The university of st thomas doctorate in leadership program imp

University of St. Thomas, Minnesota UST Research Online Education Doctoral Dissertations in Leadership School of Education 2012 The University of St. Thomas Doctorate in Leadership Program: Impact on Graduates James A. Sturdevant University of St.

Thomas, Minnesota Follow this and additional works at: https://ir.edu/caps_ed_lead_docdiss Part of the Education Commons Recommended Citation Sturdevant, James A., "The University of St. Thomas Doctorate in Leadership Program: Impact on Graduates" (2012). Education Doctoral Dissertations in Leadership.edu/caps_ed_lead_docdiss/27 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the School of Education at UST Research Online. It has been accepted for inclusion in Education Doctoral Dissertations in Leadership by an authorized administrator of UST Research Online.

For more information, please contact libroadmin@stthomas. The University of St. Thomas Doctorate in Leadership Program: Impact on Graduates A DISSERTATION SUBMITTED TO THE FACULTY OF THE SCHOOL OF EDUCATION OF THE UNIVERSITY OF ST. PAUL, MINNESOTA By James A.

Sturdevant IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF EDUCATION 2012 ii UNIVERSITY OF ST. THOMAS, MINNESOTA The University of St. Thomas Doctorate in Leadership Program: Impact on Graduates We certify that we have read this dissertation and approved it as meeting departmental criteria for graduating with honors in scope and quality. We have found that it is complete and satisfactory in all respects, and that any and all revisions required by the final examining committee have been made.

Dissertation Committee _________________________________ Thomas L., Committee Chair _________________________________ Kathleen M., Committee Member _________________________________ Sarah Noonan, Ed., Committee Member May 7, 2012 _________________________________ Final Approval Date iii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I am eternally grateful to my wife, Diane, for her love and understanding throughout our lives together, and especially throughout my doctoral experience. This dissertation is dedicated to her. Also, I thank our children, Anna and David, for their unquestioning support of my need to learn. Finally, I am forever indebted to Dr.

Tom Fish, my Dissertation Committee Chair, for his patience, guidance, and faith in me. iv ABSTRACT The purpose of this case study was to explore with a sample of doctoral graduates their perceptions of the impact of the University of St. Thomas Doctorate in Leadership Program on their lives. Major research questions were: 1) How did the program affect the graduates’ views of self? 2) How did the program affect the graduates’ roles in the world? 3) How did features of the program affect the graduates? 4) How were the graduates able to stay motivated and complete their degrees? Qualitative information was gathered from in-depth interviews of 21 graduates selected for a balance of gender, year graduated, and occupation.

Themes emerged and added meaning to the collective graduate experiences. The program changed the graduates’ sense of self, specifically increasing self-confidence, improving self-understanding, enhancing critical thinking abilities and research skills, and opening participants to multiple perspectives and diversity. Graduates reported an increased focus on relationships and ability to collaborate with others, enhancing their ability to offer leadership to others. The program’s non-traditional format and schedule fit the needs of the adult learner.

The faculty performed facilitation and support roles, the cohort was a comfortable and secure forum, and experiences of cohort members were powerful sources of learning. The result was transformational learning among study participants. Sturdevant ALL RIGHTS RESERVED vi TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS. iv TABLE OF TABLES.

viii LIST OF INCIDENT TABLES. ix CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION .1 The UST Program and the Cohort Model.3 Statement of Problem.5 Significance of the Problem.6 Definition of Terms.7 CHAPTER TWO: REVIEW OF LITERATURE .9 Trends in Doctoral Leadership Programs .9 Setting the Stage .17 Impact of Doctoral Programs on Graduates.19 Theory Related to Identity, Adult Education, Change, and Leadership .23 Identity Theory and Social Identity Theory.24 Adult Education Theory.26 Transformation Theory of Adult Learning .32 Transformational Leadership Theory .33 CHAPTER THREE: METHODOLOGY .36 Qualitative Research Design.36 Case Study Methodology.37 The Research Sample.38 Overview of Research Design .41 Data Collection Methods .42 Methods for Data Analysis and Synthesis .………………………………47 Issues of Trustworthiness.48 vii Limitations of the Study.50 CHAPTER FOUR: A NEW VIEW OF SELF AND OTHERS.51 A New View of Inner Self .58 An Equity Vision .62 Respecting, Trusting, and Valuing Others.65 Driven to Finish .73 CHAPTER FIVE: FOUR SOURCES OF LEARNING.76 Instructive and Nurturing Cohort.90 CHAPTER SIX: DISCUSSIONS, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS .115 Appendix A: Draft Letter to Graduates .116 Appendix B: Consent Form .118 Appendix C: Confidentiality Form – Transcriber.119 Appendix D: Application to the UST Institutional Review Board .121 Appendix E: Incident Tables .129 viii TABLE OF TABLES Table 2. Doctoral degrees in education awarded by U. colleges and universities,.2: Doctorate recipients, by sex and education subfield of study: 2008 .3: Doctoral education leadership program reform elements identified by at least .19 two referenced articles Table 3.1: Demographics of study participants.

Data compilation and analysis frameworks for survey responses and .44 my derived framework Table 3. Codes used in the study. Relationships among program features and study participant demographics. Relationships between gender and participant acceptance of multiple .99 perspectives, and the impact of the cohort and dissertation ix LIST OF INCIDENT TABLES Table E.

Incident table for sense of inner self. Incident table for becoming critical. Incident table for equity vision. Incident table for respecting, trusting, and valuing others.

Incident table for driven to finish. Incident table for supportive faculty. Incident table for instructive and nurturing cohort. Incident table for robust curriculum.

Incident table for dissertation passion. Incident table for gender and profession with respect to findings. Incident table for timing with respect to themes. Incident table for overall doctoral experience.138 1 INTRODUCTION Background I witnessed the profound impact of leadership education throughout my life on individuals and organizations.

I witnessed how leadership education influenced a variety of people. For example, members of a large, traditional church accepted new ministry practices because of leadership workshops and mentoring offered by progressive clergy and lay leaders. Hundreds of government employees embraced servant leadership principles as a result of their participation in a series of workshops. My colleagues’ professional lives changed through participation in a formal leadership-mentoring program sponsored by my employer.

A team of 13 year-old female soccer players from the U. achieved their vision of playing soccer in England because of the leadership lessons taught by a few parents. Finally, many of my classmates, including me, made major life changes due at least in part to our education in the University of St. Thomas (UST) Doctorate in Leadership Program.

I have a strong interest in learning more about the impact of leadership education on individuals and organizations. There are many forms of leadership education. Some colleges and universities offer degrees in leadership. Consultants offer leadership workshops.

Business schools offer courses in various aspects of leadership. Some governmental organizations and businesses provide their own in-house leadership training. I chose to study the impact of the UST Doctorate in Leadership Program because of its significance to me. I enrolled in this program in 2005.

My experience caused me to challenge many previously held assumptions constraining the way I perceived the world. I made a major career change in the midst of the program, and I believe the program informed and enabled the change. The University of St. Thomas describes its Doctorate in Leadership Program as follows: 2 Leaders in a rapidly changing world know how to turn possibilities into strategies that enhance lives and transform organizations.

They are practical visionaries who collaborate with others to develop sound policies during times of ambiguity and conflict. They listen well to diverse points of view. Their belief in the potential of education is mirrored in their own love of learning. They think critically and act ethically.

Leadership practitioners make a difference within their organization and are committed to human growth and development. They apply advanced research methods to issues central to leadership. Leading practices meet the day-to-day and strategic needs of an organization. (University of St.

Thomas, 2008) I began to wonder about the impact of this program, especially about the perceptions and experiences of program graduates. Successful graduates share the experience of having completed the program, perhaps applying their education in the world after earning the doctoral degree. Did the program give them greater abilities to “enhance lives and transform organizations” and “think critically and act ethically?” In this study, I asked a sample of graduates to describe the meaning and value of their doctoral education, assuming this meaning would be informed by their practical work and personal experiences. I gathered information from some program graduates to discover their experience of doctoral education and its value to them.

I believe doctoral education does more than prepare people to conduct research. Too often people measure the value of the doctorate by counting research grants, awards, and publications, and ignoring personal change experienced by people in doctoral education. Neither training nor learning is directly addressed by [these] indicators….only the intellectual and cognitive aspects of education are studied or evaluated. The emotional, moral, ethical, and even behavioral outcomes of graduate study are left unexamined.

Often they are considered irrelevant. (Stevens-Long & Barner, 2006, p. 456) I examined the impact of the program on the whole person, going beyond the graduates’ professional record to their personal accomplishments. I assumed doctoral study might touch the whole person, and potentially change attitudes, behaviors, emotional states, and views of the world.

I also believed certain program elements, such as faculty and curriculum, may have more 3 powerful impact than others. I also wondered about the struggle involved in completing the degree. “Doctoral studies usually are accompanied by intense periods of personal discomfort, emotional turmoil, cognitive struggle, and transformation” (p. Thus, I was also interested in how graduates were able to stay motivated and complete their degrees.

Information on motivation may offer additional insights into program impact. I next provide a brief introduction of the doctoral program and describe two case studies on the UST program. The UST Program and the Cohort Model The general approach and curriculum of the UST Doctorate in Leadership Program has changed little since its inception. It is a mix of theory and application, and open to people across disciplines.

Content includes leadership and organizational theories, problem solving, ethics in leadership, and analysis of critical leadership issues such as “equity, global interdependence, conflicting cultural values, and accelerating social and technological change” (University of St. Scheduling of courses is designed to meet the needs of working professionals. The curriculum has four components: core courses, collateral courses, research courses, and dissertation. Students may concurrently take collateral and research courses.

The required core courses are: Leaders and Organizations: Multidisciplinary Perspectives 1 and 2; Critical Issues in their Political, Social and Economic Contexts; Power, Freedom and Change; Ethical Dimensions of Leadership; and Leadership Narrative Seminar. Three research courses are also required: Survey Research, Qualitative Methods of Research and Evaluation, and one of the following: Educational Statistics, Historical Methodology in Education, and Analysis of Qualitative Data (University of St. The program employs the cohort model for core courses. Through 2010, the program included 26 cohorts and over 550 students (University of St.

In this cohort 4 model, the same student group takes the core courses together. “The program’s cohort component fosters respectful and critical conversation, a diversity of perspectives and camaraderie among learners. Because members of each cohort come from a variety of backgrounds, discussions are rich and experiences are deep” (University of St. Cohorts have been used in other graduate-level programs for many years, and much about their advantages and disadvantages can be found in the literature.

The advantages of cohorts are inter-student support, trusting relationships among members, professional networking, depth of student connections, strength of support structures, depth of discussions, feelings of community, and ease in scheduling. The cohort model allows for multiple learning perspectives, student- based support systems, and skills enhancement. The disadvantages of cohorts are disruptions from dominant members, lack of commitment from some members, and failure among some to meet group expectations.