3.9 Perceptions within the discipline: exceptional scholarship in  (Page 8/8)

As mentioned, a generational bias entered into the results but once again the degree of influence is unknown.More senior professors generally know the older or more established generation of scholars, whereas those younger have familiarity withthe newer“stars.”Several nominees addressed this phenomenon, as in:“The more scholarly respondents might tend to select someone who is treasured within their field for the writing they have done.Personally, I am not as up-to-date with names because my own heroes are mostly retirees; in fact, I am ignorant of the mid-careerhotshots who are making good waves.”

Final Remark

The issues of complexity raised herein suggest that while nominations of“living legends”seem possible, especially where constituents have formulated criteria, deeperissues prevail. Nominators forwarded useful and revealing criteria supporting their decision making—a process thoughtfully undertaken, particularly by those sharing reflections and caveats. And thedissenting critiques proved invaluable as well. Nominators provided clues about the patterns of educational leadership they most value,the individuals to whom they have looked for guidance, the status of the field, and emergent trends.

Further research is needed that continues work on the controversial topic of exceptional scholarship ineducational leadership. Debate is also encouraged about the topics of significance raised: The critical tensions explored herein thatcapture the thinking of some university faculty in addition to the self-identifying criteria for the votes cast would benefit from acommunity-wide response.

References

Born, D. (1996).“Leadership studies”: A critical appraisal. In P. S. Temes (Ed.), Teaching leadership:Essays in theory and practice (pp. 45-72). New York: Peter Lang.

Culbertson, J. (1995). Building bridges: UCEA’s first two decades. University Park, PA: The University Council for Educational Administration.

Diem, K. G. (2002). Maximizing response rate and controlling nonresponse error in survey research. NewBrunswick, NJ: Rutgers Cooperative Extension/Resource Center Services. [Online]. Available: http://www.rce.rutgers.edu.

English, F. W. (2003). The postmodern challenge to the theory and practice of educational administration.Springfield, IL: Charles C. Thomas Publisher.

Engstrom, C. M. (1999). Promoting the scholarly writing of female doctoral students in higher educationand student affairs program. NASPA Journal, 36(4), 264-277.

Fraze, S., Hardin, K., Brashears, T., Smith, J. H.,&Lockaby, J. (2003). The effects of delivery mode upon survey response rate and perceived attitudes of Texas agri-scienceteachers. Journal of agricultural education, 44 (part 2), 27-37.

Fullan, M. (1999). Change forces: The sequel. London: Falmer.

Haring, M. J. (1998). Response to“A woman's name: Implications for publication, citation, and tenure.”Educational Researcher, 27(8), 43.

Johnson, P. F. (1996). Antipodes: Plato, Nietzsche, and the moral dimension of leadership. In P. S. Temes(Ed.), Teaching leadership: Essays in theory and practice (pp. 13-44). New York: Peter Lang.

Kiewra, K. A.,&Creswell, J. W. (2000). Conversations with three highly productive educationalpsychologists: Richard Anderson, Richard Mayer, and Michael Pressley. Educational Psychology Review, 12(1), 135-161.

McCarthy, M. M. (1999). The“changing”face of the educational leadership professoriate. In J. Murphy&P. B. Forsyth (Eds.), Educational Administration: A decade of reform(pp. 192-214). Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.

Miles, M. B.,&Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook (2nd ed.).Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Mullen, C. A., Gordon, S. P., Greenlee, B.,&Anderson, R. H. (2002). Capacities for school leadership: Emerging trends in the literature. International Journal ofEducational Reform, 11(2), 158-198.

Murphy, J. (1999). The reform of the profession: A self-portrait. In J. Murphy&P. B. Forsyth (Eds.), Educational Administration: A decade of reform (pp. 39-68).Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.

Newman, M. E. (2002).‘Rounding up’responses to mailed questionnaires. [American EvaluationAssociation/Extension Education Evaluation]. [Online]. Available: http://danr.ucop.edu/eee-aea/AEA_HearItFromTheBoardJuly2002.pdf

Renzetti, C. M.,&Lee, R. M. (Eds.). (1993). Researching sensitive topics. London: Sage.

Author Notes

The respondent quotes appearing on this chart (and in this article) have been synthesized and slightly altered,rendered gender-neutral where possible and anonymous, protecting both the nominees and the nominators. I am grateful to the faculty nominators whogenerously shared their perceptions. Also, I appreciate the helpful critique provided by the editor and the two reviewers.

Acronyms for national standards used by nominators:

Educational Leadership Constituent Council (ELCC); Interstate School Leaders LicensureConsortium (ISLLC; National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education (NCATE)