peers, training, t o work e f f e c t i v e l y and with E x p e r i e n c e , academic p r e p a r a t i o n , s t a f f in v ol v em en t i n t h e s e l e c t i o n process. Experience, background. committee support (selection committee), educational 242 C o m m un ity c o l l e g e preparation. experience, personal U n iv ersity teach in g , ad m in istrativ e academic e x c e l l e n c e , Ph.D. q u a litie s , experience, academ ic c o m m it m e n t to C a n d i d a t e ’ s s t a t e m e n t o f ph il o so p h y as a p p l i c a b l e t o p o s i t i o n e i t h e r d e m o n s t r a t e d a b i l i t y t o implement t h a t p h i l o s o p h y o r i n d i c a t i o n o f a b i lit y to. E v a l u a t i o n by s e l e c t i o n committee. Proper q u a l i f i c a t i o n s v e r i f i e d . P os t-1 97 4 Past experience. Degree. Responses t o " c a s e s i t u a t i o n s . " Experience. P e rs o n a l t r a i t s . Credentials. Knowledge o f h i g h e r e d u c a t i o n . Personality. Degree. Experience. Management s t y l e . Degree. Broad ly based r e p r e s e n t a t i o n . Experience. Degree. Personality. Past record at t h i s s it u a t i o n . 243 P r i o r study of q u a l i f i c a t i o n s , sought e x p e rie n c e , o f i n d i v i d u a l , management s t y l e . N a ti o n a l s e a r c h . Open p r o c e s s . Experience. Has been a c t i n g dean. Trust. Integrity. Ex p er i en ce in a comparable i n s t i t u t i o n . Academic d e g re e (P h.D.) References. Communication s k i l l s . Experience. L e a d e r s h ip s k i l l s . Experience. Style. C r e d e n t i a l s ( a ca de m ic ) . I n t e l 1 ig e n c e . Experience. A ttitude. A d m i n i s t r a t i v e a b i l i t y t o do t h e j o b . A b i l i t y t o work w ith p e o p l e . I n t e l l e c t u a l l y com pet ent . S p e c i f i c e x p e r i e n c e s a t a n o t h e r community c o l l e g e . Peo ple s k i l l s . Match between c a n d i d a t e s k i l l s and need o f c o l l e g e . personality, type 244 Past e x p e r i e n c e w i t h r e s p e c t t o c u r r i c u l u m d e s i g n . P er s o n al col l e g e . background w it h respect to "fittin g in" to community P er s o n al a p p e a ra n c e , v i t a l i t y and a r t i c u l a t e n e s s . Experience a t s im i la r i n s t i t u t i o n Successful ( s i m i l a r s i z e and c o n f i g u r a t i o n ) . (open and ca n d i d ) i n t e r v i e w . Comp atib le management p h i l o s o p h y . A b i l i t y t o r e l a t e well t o o t h e r s . Experience. Academic p r e p a r a t i o n . Clear p o s itio n d e s c rip tio n . C l e a r committee c h a r g e . Res p ec t o f t h e f a c u l t y . Experience. "What q u a l i f i c a t i o n s were sought f o r t h e p o s i t i o n o f c h i e f academic officer?" Pre-1974 M a t u r i t y and a t t i t u d e were weak, so I g o t him "promoted" community c o l l e g e a d m i n i s t r a t o r in a n o t h e r s t a t e . to chief I t i s hard f o r me t o imagine c o n s i d e r i n g anyone f o r c h i e f academic o f f i c e r w i t h a n y t h in g l e s s th a n a d o c t o r a t e . I would p r e f e r someone w i t h pr ov en needs t o g e t a s t a r t somewhere. experience, although e ve r yo ne A good u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f t h e p u r p o s e and f u n c t i o n o f t h e community college--not a university. Some o f t h e s e s t u d e n t s need a d d i t i o n a l h e l p and t h e y do very w e l l . As t o p e r s o n a l t r a i t s , I f e e l t h a t a r e c o r d o f t r u t h f u l n e s s , h o n e s t y , and s i n c e r i t y (assuming t h a t t h e p e r s o n has t h e n e c e s s a r y academic bac kg round) a r e t h e most v a l u a b l e t r a i t s t o lo o k f o r . 245 We g o t t h e b e s t p e r s o n a v a i l a b l e - - r e g a r d l e s s o f p e r s o n s v a r i a b l e s . However, we hoped a l l were committed t o t h e community c o l l e g e philosophy. Knowledge o f t h e r e a l world o f work e x p e r i e n c e in academic w o r ld . The p e r s o n s e l e c t e d had i n d u s t r i a l e x p e r i e n c e , c o l l e g e t e a c h i n g and a d m i n i s t r a t i v e e x p e r i e n c e . plus c o m m un it y P o s t- 1 9 7 4 S i g n i f i c a n t c o l l e g e a d m i n i s t r a t i v e e x p e r i e n c e s p r i o r t o o ur s c h o o l - at a four-year in s titu tio n . The r a t i n g f o r e x t e r n a l c a n d i d a t e does n o t mean i t i s n o t a c o n s i d e r a t i o n - - i t s i m p l y means e x t e r n a l i s n o t a f a v o r a b l e c o n s i d ­ eration. In ch o o s in g a p e r s o n f o r t h i s p o s i t i o n my p r im a r y i n t e r e s t s a r e a b i l i t y t o do t h e j o b , l e a d e r s h i p , a b i l i t y t o work w it h o t h e r s , b e l i e f i n t h e c o m m u n i t y c o l l e g e p h i l o s o p h y and i n t e l l e c t u a l co m pet enc e. O t h e r p e r s o n a l v a r i a b l e s a r e i n c i d e n t a l . E d u c a t i o n a l i n s t i t u t i o n s have u n s u i t a b l e s e l e c t i o n p r a c t i c e s . I n s t e a d o f a c t u a l l y p r e p a r i n g s e l e c t e d employees f o r advancement, c o l l e g e s stew o v e r f a v o r i t i s m . Result o ften is i n s u f f i c i e n t l y t r a i n e d a p p o i n t e e s and i n e x c u s a b l e d e l a y s in making c h o i c e s , and t h e a c t i v i t i e s of the p o s itio n languish. BIBLIOGRAPHY BIBLIOGRAPHY A lfre d , Richard. "Maximizing I n s t i t u t i o n a l R e s p o n s i v e n e s s t o Chang­ in g Environmental C o n d i t i o n s . " In Emerging Roles f o r Community C o l l e g e L e a d e r s , pp. 7 - 19 . E d i t e d by Paul A. E i s n e r , R ic h a r d A l f r e d , R. Jan LeCroy, and Nancy Armes. New D i r e c t i o n s f o r Community C o l l e g e s , no. 46. San F r a n c i s c o : J o s s e y - B a s s , 1984. A l l e n , Lo u ise H. "On Being a Vice P r e s i d e n t f o r Academic A f f a i r s . " J o u r n a l o f t h e N a t i o n a l A s s o c i a t i o n o f Women Deans. A d m i n i s t r a ­ t o r s , and C o u n s e lo r s 47 (Summer 1984): 8 - 1 5 . Anderson, Joyce S. "The Shoemaker’ s C h i l d r e n . " Community and J u n i o r C o ll e g e J o u r n a l 54 (March 1984 ): 20-2 1. Arman, Haro ld D. " C a r e e r P r e p a r a t i o n o f C o l l e g e P r e s i d e n t s and C h i e f Academic O f f i c e r s in Midwestern C o l l e g e s . " Ph.D. d i s s e r ­ t a t i o n , Michigan S t a t e U n i v e r s i t y , 1986. Benton, Sand ra Y. "Women A d m i n i s t r a t o r s f o r t h e 19 80 ’ s : A New B r e e d ." J o u r n a l o f t h e N a t i o n a l A s s o c i a t i o n f o r Women Deans, A d m i n i s t r a t o r s and C o u n s e lo r s 43 (Summer 19 8 0) : 3 - 7 . Bogue, J e s s e P. 1950. The Community C o l l e g e . Bowker, Lee H. "The Academic Dean." 19 8 2) : 257-71. New York: McGraw-Hill, Teach ing S o c i o l o g y 9 ( A p r il Brown, James L. " R e c r u i t i n g and H i r i n g P r a c t i c e s o f Community C o l ­ l e g e Deans o f I n s t r u c t i o n . " The C l e a r i n g h o u s e 51 ( Se pte m ber 19 7 7) : 29- 31. Cohen, A r t h u r M., and B r a u e r , F l o r e n c e B. The American Community C o l l e g e . San F r a n c i s c o : J o s s e y - B a s s , 1982. C h r o n i c l e o f Higher E d u c a t i o n . V ar io us i s s u e s , 1960-1988. C y p h e r t , F r e d e r i c k R. " L e a d e r s h i p S t r a t e g y in Academic A d m i n i s t r a ­ t i o n . " J o u r n a l o f Te a c h e r E du ca ti on 25 ( W in t e r 19 7 4) : 3 5 7- 5 9. Doyle, D en is , and H a r t l e , T e r r y W. " L e a d e r s h i p in E d u c a t i o n : G o ver no rs, L e g i s l a t o r s , and T e a c h e r s . " Phi D e l t a Kappan (September 1985): 21-27. 246 247 Ed u ca ti o n D i r e c t o r y 19 6 9 - 1 9 7 0 . Wa shington, D.C. : f o r E d u c a t i o n a l S t a t i s t i c s , 1970. National Center E h r l e , Elwood B. " O b s e r v a t i o n s on t h e Nature of Deaning: The Emerging Role o f Dean in Academic P l a n n i n g . " J o u r n a l o f P h y s i c a l E d u c a ti o n and R e c r e a t i o n ( J a n u a r y 1 97 9) : 44. E i s n e r , Paul A. "Meeting t h e C h a l l e n g e s With New L e a d e r s h i p D e v e l ­ opment P ro g r am s ." In Emerging Roles f o r Community C o l l e g e L e a d e r s , pp. 1 - 4 , 3 3- 4 0 . E d i t e d by Paul A. E i s n e r , R ic ha r d A l f r e d , R. Jan LeCroy, and Nancy Armes. New D i r e c t i o n s f o r Community C o l l e g e s , no. 46. San F r a n c i s c o : J o s s e y - B a s s , 1984. Enar so n, H a r o ld . "The Academic Vice P r e s i d e n t o r Dean." In A d m i n i s t r a t o r s in H igh er E d u c a t i o n , pp . 11 1- 24. E d i t e d by G er al d Burns. New York: H ar p er & Row, 1962. E p s t e i n , C h a r l o t t e , and Wood, C l i f f L. "Women in Community C o l l e g e A d m i n i s t r a t i o n . " American A s s o c i a t i o n o f Community and J u n i o r C o l l e g e J o u r n a l ( O ct o b er 1984): 19- 22 . E s t l e r , Suzanne E . , and Miner, Anne S. "Accrual M o b i l i t y . " o f H igh er Ed u ca ti o n 56 (M ar ch /A pr il 1 9 8 5 ) : 12 1-4 3. F e u e r s , S t e l l e . "Women i n Management." l e g e J o u r n a l (O c t o b e r 1981): 6- 11. Journal Community and J u n i o r C o l­ Glennen, R ob er t E . , and McCullough, Jose ph B. " S e l e c t i o n Trends in College A d m in is tra tiv e P o s i t i o n s . " E d u c a t i o n 96 (Summer 1976 ): 38 4- 87 . Goodner, J a c k . "A Check L i s t f o r Top A d m i n i s t r a t o r s . " Management 9 (May 1974): 24-28. Green, Madele ine In Academic H. A t w e l l . Francisco: College F. "De veloping L e a d e r s h i p : A Par adox in Academe." Lea der s as M ana ger s, pp. 11- 17. E d i t e d by Robe rt New D i r e c t i o n s f o r High er E d u c a t i o n , no. 36. San J o s s e y - B a s s , 1981. G y sb e r s, Norman C. "Major Trends in C a r e e r Development Theory and P r a c t i c e . " V o c a t i o n a l Guidance Q u a r t e r l y 33 ( 19 84 ) : 15 -2 5 . Heald , James E. " E d u c a t i o n Deans and T h e i r S e l e c t i o n . " J o u r n a l o f T e a c h e r E d u c a ti o n 33 ( J a n u a r y / F e b r u a r y 19 8 2 ) : 4 7 - 4 9 . Human Resource C e n t e r (UAW-GM). T r a i n i n g Needs A n a l y s i s : c a t i o n s G u i d e . D e t r o i t : UAW-GM, 1987. Kachigan, Sam Kash. 1986. S ta t is tic a l A nalysis. New York: An A p p l i ­ Radius P r e s s , 248 K e r l i n g e r , Fred N., and P ed h azu r, E l a z a r J . M u l t i p l e R e g r e s s i o n in B eh a v i o r a l R e s e a r c h . New York: H o l t , R i n e h a r t and Winston, 1973. L a h t i , Rob ert E. I n n o v a t i v e C o l l e g e Management. J o s s e y - B a s s , 1973. San F r a n c i s c o : LeCroy, R. J a n . " B u i l d i n g L e a d e r s h i p E x p e r t i s e Through O n - t h e - J o b Experience." In Emerging Role s f o r Community C o l l e g e L e a d e r s , pp. 109- 16. E d i t e d by Paul A. E i s n e r , R ic ha rd A l f r e d , R. Jan LeCroy, and Nancy Armes. New D i r e c t i o n s f o r Community C o l ­ l e g e s . no. 46. San F r a n c i s c o : J o s s e y - B a s s , 1984. L ut z, Frank W. "The D ean sh ip: Sear ch and S c r e e n i n g P r o c e s s . " E d u c a t i o n a l Record 60 (Summer 1979): 261-71. M a n g i e r i , Jo h n , and Arnn, John W., J r . " F i n d i n g a Dean: M inimizing t h e Guesswork." J o u r n a l o f T e a c h e r E d u c a ti o n 35 ( S e p t e m b e r / O c to b e r 1984): 56-5 7. McGannon, Barry J . "The Academic Dean’ s Dimensions o f L e a d e r s h i p . " L i b e r a l Ed u ca ti o n 5 ( O ct o b er 19 73 ): 277-91. Mc Intosh, E l a i n e , and M aie r, R o b e r t . "Management S k i l l s in a Chang­ ing Academic E n v i r o n m e n t . " E d u c a t i o n a l REcord 57 ( S p r i n g 1976 ): 78-91. Merk, Lawrence. " P r e s e n t C o n f l i c t Among C r i t i c a l F a c t o r s in H ig h er Ed u ca ti o n A d m i n i s t r a t i o n . " C o l l e g e S t u d e n t J o u r n a l 20 (Summer 1986): 153-56. M i l l e r , Ric h ar d I . 197 4) : 231-34. "The Academic Dean." I n t e l l e c t 1002 ( J a n u a r y M o e ll e n b e r g , Wayne P. "The Hazards o f Academic A d m i n i s t r a t i o n . " Ed u ca ti o n D i g e s t 41 (May 1976 ): 19- 23. Moore, Kathryn M. Lea der s in T r a n s i t i o n . S t a t e C o l l e g e : Center f o r t h e Study o f H igh er E d u c a t i o n , P e n n s y l v a n i a S t a t e U n i v e r ­ s i t y , 1983. _________ ; S a l i m b e r e , Ann M.; M a r l i e r , J o y c e D . ; and Bragg, Steph an M. "The S t r u c t u r e o f P r e s i d e n t s ’ and D ea ns ’ C a r e e r s . " J o u r n a l o f Higher E d uc a ti o n 54 ( S e p t e m b e r / O c t o b e r 19 83 ): 50015. Murphy, P e t e r James. "Preparing A dm inistrators fo r the Tw enty-First C e n t u r y . " Hi gher E d u c a ti o n 13 (August 198 4) : 43 9-4 9. 249 1987 Community, T e c h n i c a l , and J u n i o r C o l l e g e D i r e c t o r y . Washing­ t o n , D.C.: American A s s o c i a t i o n o f Community and J u n i o r C o l ­ l e g e s , 1987. 1987 H ig he r E d u c a ti o n D i r e c t o r y . t i o n P u b l i c a t i o n s , 1987. Washington, D.C. : H igh er Educa­ Packwood, E. Gene. D i r e c t o r o f Research and Development, D e l t a C o l l e g e , U n i v e r s i t y C e n t e r , M ichi gan. I n t e r v i e w , May 9, 1988. P a u l , Carol A .; Sweet, R i c k i ; and Brigham, Nancy. " P e r s o n a l , Educa­ t i o n a l , and C a r e e r C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f Male and Female Community C o l l e g e A d m i n i s t r a t o r s in M a s s a c h u s e t t s . 11 J o u r n a l o f t h e N a t i o n a l A s s o c i a t i o n f o r Women Deans. A d m i n i s t r a t o r s and Coun­ s e l o r s 44 ( F a l l 198 0) : 14- 18. P e r k i n s , James R. "An Outcomes A n a l y s i s o f t h e P r e - S e r v i c e F e l l o w ­ s h i p R e c i p i e n t s o f t h e W. K. Kellogg Fou nda ti on S up po r te d J u n i o r C o l l e g e L e a d e r s h i p P r o g r a m . " Ph.D. d i s s e r t a t i o n , F l o r i d a S t a t e U n i v e r s i t y , 1980. Poskozim, Paul S. "New A d m i n i s t r a t o r s - - A S t a t i s t i c a l Look a t Movement Within t h e Ranks, 19 82 -1 983 ." Change 16 ( O ct o be r 19 8 4) : 55- 59. P u y ea r , Don. "The Book B i n . " American A s s o c i a t i o n o f Community and J u n i o r C o l l e g e J o u r n a l ( F ebr uar y/M arc h 1986): 58. Rebore, Ronald W. Pe rs o nn el A d m i n i s t r a t i o n in E d u c a t i o n : A Manage­ ment A p pr o ac h. Englewood C l i f f s , N . J . : P r e n t i c e - H a l l , 1982. R e i f , F. "Where Are t h e Leaders in Hig her E d u c a t i o n . " D i g e s t 42 (May 197 7): 25- 27 . Ed u ca tio n R i c h a r d s o n , R ic h a r d C . , J r . "Management C h a l l e n g e s , P r i n c i p l e s , and S t r a t e g i e s f o r t h e 19 80’ s . " In Emerging Roles f o r Community C o l l e g e L e a d e r s , pp. 21 -3 1. E d i te d by Paul A. E i s n e r , Ric har d A 1 f r e d , R. Ja n LeCroy, and Nancy Armes. New D i r e c t i o n s f o r Community C o l l e g e s , no. 46. San F r a n c i s c o : J o s s e y - B a s s , 1984. _________ . "A Q u e s ti o n o f Q u a l i t y ." American A s s o c i a t i o n o f Commu­ n i t y and J u n i o r C o l l e g e J o u r n a l ( F eb ru ary /M arc h 1987): 39- 41 . R i n g i e , P h i l l i p M., and S a v i c k a s , Mark L. " A d m i n i s t r a t i v e L e a d e r ­ s h i p . " J o u r n a l o f High er Ed u ca tio n 54 (November/December 1 98 3) : 6 5 4- 6 1. Ro binson, James K. P u t t i n g Our Minds T o g e t h e r : New D i r e c t i o n s f o r Michigan H ig he r E d u c a t i o n . Lan si ng : The G o v e r n o r’ s Commission on t h e F u t u r e o f H igh er E d uc a ti o n in M ichigan, 1984. 250 Rowland, K e n d r i t h ; F e r r i s , G era ld R . ; and Sherman, J a y L. C u r r e n t I s s u e s in P er s o nn el Management. Boston, M as s.: A ll y n and Bacon, 1983. S a g a r i a , Mary Ann D . , and Moore, Kathryn M. " D i f f e r e n t i a l Job Change and S t a b i l i t y Among Academic A d m i n i s t r a t o r s . " J o u r n a l o f H igh er E d u c a ti o n 33 ( S e p t e m b e r / O c t o b e r 1982): 501-503. S a n d e r s , Donald H . ; Eng, Robert J . ; and Murph, A. F r a n k e l i n . S t a t i s t i c s . New York: McGraw-Hill, 1985. Sbaratta, Philip. "Academic Deans: Keep t h e H e a r t Pumping." Community and J u n i o r C o l l e g e J o u r n a l 54 (November 1983 ): 21 -2 2, 27. S c o t t , Phebe M. "The New A d m i n i s t r a t o r : A P o i n t o f View." J o u r n a l o f Phys i c a l E d u c a ti o n and R e c r e a t i o n 50 ( J a n u a r y 1979 ): 4 0- 4 2 . S c o t t , Robe rt A. "Mi ddle-Level C o l l e g i a t e A d m i n i s t r a t i o n in a P e r i o d o f R e t r e n c h m e n t . " C o l l e g e and U n i v e r s i t y 53 ( F a l l 1977 ): 42- 55 . S k i p p e r , C h a r l e s E. " A d m i n i s t r a t i v e S k i l l s o f E f f e c t i v e and I n e f f e c t i v e U n i v e r s i t y L e a d e r s . " C o l l e g e and U n i v e r s i t y 52 ( S p r i n g 197 7) : 276-779. S i e g e l , Andrew F. S t a t i s t i c s and Data A n a l y s i s . Wiley & Sons, 1988. New York: John S i e g e l , S id n e y . N o n p a r a m e tr ic S t a t i s t i c s f o r t h e B e h a v i o r a l S c i e n c e s . New York: McGraw-Hill, 1956. S i l v e s t r i , Marco J . , and Kane, Paul L. "How A f f i r m a t i v e I s t h e A c ti o n f o r A d m i n i s t r a t i v e P o s i t i o n s in H igh er E d u c a ti o n ? " J o u r n a l o f H ig h e r E d uc a ti o n 46 ( J u l y 19 75 ): 445- 50. Simon, H e r b e r t A. "The Jo b o f a C o l l e g e P r e s i d e n t . " Record 48 (W in t e r 1976 ): 68- 78 . Educational Socolow, D. J . "How A d m i n i s t r a t o r s Get T h e i r J o b s . " 19 7 8) : 4 2- 4 3 , 54. Change (May T a y l o r , E . , and S h a v l i k , D. "To Advance Women: A N a t i o n a l I d e n t i f i c a t i o n P r o g r a m . " E d u c a t i o n a l Record (W in t e r 197 7) : 91-1 00. Twombly, Susan B. " B o un da r ie s o f an A d m i n i s t r a t i v e Labor M a r k e t . " Community C o l l e g e Review 13 ( S p r i n g 198 6) : 34 -4 3. T y r e e , Laurence W. " V i e w p o i n t . " Community and J u n i o r C o l l e g e J o u r ­ nal 55 ( A u gu st /S ep te m be r 198 4) : 40. 251 V e r h a n o v i t z , James. P r o f e s s o r o f Computer S c i e n c e and M at h em at i cs , D e l t a C o l l e g e , U n i v e r s i t y C e n t e r , Mich ig an. Interview , F e b r u a r y 15, 1988. Yearbook o f H igh er E d u c a t i o n . c a t i o n s , 1972. Ch icago: Marquis P r o f e s s i o n a l P u b l i ­ Walker, James W. "Human Resou rce P l a n n i n g : An E v o l u t i o n . " In C u r r e n t I s s u e s in P e r s o n n e l Management, pp. 2 9 - 3 5 . E d i t e d by K e n d r i t h M. Rowland, G er al d R. F e r r i s , and J a y L. Sherman. Bos ton, M as s. : A ll y n and Bacon, 1983. Wexley, Kenneth, and Latham, Gary P. De ve lo p in g and T r a i n i n g Human R es ou rce s in O r g a n i z a t i o n s . Glenview, 1 1 1 . : S c o t t , Foresman and C o . , 1981. Zi o n , C a r o l . "Role D e f i n i t i o n s : A Focus f o r A d m i n i s t r a t i v e Growth and E v a l u a t i o n . " C o l l e g e and U n i v e r s i t y P e r s o n n e l A s s o c i a t i o n J o u r n a l 28 (Summer 19 7 7) : 5-1 2.