The purpose of this grounded theory study was to explore the futures that school of education leaders envision for their institutions. American higher education institutions broadly, and schools of education specifically, face a complex of challenges to their traditional structures, processes, practices, value, and values. These challenges create a climate of uncertainty about the future of institutions that were built around assumptions of long-term operational stability. Leaders must evaluate what changes must be made and what legacies must be preserved in order to ensure that their institutions continue to thrive into the future. Therefore, it is important to understand the futures that school of education leaders envision, because these visions of the future will impact decisions made in the present. Current and recent deans from top fifty ranked schools of education in the United States were identified according to the US News & World Report 2016 rankings. These schools were assigned to segments based on their ranking: 1–10, 11–20, 21–30, 31–40, and 41–50. A public and a private school of education were selected from each segment and the deans were contacted for participation. Open response interviews guided by an initial interview protocol were conducted with participants by phone. After the completion of each interview, the audio recording was transcribed, coded, and an initial theory was generated. This theory was then presented to the next participant in the study for discussion. This process was repeated until theoretical data saturation was reached at the tenth interview. The theory of school of education futures that emerged from this process was The Adaptive School of Education. Deans described an institution that: engages in the organizational Activities of critique, creation, education, and communication; is, by its Design, embedded, engaged, diverse, sustainable, and governed by a federalist governance structure; will consider its Human Capital consisting of faculty, students, and staff as the source of innovation and stability; is undergirded by certain organizational Values; and is clear about its Value proposition for the public good, and the private good. These findings have several implications for higher education leadership and school of education leadership practice and inquiry.

The purpose of this study was to identify what factors prompt adult women to return to community college. Adult developmental theory provided a framework for the study. Aslanian and Brickell's (1980) theory that life transitions prompt a learning response was integrated with Gilligan's (1982) theory that women identify themselves in the context of relationships. Information was gathered to determine whether life changes and the desire for a revised identity are the major reasons adult women return to school.;The population of this study was a randomly selected sample of 186 women who had returned to Paul D. Camp Community College during the academic year, 1985-86. The participants had to be 25 years old or older, enrolled in a credit course of study, and returning to college after at least a two year lapse in their formal educational experience. Those women selected to participate in the study responded to a survey asking them to describe their current life situation and reasons for their return to school. Personal interviews were conducted with a select portion of the survey respondents.;Frequencies and percentages were calculated to identify common and distinctive patterns in the reasons adult women return to college. The results support the hypothesis that life changes and the desire for a revised identity prompt women in general to return to education. However, notable differences were identified among women according to their age, race, marital and employment status.;Further study on the development of women is needed. More information regarding the special needs of returning women students in general is warranted. In addition, research on selected categories of returning women students (e.g., minority group women, women who are no longer married) is also needed.

The purpose of this study was to explore differences in the perception of residential living experiences between students living in residential learning communities and those living in traditional residence halls. These two groups were further disaggregated based on their living environment location, on- or off-campus, and their gender. The quality of experience was based on students' perception of their living environment assessed using the Student Residence Environment Scales.;The participants in this study were undergraduate students at a large southeastern public Research I institution enrolled as full-time status students. The on-line survey solicited 600 usable responses (35% usable response rate). of that total, 225 students lived in university owned and operated on-campus residence halls and 375 lived in the privately-owned off-campus residence halls.;Results of this study show that differences do exist between students living in residential learning communities and those living in traditional residence hall environments; however those differences are contingent upon the location of students' residence hall and gender. Location of residence hall and gender impact students' perceptions of their living environment in an interactive relationship with the type of residence hall.;Recommendations for further research included: a replication of this study on multiple campuses to obtain a norm for responses; qualitative data gathering for greater understanding of students experiences; and exploration of the differences between university-owned residence halls and privately-owned residence halls. Recommendations for practitioners included: annual assessment of residential learning communities; and conduct multivariate analysis for a greater understanding of the multiple variables impacting students' perception.

No description available.

The purpose of this study was to identify, analyze, and interpret relationships among the views of the role of the Board of Visitors of the senior public colleges and universities held by leading decision makers in higher education in Virginia--visitors, presidents, legislators, members and staff professionals of the statewide coordinating agency, and other State executives and staff professionals whose work directly affected higher education.;This study was exploratory, ex post facto, survey research using a mail questionnaire to determine the relative incidence and distribution of the views of the visitor's role. Relationships were also investigated between these views and certain other variables associated with the respondents' positions relative to higher education and their personal attributes. of the 385 questionnaires mailed 254 usable questionnaires, or 66 percent, were returned.;It was concluded generally that visitors were typical of higher educational governing board members nationwide; they were expected by most respondents to exercise authority in governing every aspect of their institutions and retain control over all types of decisions affecting campus policy either directly or through authority exercised by faculty, students, or external agencies; and the variations among the respondents' views of the visitor's role were related to their positions, the influence of their different orientations toward external constituencies, the particular aspect of the role they were considering, and certain of their personal attributes.;Notable among the 20 specific conclusions from the study were: (a) visitors were more likely than other respondents to ascribe authority to their own role; (b) visitors were more likely to oppose having their position of authority by-passed than other respondents who could participate in the by-pass; (c) Boards of Visitors were said to be more strongly obligated toward faculty and students by presidents, who dealt more directly with the faculty and students, than by the other respondents; and (d) respondents who indicated a more favorable attitude toward academic freedom and/or who had completed a higher level of education indicated a more favorable attitude toward having Boards of Visitors share authority with campus groups.

The purpose of this study was to both identify and analyze political, educational, and economic factors, particularly political factors, which had a significant impact on the development and growth of the Norfolk Division, The College of William and Mary (1930) into Old Dominion College (1962). The study was also designed to record a significant period (1930-62) in the history of a two-year, junior college and later a four-year, degree-granting college.;It was hypothesized that the development and growth of the college in Norfolk was based largely on decisions of a political nature rather than on those that were educational and economic. In addition, the effective application of politics enabled the college to survive several crises during the period 1930 to 1962.;The historical method of research was used to conduct this study. This method permitted the examination of primary and secondary source documents, the use of recorded oral testimony from participants and observers, and the scrutiny of relationships among peoples, places, and events.;The study concluded that political factors overwhelmingly influenced the development and growth of the college in Norfolk. The role played by local and state figures, as well as by local organizations and newspaper media, affected to a considerable degree the development of a two-year, dependent, junior college into a four-year, degree-granting, independent, senior college.;Further research into the post 1962 period is needed to analyze the changing educational needs of southeastern Virginia and to determine their effect on the growth of Old Dominion College (1962) into Old Dominion University (1969).

The purpose of this dissertation was to explore the facts regarding the rhetoric of democratization and broadening the base of higher education with reference to the development of the Virginia Community College System. In a state with a tradition of conservatism and elitism toward public education, this study sought to identify those factors which accounted for the adoption of a populist notion, the community college system.;Established in 1966, the system was late in coming compared to other states. The first continuously operating two-year public college was established in Joliet, Illinois, in 1901, and California, along with other states, soon followed. This study also sought to answer why Virginia did not act sooner in creating a public community college system.;Relying primarily on available documents, forces and changes of the 1950s and 1960s which finally resulted in the adoption of the two-year comprehensive community colleges were explored and interviews of some key individuals were also used to confirm the importance, credibility, and interpretation of those documents.;Based on the findings, several conclusions were made. First and foremost, the development of a comprehensive community college system in Virginia was not the direct result of a cry for democratization or broadening the base of higher education (equal opportunity). The development, in fact, evolved from a series of problems facing the State. Through the vision and leadership of Governor Mills E. Godwin, Jr., the establishment of the Virginia Community College System was promoted and adopted. Time, care, and thoughtful consideration (in the traditional Virginia fashion) brought to fruition this system which was an immediate cure for a number of ills. It answered the following needs: It provided a cost-effective and efficient way to accommodate an increasing enrollment; it was a vehicle for occupational/technical training in support of industrial development and keeping up with advancing technology; and it provided a method for coordination of all two-year institutions. and finally, although the Virginia Community College System was adopted without compromising the past tradition of conservatism and elitism, it did come to be a vehicle for broadening the base of higher education in Virginia.

In a study published in 1978, Manns and March found that university curricula do change in response to financial adversity. Based on a model proposed by Cohen and March, Manns and March said that it was necessary for departments to stimulate demand for enrollment in order to secure resources. They proposed that competition for resources would encourage competition among departments. Departments most in need of maintaining demand would change most; those least in need of maintaining demand would change least.;Manns and March also noted that academia has traditions about change that could have influenced the process. Thus, there may have been other considerations that contributed to academic's decisions to change. to extend Manns and March's work and to discover what kinds of things had informed decisions to make curriculum changes was the aim of this research.;Through interviews with department, school, and curriculum committee heads at William and Mary, this study sought to discover the reasons these people gave for certain curricular changes they made from 1971-72 to 1980-81. Representatives from three arts and sciences and departments and two professional schools were asked to recall the kinds of things they had considered when changing six different curricular attributes. The six curricular attributes examined were: (1) course numbers; (2) course titles and descriptions; (3) course additions, deletions, modifications; (4) credit requirements for majors; (5) area/sequence designation; (6) courses without prerequisite designation.;This study found that in all five groups studied, student enrollments had been a consideration in the changes made in one curriculum attribute--the addition or substantive modification of courses. For the five other attributes examined, other factors were considered rather than student demand. These other factors consisted variously from one group to the next of such things as change in the discipline, change in texts, change in faculty teaching loads, change in faculty members, change in departmental emphasis, and change in accreditation of certification requirements.;Each group examined viewed the importance of each of the six curriculum attributes differently, varied in the kinds of attention given to students' pursuits, and had group-specific routines and operating procedures.

The purpose of this study was to determine whether career patterns of collegiate administrators could be explained in terms of existing organizational models of academic institutions.;The study involved a secondary analysis of data collected in the summer of 1981 in a statewide survey of collegiate administrators. The target population consisted of all the middle level administrators (N = 617) at the director level or above from thirty-three state-supported and independent colleges and universities from the Commonwealth of Virginia. A strict adherence to the Dillman "total design method" resulted in a response rate of 76.5 percent.;Previous studies which had employed the narrow concept of career ladder had generally found career patterns in collegiate administration to be less defined than in industry or the military. to address the inadequacy of the career ladder concept, a broader concept, "career field" was introduced in this study. Three organizational models were chosen and the subdivisions of each were defined as career fields. Administrator titles were assigned to each career field of each of the three models by a panel of experts employing a Q-Sort technique.;The results of this research show that, when all career positions are included, positions held by respondents prior to entering collegiate administration tend to mask existent career patterns.;For academic administrators, most of their pre-administrator positions had been in teaching faculty or higher education related roles. The study confirmed that the academic administrator career field continues to be quite different due to its inextricable link to professorial career patterns. The study also found that among non-academic administrators, patterns of pre-administrator positions varied by the career fields of each model.;Among academic and non-academic administrators alike, there was little evidence of people leaving administration and then returning.;A significant but unexpected finding of the study was that many administrators carry on other career pursuits concomitantly. Previous career research may have been distorted by concomitant positions as well as pre-administrator positions. This finding points to the need for better definitions and stricter composition of career research instruments.

The purpose of this study was to investigate reasons for establishment of the National War College, its interrelationship with other Senior Service Schools, and to assess why the multiple institutions continue to exist.;The study contained three hypotheses. First, the National War College was planned and developed to be the capstone of the nation's military educational system. It never achieved that position. Instead it has shared the summit of professional military education with the other four Senior Service Colleges. Second, the National War College and each of the other Senior Service Colleges had unique missions which prevented any institution from becoming surpreme in the military education system. Third, although one could establish the interrelationships among the Senior Service Colleges, one could not assess readily the reasons the multiple institutions existed.;The present investigation is significant because the interrelationships that exist among the National War College and the other Senior Service Schools seem to be misunderstood by the civilian sector and ignored by the military. The study attempted to clarify those relationships for both elements.;It was hypothesized that by investigating the historical antecedents of military higher education in the United States one could better understand the development of the National War College and its interrelationships with the other Senior Service Colleges. It was also the contention of the author that an analysis of factors leading to the development of the Senior Service Colleges would provide insight into the reasons all the senior institutions exist today. Additionally, the author believed that one would have to investigate the roles, attitudes, and influences of military and civilian leaders as well as curriculum development and instructional strategies at the Senior Service Colleges before one could fully understand why they developed as they did.;It was concluded that all the Senior Service Colleges are required, and the present arrangement appears to be the best for military higher education given the current state of desires of military officials and indifference to military advanced graduate education by the civilian sector.