Preparing Educational Leaders for Adaptive Leadership

• In Event: New Advances in the Preparation, Supervision, and Evaluation of Principals

Abstract

Conceptual Perspectives and Study Purpose. School leaders face technical and adaptive challenges (Heifetz, 1994). While technical challenges are clearly defined with easily implementable solutions, adaptive challenges are more difficult and their causes and solutions are not readily identifiable or implemented. To Heifetz (2010), leaders with greater “adaptive capacity” (p. 73) are better able to coordinate the people and resources needed to identify and respond to adaptive challenges. To enhance adaptive capacity, leaders should undergo personal transformation in which their life perspective transforms (Heifetz & Linksy, 2002; Mezirow, 1997).
Leadership preparation programs (LPPs) are in a pivotal position to create the conditions for such transformation, and we posit that powerful learning experiences (PLEs) offer one way for LPPs to create such conditions. PLEs are defined as “impactful and connected learning experiences situated in authentic contexts that provide [candidates with] opportunities to explore and apply leadership knowledge and skills” (UCEA, 2014). This paper examines how several university-based LPPs deemed “exemplary” by the University Council for Educational Administration (UCEA) design PLEs to enhance aspiring leaders’ adaptive capacity in addition to helping them acquire technical knowledge and skills.
Methods and Data Sources. We engaged in directed content analysis (Hsieh & Shannon, 2005) and analyzed semi-structured interviews (Patton, 2002). The five LPPs in the sample received the Exemplary Educational Leadership Preparation Program Award from UCEA. We analyzed the five applications using an open coding scheme (Corbin & Strauss, 2015). To triangulate self-reported application content, we conducted interviews with program coordinators, faculty members, recent graduates, and current students in each program.
Findings. Our study found that these programs prompted leadership candidates to frequently reflect on their assumptions, attitudes, beliefs, and values—and then engage in critical dialogue about those reflections with colleagues and program faculty and staff. LPPs prioritized developing candidates as people so that, in turn, they could develop as leaders. Preparation focused on more than technical knowledge and skills—programs also aimed to shift candidates’ beliefs and values. Each program also used PLEs to introduce candidates to educational leaders’ professional expectations in order to bridge the theory-practice gap. Candidates spent considerable time in local contexts engaging in actual leadership work (e.g., conducting equity audits). Programs also included assignments that involved candidates working in the communities served by their schools.
Significance. Findings suggest that the exemplary LPPs have a clear, purposeful aim for their candidates: they develop them personally and professionally to help them address technical and adaptive challenges. Enhancing these kinds of capacities within leadership candidates requires a transformational shift in perspective. The integration of PLEs offers one way for LPPs to aid aspiring leaders in critically examining themselves, how they lead currently, and how they want to lead in the future. Creating transformational learning conditions, though, is no simple task. Our findings provide guidance for how LPPs can reflect upon their design, program of study, learning experiences, assignments, and assessments. Programs only work with candidates for a short amount of time, and leveraging each moment is imperative for preparing effective leaders.

Authors

• Bryan A. VanGronigen, University of Delaware

• Kathleen M.W. Cunningham, University of South Carolina

• Michelle D. Young, Loyola Marymount University