Not available / text

Not available / text

School superintendents of today must balance leadership skills, political skills, instructional skills, and people skills. They are at the forefront of the school district and are the most public personification of the district. They are encumbered with and often held accountable for student achievement, ensuring that all faculty and staff are accountable in their respective areas, and fostering and many times creating a culture that must meet the needs of all of their constituents. Research suggests that being a visible presence in the school district is one way for school superintendents to gauge the effectiveness of the district. Given the complexity of the job, school superintendents must utilize every available moment to ensure that the work of the school district is done in an efficient and effective manner. The successful school superintendent will find ways to be a visible presence in the school district and in the community, thus enabling him to have first-hand knowledge about the actions of the varying constituents in the school district as well as providing opportunities for him to have a positive impact on those actions. This treatise utilizes case study design to analyze the actions of a superintendent in one suburban school district. From the analysis of interviews, documents, and interactions, certain themes emerged. This study suggests that superintendents maintaining a visible presence in the district and in the surrounding community have a positive effect on the studied areas of student achievement, staff accountability, and organizational culture. Additionally, the study analyzed and documented specific behaviors which enable the superintendent to actualize a visible presence in the school district. / text

Not available / text

Not available / text

Not available / text

Not available / text

Not available / text

The study of leadership in education, business, industry, government, and other organizations has evolved over time. Early studies focused on leadership traits and behavior. Currently, researchers and theorists have concentrated on the interaction of leadership styles and situations. The primary purpose of this study was to determine the predominant leadership style of a group of senior administrators of public universities in Texas.

As the U.S. population diversifies, so do its higher education institutions. Leadership at these institutions should be prepared for this diversification of students, faculty, and staff. The purpose of this study was to gain greater knowledge about the leadership styles and cultural sensitivity of department chairs. Survey research was used to determine if department chairs’ leadership styles correlated with their cultural sensitivity. The target population was department chairs from public universities in the state of Texas. The survey was distributed to 406 randomly selected department chairs. The participants completed three measures: Leadership Behavior Description Questionnaire (LDBQ) for leadership style, the Intercultural Sensitivity Scale (ISS) for cultural sensitivity, and a demographic questionnaire (gender, age range, race/ethnicity, and years of service as department chair). The sample included 165 usable surveys (40% return rate). The department chairs were primarily male (72%), White (78%), and over 50 (71%) years of age. First, a statistically significant negative correlation (r = -.431, p < .0001) occurred between LBDQ overall scores and overall ISS scores: As chairs scored higher on leadership ability, they scored lower on intercultural sensitivity. Second, leadership style by demographic variable displayed mixed results. No significant difference was found for leadership style by age, gender, years of service, or region of service. For ethnicity, White participants scored significantly lower than Minority participants on the LBDQ scales of consideration (t [162] = -2.021, p = .045), structure (t [162] = -2.705, p = .008), and overall (t [162] = -2.864, p = .005). Minority participants might work more diligently to increase their leadership abilities based on their higher LDBQ scores. Third, findings on intercultural sensitivity by demographic variable were mixed. No statistical significance was observed between any of the ISS scales and age, gender, years of service, and region. For ethnicity, Minority participants’ scores showed significantly lower intercultural sensitivity than White participants scores on two of six ISS subscales: interaction enjoyment (t = -2.46, p = .015) and respect (t = 2.107, p = .037). It was concluded that the Minority and White department chairs’ leadership style and intercultural sensitivity differences could be due in part to differences in the chairs’ ethnic affiliations, associated cultural backgrounds, and views of dominant versus non-dominant cultures. Recommendations for study are included.