Collaborative Leadership Preparation: A Comparative Study of Partnership and Conventional Programs and Practices

Abstract

The need for more and better-prepared educational leaders has led to greater program effort to adhere to national leadership standards and form university-district partnerships for improved preparation, particularly in creating better-quality internships and more supportive structures. This article compares 3 leadership preparation programs-2 partnership and 1 conventionalon program attributes and differences in graduates' reported gains in leadership skill development, career aspirations, and career advancement. Forty-nine program graduates were surveyed from 2 cohorts of a suburban university-partnership program, its conventional program counterpart, and an urban university-partnership program. The findings show that internship scope and quality as well as program structure qualities-more common of the partnership programs-were significantly and positively associated with leadership learning and career outcomes, beyond graduates' initial commitment. These results suggest that program design and operation are instrumental in participants' education and their postprogram career aspirations and pursuits. The article offers insights into conceptual methodological considerations for further research on preparation effectiveness. In recent years, there have been efforts to reform leadership preparation and stimulate experimentation in program design and delivery (Orr, 2006). 1 Among the most common new developments have been the creation and

Clones, drones and dragons: ongoing uncertainties around school leader development

“…They are also used extensively within and between western societies (Lumby 2014). Drones are not only about what is delivered, but also how leadership knowledge, understandings and skills are delivered, where it is delivered and how it is monitored (Orr and Barber 2009). Drones carry imported policies or programmes which are run 'from afar'.…”

“…Fifth, the surveillance/monitoring function of drones around leadership development programmes has also been called into question (Lumby 2014;Orr and Barber 2009;Pounder 2011;Simkins 2012). Lumby (2014) outlines the shortfalls of monitoring:…”

“…Unfortunately, and sometimes tragically, they hit the wrong targets based on faulty intelligence and cause pain and hardship. Although a key purpose of drones is to monitor the impact of leader development programmes, the technology needed to do this effectively remains largely underdeveloped (Lumby 2014;Simkins 2012;Orr and Barber 2009). …”

Reflections on leadership preparation programs and social justice

“…Therefore, social justice preparation programs are particularly relevant for these contexts, and most likely easier to initiate because universities and districts are more inclined to partner and create collaborative leadership programs (Orr and Barber, 2007) that address dominant local needs. It is possible to argue that not all programs should be social justice-oriented because not all social settings pose key challenges associated with social injustice.…”

Sources of Principals' Leadership Practices and Areas Training Should Emphasize

“…Review of research, Orr and Orphanos (2011); Bottoms, O'Neill, Fry and Hill (2003) have identified a number of features of exemplary leadership training programmes as For example, Orr and Barber (2006) report that some supportive programme structures, complete and standardized curriculum, and more rigorous internships highly influence different types of outcomes. Beyer (2009) holds that it is imperative for leadership preparation programmes to be instrumental-to act as practical tools in integrating courses and content that combine topical issues in the educational and business world.…”