Perceived effectiveness of academic leadership development training: The contribution of motivational factors and peer interaction

Year 2022, Volume: 7 Issue: 3, 633 - 678, 30.09.2022

Ngoc Dınh , Chang Zhu , Aysun Calıskan

https://doi.org/10.30828/real.1159480

Abstract

Due to the radical changes and complexities within academic institutions, leadership development addressed to academic leaders in the digital age has become more critical. In the available literature, the outcome assessment of leadership development and its related factors have not been evaluated rigorously. The current study investigated the contribution of peer interaction and two subscales of motivation to the effectiveness of the leadership development programs perceived by training participants in a diverse context. Of 101 participants, the majority of training workshop attendees were junior and middle-level leaders from both European universities and Chinese universities who participated in the leadership development programs organized under an EU project. PLS-SEM was exploited to validate the measurement model and test the hypotheses. The results showed that self-growth and peer interaction significantly contribute to perceived effectiveness, whereas networking motivator shows nonsignificant impact. The findings also illustrated that the two motivation patterns have significant effects on interaction quality. The mediating role of peer interaction on the relationships between the two motivational factors and perceived effectiveness, respectively, were not found in the current study. The findings contributed to identifying the role of different contributors to the effectiveness of the leadership development program in HE contexts and the potential of such a program to enhance knowledge and capacities of academic leaders regarding university governance and leadership.

Keywords

higher education, leadership development, training effectiveness

References

• Antoine, A., & Van Langenhove, L. (2019). Global challenges and trends of university governance structures. In C Zhu & M. Zayim-Kurtay (Eds.), University Governance and Academic leadership in the Eu and China (pp. 233–245). IGI Global.
• Barak, M., Watted, A., & Haick, H. (2016). Motivation to learn in massive open online courses: Examining aspects of language and social engagement. Computer & Education, 94, 49–60.
• Caliskan, A., Zhu, C., & Dinh, N. B. K. (2021). Exploring young-level academic leadership: A thematic analysis of a MOOC discussion forum. HigherEducation Governance & Policy, 2(1), 1–18.
• Cave, A., & Mulloy, M. (2010). How Do Cognitive and Motivational Factors Influence Teachers’ Degree of Program Implementation?: A Qualitative Examination of Teacher Perspectives. National Forum of Educational Administration and Supervision Journal, 27(4).
• Chen, B., Fan, Y., Zhang, G., Liu, M., & Wang, Q. (2020). Teachers’ networked professional learning with MOOCs. PLoS ONE, 15(7), 1–23.
• Chia, P. K., Ying, T. W., & Chin, C. T. (2011). Elementary school teachers’ motivation toward web-based professional development, and the relationship with Internet self-efficacy and belief about web-based learning. Teaching and Teacher Education, 27(2), 406–415.
• Chin, W. (1998a). The partial least squares approach to structural equation modeling. In G. . Marcoulides (Ed.), Modern Methods for Business Research (pp. 295–358). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
• Chin, W. (1998b). The Partial Least Squares Approach to Structural Equation Modelling. In G. A. Marcoulides (Ed.), Advances in Hospitality and Leisure (pp. 295–335).
• Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
• Cooper, J., Gage, N. ., Alter, P., LaPolla, S., MacSuga-Gage, A., & Scott, T. . (2017). Educators’ self-reported training, use, and perceived effectiveness of evidence-based classroom management practices. Precenting School Failure, 13–24.
• Creswell, J. W. (2009). Research design: qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. Sage.
• Cullen, K., Willburn, K., & Chrobot-Mason, D. (2014). Networks: How Collective Leadership Really Works.
• Day, D. ., Riggio, R. ., Tan, S. ., & Conger, J. A. (2021). Advancing the science of 21st-century leadership development: Theory, research, and practice. The Leadership Quarterly, 32, 101557.
• Denis, J. ., Langley, A., & Sergi, V. (2012). Leadership in the Plural. Academy of Management Annals, 6(1), 211–283.
• Diep, N. ., Cocquyt, C., Zhu, C., Vanwing, T., & de Greef, M. (2017). Effects of core self- evaluation and online interaction quality on adults’ learning performance and bonding and bridging social capital. The Internet and Higher Education, 34, 41–55.
• Diep, N. A., Cocquyt, C., Zhu, C., & Vanwing, T. (2016). Predicting adult learners online participation: effects of altrusm, performance expectaincy, and social capital. Computers & Education, 101, 84–101.
• Dinh, N.B.K., Caliskan, A., & Zhu, C. (2021). Academic leadership: Perceptions of academic leaders and staff in diverse contexts. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 49(6), 996–1016. https://doi.org/10.1177/1741143220921192
• Dopson, S, Ferlie, E., McGivern, G., Fischer, M. ., Mitra, M., Ledger, J., & Behrens, S. (2018). Leadership Development in Higher Education: A Literature Review and Implications for Programme Redesign. Higher Education Quarterly, 1–17. https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.18104.39686
• Dopson, Sue, Ferlie, E., McGivern, G., Fischer, M., Ledger, J., Behrens, S., & Wilson, S. (2016). Research and development series: the impact of leadership and leadership development in higher education: a review of the literature and evidence. https://doi.org/978-1-906627-89-8
• Dumulescu, D., & Mutiu, A. . (2021). Academic Leadership in the Time of COVID-19—Experiences and Perspectives. Frontiers in Psychology, 12.
• Durksen, T., Klassen, R. ., & Daniels, L. . (2017). Motivation and collaboration: The keys to a developmental framework for teachers’ professional learning. Teaching and Teacher Education, 67, 53–66.
• Evans, L. (2014). What is effective research leadership? A research- informed perspective. Higher Education Research & Development, 33(1), 46–58. https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2013.864617
• Fischer, C., Malycha, C. ., & Schafmann, E. (2019). The Influence of Intrinsic Motivation and Synergistic Extrinsic Motivators on Creativity and Innovation. Frontiers in Psychology. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00137
• Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. . (1981). Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18(1), 39–50.
• Gardner, R., Smythe, P., Clement, R., & Gliksman, L. (1976). Second-Language learning: a social- psychological perspective. Canadian Modern Language Review, 32, 198–213.
• Gde Agung Yana, A. ., Rusdhi, H. ., & Agung Wibowo, M. A. (2015). Analysis of factors affecting design changes in construction project with Partial Least Square (PLS). Procedia Engineering, 125, 40–45.
• Geisser, S. (1974). A predictive approach to the random effect model. Biometrika, 61(1), 101–107.
• Gray, J., & Diloreto, M. (2016). The effects of student engagement, student satisfaction, and perceived learning in online learning environments. International Journal of Educational Leadership Preparation, 11(1).
• Green, M., & Cifuentes, L. (2011). The Effects of Follow-up and Peer Interaction on Quality of Performance and Completion of Online Professional Development. Journal of Interactive Learning Research, 22(1), 85–109.
• Hair, J., Hult, G., Ringle, C., & Sarstedt, M. (2017). A Primer on Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling. (2nd ed.). Thousand Oacks: Sage.
• Haythornthwaite, C., & De Laat, M. F. (2012). Social Network Informed Design for Learning with Educational Technology. In A. Olofson & O. Lindberg (Eds.), Informed Design of Educational Technologies in Higher Education: Enhanced Learning and Teaching (pp. 352–374). Hershey: IGI Global.
• Henseler, J., & Fassott, G. (2015). A new criterion for assessing discriminant validity in variance-based structural equation modeling. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Sciences, 43(1), 115–135.
• Hone, K. ., & El Said, G. . (2016). Exploring the factors affecting MOOC retention: A survey study. Computers & Education, 98, 157–168.
• Hundessa, F. . (2019). Academic leadership: exploring the experiences of department heads in a first generation university in Ethiopia. International Journal of Leadership in Education. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603124.2018.1545922
• Jung, E., Kim, D., Yoon, M., Park, S., & Oakley, B. (2019). The influence of instructional design on learner control, sense of achievement, and perceived effectiveness in a supersize MOOC course. Computers & Education, 128, 377–388.
• Kao, C. P., Wu, Y. ., & Tsai, C. . (2011). Elementary school teachers’ motivation toward web-based professional development, and the relationship with Internet self-efficacy and belief about web-based learning. Teaching and Teacher Education, 27(2011), 406–415.
• Ke, F., & Kwak, D. (2013). Online learning across ethnicity and age: A study on learning interaction participation, perception, and learning satisfaction. Computers & Education, 61, 43–51.
• Kirkpatrick, D. (1996). Great ideas revisited. Techniques for evaluating training programs. Revisiting Kirkpatrick’s four level model. Training & Development, 50, 54–59.
• Kirkpatrick, L., & Kirkpatrick, J. (2006). Evaluating training programmes: the four levels. Berret- Koehler.
• Kline, R. . (2011). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling. Guilford Press.
• Kovacevic, M. (2019). Academic leadership skills: Magaging teams and conflict management. In Z. Chang & M. Zayim-Kurtay (Eds.), University Governance and Academic leadership in the Eu and China (pp. 246–254). IGI Global.
• Ladyshewsky, R. ., & Flavell, H. (2011). Transfer of training in an academic leadership development program for program coordinators. Educational Management Administration & Leadership, 40(127–147).
• Lagat, K., & Concepcion, G. . (2022). Students’ Social Interaction, Collaborative Learning, and Perceived Learning in an Online Learning Environment. International Journal of Social Science Research and Review, 5(1), 24–33.
• Lester, K. L. ., Maupin, C. ., & Carter, D. . (2017). Incorporating social networks into leadership development: A conceptual model and evaluation of research and practice. The Leadership Quarterly, 28, 130–152.
• Levin, S., Fulginity, A., & Moore, B. (2018). The perceived effectiveness of online social work education: insights from a national survey of social work educators. Social Work Education, 37(6), 775–789.
• Liu, W. (2019). Higher education leadership development: an international comparative approach. International Journal of Leadership in Education, 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603124.2019.1623920
• Liu, WS, Li, X., & Zou, Y. (2019). The Formation of Teachers’ Intrinsic Motivation in Professional Development. Integr Psychol Behav Sci, 53(3), 418–430.
• Loizzo, J., Ertmer, P. ., Watson, W. ., Watson, & Lee, S. (2017). Adults as self-directed and determined to set and achieve personal learning goals in MOOCs: learners’ perceptions of MOOC motivation, success, and completion. Online Learning, 21(2).
• Luyckx, K., & Robitschek, C. (2014). Personal growth initiative and identity formation in adolescence through young adulthood: Mediating processes on the pathway to well-being. Journal of Adulescence, 37, 973–981.
• MacKenzie, S. B., & Podsakoff, P. M. (2012). Common Method Bias in Marketing: Causes, Mechanisms, and Procedural Remedies. Journal of Retailing, 88(4), 542–555.
• Malik, S. K., Nasim, U., & Tabassum, F. (2015). Perceived Effectiveness of Professional Development Programs of Teachers at Higher Education Level. Journal of Education and Practice, 6(13).
• McCauley, C. ., & Palus, C. . (2021). Developing the theory and practice of leadership development: A relational view. The Leadership Quarterly, 32(5), 101456. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2020.101456
• Meijs, C., Prinsen, F. R., & de Laat, M. (2016). Social learning as approach for teacher professional development; how well does it suit them? Educational Media International, 53(2), 85–102.
• Mueller, R. ., & Hancock, G. . (2018). Structural equation modeling. In G. R. Hancock, L. Stapleton, & R. O. Mueller (Eds.), The Reviewer’s Guide to Quantitative Methods in the Social Sciences (2nd ed., pp. 445–456). Routledge.
• Muirhead, B. (1999). Attitudes toward interactivity in a graduate distance education program: a qualitative analysis. Parkland.
• Nasser, F., & Shabti, A. (2010). Satisfaction with professional development: Relationship to teacher and professional development program characteristics. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2, 2739–2743.
• Newcomer, K. ., Hatry, H. ., & Wholey, J. . (2015). Handbook of Practical program evaluation. John Wiley & Sons.
• Nov, O., Naaman, M., & Ye, C. (2010). Analysis of participation in an online photo sharing community:amulti-dimension perspective. Journal of American Society for Information Science and Technology, 61(3), 555–565.
• Osman, D. J., & Warner, J. R. (2020). Measuring teacher motivation: The missing link between professional development and practice. Teaching and Teacher Education, 92, 1–12.
• Peltier, J., Schibrowsky, J., & Drago, W. (2007). The Interdependence of the Factors Influencing the Perceived Quality of the Online Learning Experience: A Causal Model. Journal of Marketing Education, 2, 140–153.
• Peltier, J. W., Drago, W., & Schibrowsky, J. . (2003). Virtual Communities and the Assessment of Online Marketing Education. Journal of Marketing Education, 25(3), 260–276.
• Preacher, K., & Hayes, A. (2008). Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing and comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models. Behavior Research Methods, 40(3), 879–891.
• Reeves, T. ., & Pedulla, J. (2011). Predictors of teacher satisfaction with online professional development: evidence from the USA’s e-Learning for Educators initiative. Professional Development in Education, 1(21).
• Reyes, D. ., Dinh, J., Lacerenza, C., Marlow, S. ., Joseph, D. ., & Salas, E. (2019). The state of higher education leadership development program evaluation: A meta-analysis, critical review, and recommendations. The Leadership Quarterly, 30(101311), 1–15. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2019.101311
• Ringle, C. ., Wende, S., & Becker, J. M. (2015). SmartPLS 3. SmartPLS GmbH.
• Robitschek, C., Ashton, M. W., Spering, C., Geiger, N., Byers, G., Schotts, G., & Thoen, M. (2012). Development and Psychometric Evaluation of the Personal Growth Initiative Scale–II. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 59(2), 274–287.
• Roblyer, M., & Ekham, L. (2000). How interactive are YOUR distance courses? A rubric for assessing interaction in distance learning. Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration.
• Ryan, R. ., & Deci, E. L. (2020). Intrinsic and extrinsic motivation from a self-determination theory perspective: Definitions, theory, practices, and future directions. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 61.
• Ryan, R., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-Determination Theory and the Facilitation of Intrinsic Motivation, Social Development, and Well-Being. American Psychologist, 55(1), 67–68. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.55.1.68
• Scott, G., Coaters, H., & Anderson, M. (2008). Learning Leaders in Times of Change: Academic Leadership Capabilities for Australian Higher Education. University of Western Sydney, Australian Council for Educational Research.
• Setia, S., Iyengar, S. R. ., Chhabra, A., Verma, A. ., & Dubey, N. (2021). How well do the students understand the course contents? Assessing comprehension through course videos. Journal of Computers in Education.
• Sewerin, T., & Holmberg, R. (2017). Contextualizing distributed leadership in higher education. Higher Education Research & Development, 36(6), 1280–1294. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1080/07294360.2017.1303453
• Stone, M. (1974). Cross-validatory choice and assessment of statistical predictions. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Series B (Methodological), 36(2), 111–147.
• Tedla, B. ., Redda, E. ., & Vilas B, D. (2021). Leadership styles and school performance: a study within an eritrean context of Eastern Africa. International Journal of Management, 12(4), 56–73.
• Truong, M., & Murray, J. (2019). Understanding Language Teacher Motivation in Online Professional Development: A Study of Vietnamese EFL Teachers. The Electronic Journal for English as a Second Language, 24(3), 1–22.
• Turnbull, S., & Edwards, G. (2005). Leadership Development for Organizational Change in a New U.K. University. Advances in Developing Human Resources, 7(3), 396–413.
• Vaessen, M., van den Beemt, A., & de Laat, M. (2014). Networked professional learning: relating the formal and the informal. Frontline Learning Research, 56–71.
• Wasko, M., & Faraj, S. (2000). It is what one does: why people participate and help others in electronic communities of practice. Journal of Strategic Information Systems, 9(2–3), 155–173.
• Woerkom, M., & Meyers, M. (2019). Strengthening personal growth: The effects of a strengths intervention on personal growth initiative. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 92, 98–121.
• Wolverton, M., Ackeman, R., & Holt, S. (2005). Preparing for Leadership: What Academic Department Chair needs to know. Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management, 27(2), 277–238. https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13600800500120126
• Xie, K., & Ke, F. (2011). The role of students’ motivation in peer-moderatedasynchronous online discussions. British Journal of Educational Technology, 42(6), 916–930.
• Xiong, Y., Li, H., Kornhaber, M. ., Suen, H. ., Pursel, B., & Goins, D. . (2015). Examining the relations among student motivation, engagement, and retention in a MOOC: A structural equation modeling approach. Global Education Review, 2(3), 23–33.
• Zainuddin, Z. (2018). Students’ learning performance and perceived motivation in gamified flipped-class instruction. Computer & Education, 126, 75–88.
• Zhu, C. (2017). University student satisfaction and perceived effectiveness of a blended learning course. International Journal of Learning Technology, 12(1), 66–83.
• Zhu, C. & Zayim-Kurtay, M. (2018). University governance and academic leadership: Perceptions of European and Chinese university staff and perceived need for capacity building. European Journal of Higher Education, 8(4), 435–452. https://doi.org/10.1080/21568235.2018.1458636