This empirical study contributes to the dialogue about quality leadership and national trends involving standards-based program review. It is the first to utilize the 2016 Council for the Accreditation of Educator Preparation (CAEP) Standards for graduate programs and separately from accreditation and sponsorship. The literature on quality leadership is reviewed, and results from an original instrument are described. Survey influences included leadership literature, the CAEP Standards, and the University Council for Educational Administration’s artifacts. Students and completers’ feedback was on program effectiveness, satisfaction, impact, and ethics. Variance was found in perceptions of quality, relevance, and learning. Contradictory beliefs of program effectiveness can stimulate discussion and strengthen programming.
BeachumF. D.McCrayC. R. (2015). Cracking the code: Illuminating the promises and pitfalls of social justice in educational leadership. In BrooksJ. S.BrooksM. C. (Eds.), Urban educational leadership for social justice: International perspectives (pp. 303-322). Charlotte, NC: Information Age.
2.
BoglerR. (2001). The influence of leadership style on teacher job satisfaction. Educational Administration Quarterly, 37, 662-683. doi:10.1177/00131610121969460
3.
BowersA. J. (2017). Quantitative research methods training in education leadership and administration preparation programs as disciplined inquiry for building school improvement capacity. Journal of Research on Leadership Education, 12, 72-96. doi:10.1177/1942775116659462
4.
Center on Great Teachers and Leaders. (2016, October). The Professional Standards for Educational Leaders (PSEL) 2015 and the Interstate Leaders Licensure Consortium (ISLLC) Standards: A crosswalk. Retrieved from http://www.gtlcenter.org/sites/default/files/PSEL_ISLLC_Crosswalk.pdf
5.
CombsJ. P.EdmonsonS. L. (2010). Professional burnout and job demands among high school principals: A mixed methods study. In CollinsK. M. T.OnwuegbuzieA. J.JiaoQ. G. (Eds.), Toward a broader understanding of stress and coping: Mixed methods approaches (pp. 437-457). Charlotte, NC: Information Age.
EnglishF. W. (2003). The postmodern challenge to the theory and practice of educational administration. Springfield, IL: Charles C Thomas.
12.
FullerE. J.ReynoldsA. L.O’DohertyA. (2017). Recruitment, selection, and placement of educational leadership students. In YoungM. D.CrowG. M. (Eds.), Handbook of research on the education of school leaders (2nd ed., pp. 77-117). New York, NY: Routledge.
13.
GreerJ. L.SearbyL. J.ThomaS. J. (2015). Arrested development? Comparing educational leadership students with national norms on moral reasoning. Educational Administration Quarterly, 51, 511-542.
14.
GubaE. G.LincolnY. S. (1994). Competing paradigms in qualitative methods. In DenzinN.LincolnY. (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 105-117). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
15.
HallingerP.HeckR. H. (2011). Collaborative leadership and school improvement: Understanding the impact on school capacity and student learning. In TownsendT.MacBeathJ. (Eds.), International handbook of leadership for learning (pp. 469-485). New York, NY: Springer.
16.
Peters-HawkinsA. (2017, November). Reclaiming our time: Thoughts on enacting elements of moral leadership in the current political climate. (UCEA Presidential address). Paper presented at the University Council for Educational Administration, Denver, CO.
17.
JacksonB. L.KelleyC. (2002). Exceptional and innovative programs in educational leadership. Educational Administration Quarterly, 38, 192-212. doi:10.1177/0013161X02382005
18.
JacobsonS.McCarthyM.PounderD. (2015). What makes a leadership preparation program exemplary?Journal of Research on Leadership Education, 10, 63-76.
19.
JohnsonB. L.KruseS. D.Jr. (2009). Decision making for educational leaders: Underexamined dimensions and issues. New York: State University of New York Press.
20.
JohnsonR. B.OnwuegbuzieA. J. (2004). Mixed methods research: A research paradigm. Educational Researcher, 33(7), 14-26.
21.
LeithwoodK.JantziD.CoffinG.WilsonP. (1996). Preparing school leaders: What works?Journal of School Leadership, 6, 316-342.
22.
LumbyJ.WalkerA.BryantM.BushT.BjorkL. (2009). Research on leadership preparation in a global context. In YoungM. D.CrowG. M.MurphyJ.OgawaR. T. (Eds.), Handbook of research on the education of school leaders (pp. 157-194). New York, NY: Routledge.
23.
MalenB. (2017). Enriching the preparation of education researchers and practitioner-scholars: Linking school district research priorities and university-based policy evaluation research courses. Journal of Research on Leadership Education, 12, 97-115. doi:10.1177/1942775116663712
24.
MichelliN. M.DadaR.EldridgeD.TamimR. M.KarpK. (2017). Teacher quality and teacher education quality: Accreditation from a global perspective. New York, NY: Routledge.
25.
MilesM. B.HubermanM. A.SaldañaJ. (2013). Qualitative data analysis: A methods sourcebook (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
26.
MilitelloM.GajdaR.BowersA. J. (2009). The role of accountability policies and alternative certification on principals’ perceptions of leadership preparation. Journal of Research on Leadership Education, 4(3), 30-66. doi:10.1177/194277510900400301
27.
MombourquetteC.BedardG. J. (2012). The internship and school leadership preparation: An inquiry and reflection. International Studies in Educational Administration, 40(2), 3-18. doi:10.13140/RG.2.1.2846.1600
28.
MorganD. L. (1998). Practical strategies for combining qualitative and quantitative methods: Applications to health research. Qualitative Health Research, 8, 362-376. doi:10.1177/104973239800800307
29.
MullenC. A. (2017). What’s ethics got to do with it? Pedagogical support for ethical student learning in a principal preparation program. Journal of Research on Leadership Education, 12(2), 1-34. doi:10.1177/1942775117701258
NguniS.SleegersP.DenessenE. (2007). Transformational and transactional leadership effects on teachers’ job satisfaction, organizational commitment, and organizational citizenship behavior in primary schools: The Tanzanian case. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 17, 145-177.
32.
O’MalleyM. P.CapperC. A. (2015). A measure of the quality of educational leadership programs for social justice: Integrating LGBTIQ identities into principal preparation. Educational Administration Quarterly, 51, 290-330. doi:10.1177/0013161X14532468
33.
OrrM. T. (2011). Pipeline to preparation to advancement: Graduates’ experiences in, through, and beyond leadership preparation. Educational Administration Quarterly, 47, 114-172. doi:10.1177/0011000010378612
34.
OrrM. T.OrphanosS. (2011). How graduate-level preparation influences the effectiveness of school leaders: A comparison of the outcomes of exemplary and conventional leadership preparation programs for principals. Educational Administration Quarterly, 47, 18-70. doi:10.1177/0011000010378610
PounderD. G. (2011). Leader preparation special issue: Implications for policy, practice, and research. Educational Administration Quarterly, 47, 258-267. doi:10.1177/0011000010378615
37.
PounderD. G. (2012). School leadership preparation and practice survey instruments and their uses. Journal of Research on Leadership Education, 7, 254-274. doi:10.1177/1942775112455265
38.
PreisS.GroganM.ShermanW. H.BeatyD. M. (2007). What the research and literature say about the delivery of educational leadership preparation programs in the United States. Journal of Research on Leadership Education, 2(2), 1-36. doi:10.1177/194277510700200204
RobinsonV. M. J.LloydC. A.RoweK. J. (2008). The impact of leadership on student outcomes: An analysis of the differential effects of leadership types. Educational Administration Quarterly, 44, 635-674. doi:10.1177/0013161X08321509
41.
SchwarzG. (2016). CAEP and the decline of curriculum and teaching in an age of techne: I have seen the enemy and he is us. In FlindersD. J.MoroyeC. M. (Eds.), Curriculum and teaching dialogue (Vol. 18, pp. 41-54). Charlotte, NC: Information Age.
42.
ShrumJ. L.GlisanE. W. (2016). Teacher’s handbook: Contextualized language instruction (5th ed.). Boston, MA: Cengage Learning.
43.
TuckerP. D.AndersonE.ReynoldsA. L.MawhinneyH. (2016). Analysis of evidence supporting the Educational Leadership Constituent Council 2011 educational leadership program standards. Journal of Research on Leadership Education, 11, 91-119. doi:10.1177/1942775116641664
WrightK. B. (2005). Researching Internet-based populations: Advantages and disadvantages of online survey research, online questionnaire authoring software packages, and Web survey services. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 10(3). doi:10.1111/j.1083-6101.2005.tb00259.x
46.
YauchC. A.SteudelH. J. (2003). Complementary use of qualitative and quantitative cultural assessment. Organizational Research Methods, 6, 465-481. doi:10.1177/1094428103257362
YoungM. D. (2015a). Effective leadership preparation: We know what it looks like and what it can do. Journal of Research on Leadership Education, 10, 3-10. doi:10.1177/1942775115569419
49.
YoungM. D. (2015b). The 2014 Willower family lecture—The leadership challenge: Supporting the learning of all students. Leadership and Policy in Schools, 14, 389-410. doi:10.1080/15700763.2015.1073330
YoungM. D.CrowG. (2016). Handbook of research on the education of school leaders (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Routledge.
52.
YoungM. D.PerroneF. (2016). How are standards used, by whom, and to what end?Journal of Research on Leadership Education, 11, 3-11. doi:10.1177/1942775116647511
