3.4 Attraction and selection of applicants for a doctoral program  (Page 6/7)

Results from these analyses indicate the importance of standardized test scores (both the GRE and the MAT) over past grade-point averages. Standardized test scores were found to be the single most important predictor. For the GRE yielding scores on both verbal and quantitative measures, the verbal score was controlling and mirrors those findings for the MAT.

With respect to past academic performance as measured by grade-point averages, graduate grade-point averages were more important than undergraduate grade-point averages when assessed through a linear equation. Several reasonable hypotheses exist but have yet to be tested for these findings. These hypotheses are maturation for individuals and timeliness of academic measures.

Well known among academicians as well as among potential applicants is that individuals mature during their undergraduate career. Many are less than serious scholars as a reflection of youth or inexperience, academic focus, and/or undecided college majors. As a result of these potential reasons, a good deal of variability exists among undergraduate grade-point averages, and this variability has not been found to be systematically related to performance in a doctoral program focusing on educational leadership given a student’s subsequent performance at the graduate level.

Graduate gradepoint averages, unlike undergraduate grade point averages, were found to differentiate between successful and unsuccessful applicants for a doctoral program in educational leadership. From a timeliness perspective, graduate grade-point averages provide a proximal measure of academic performance, while undergraduate grade-point averages provide a distal measure of academic performance. Given this time differential between graduate (proximal) and undergraduate (distal) grade-point averages, it seems only reasonable that proximal, as opposed to distal, measures would be the better predictor of future performance in a doctoral program in this discipline.

Conclusions

The importance of educational leadership for the public school setting is well documented within the professional literature. As such, able and willing educational leaders are needed to step“up to the plate”and to render their services. At present, one of the most efficient routes for capitalizing on leadership positions in the public school setting is a doctoral degree in educational leadership.

Doctoral programs in this area provide a gatekeeping function for entry to and for progression within educational leadership positions at the public school level. To meet this challenge as well as to capitalize on this opportunity, only the“best of the best”should be recruited and should be selected for a doctoral program in educational leadership. However, often overlooked or taken as a given is that effective recruitment and efficient selection require proactive actions on the part of a doctoral program.

Based on the emerging research findings addressing recruitment and selection in this area, doctoral programs in educational leadership must be prepared to provide procedural as well as substantive information to potential candidates. Unsurprisingly, according to existing research, potential doctoral candidates are interested in what it takes to be admitted and what it takes to graduate because the investment of time, effort, and financial resources is a legitimate concern for most practicing professionals. Potential applicants as wise buyers within the academic marketplace rely on these types of information to guide their decision making.