LE64 Academic Leadership for Course Coords Final

7/27/2019 LE64 Academic Leadership for Course Coords Final

1/67Academic Leadership for Course Coordinators Program 1

Leading Courses:

Academic Leadership forCourse Coordinators

Final Report

Academic Leadership for Course Coordinators Program

http://academicleadership.dev.curtin.edu.au/course_coordinator


2/672Academic Leadership for Course Coordinators Program

Support for this project has been provided by the Australian Learning and Teaching Council, an

initiative of the Australian Government Department of Education, Employment and Workplace

Relations. The views expressed in this report do not necessarily reect the views of the

Australian Learning and Teaching Council Ltd.

This work is published under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution- Noncommercial-

ShareAlike 2.5 Australia Licence. Under this Licence you are free to copy, distribute, display and

perform the work and to make derivative works.

Attribution: You must attribute the work to the original authors and include the following

statement: Support for the original work was provided by the Australian Learning and Teaching

Council Ltd, an initiative of the Australian Government Department of Education, Employment

and Workplace Relations.

Noncommercial: You may not use this work for commercial purposes.

Share Alike: If you alter, transform, or build on this work, you may distribute the resulting work

only under a license identical to this one.

For any reuse or distribution, you must make clear to others the licence terms of this work.

Any of these conditions can be waived if you get permission from the copyright holder.

To view a copy of this license, visit

http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.5/au/

or send a letter to

Creative Commons, 543 Howard Street, 5th Floor, San Francisco, California, 94105, USA.

Requests and inquiries concerning these rights should be addressed to the Australian Learning

and Teaching Council, PO Box 2375, Strawberry Hills NSW 2012 or through the website: http://www.altc.edu.au

December, 2008

ISBN 174067 596 7

Project Website www.academicleadership.curtin.edu.au/course_coordinator



AcknowledgementsThe Project Team would like to thank the participants of the rst and second pilot of the Program

for their interest, enthusiasm and contribution. Their generous feedback and patience whilst

the Program was trialed has ensured its success. We would also like to acknowledge the

contribution of all academic staff at Curtin University of Technology who provided feedback on

the developmental needs of staff in the Course Coordinator role. Thanks also go to Professor

Bruce Shortland-Jones for his assistance with the initial conceputalisation of the project.

The hard work and support of Inna Geoghegan, Helen Walpole, Naomi Prisgrove and Dic

Liew from Curtin is greatly appreciated in assisting with the production of the Program

Resources. Helen Walpole provided particular assistance with the technical requirements for

the online component of the Program in this guide. Jane Sneesby has provided specialised

support through her analysis of the evaluative data from both pilots. Sue Bolton, as the rst

Project Manager, was invaluable in establishing the projects systems and made a substantial

contribution prior to her unexpected death in 2006.

The Projects success has also been aided by the hard work of the Curriculum 2010 team withinthe Ofce of Teaching and Learning. Their work with academics, through the course review

process in play during and after the pilot, assisted by raising the awareness of the leadership

role of Course Coordinators in determining course quality.

The project team is also indebted to Professor Tricia Vilkinas and her team at The University

of South Australia for their collaboration on this project resulting from their ALTC project,

The development of a web based 360 degree feedback process for utilisation by Australian

universities to develop academic leadership capability in academic coordinators.

Thanks also are extended to the senior management of Curtin University of Technology for

generously supporting and endorsing the project.

Report and Resource Authors

Sue Jones, Richard Ladyshewsky, Beverley Oliver and Helen Flavell

Project Team Members

Ms Sue Jones (Project Leader) Curtin University of Technology

Prof Beverley OliverCurtin University of Technology

A/Prof Richard Ladyshewsky Curtin University of Technology

Dr Helen Flavell (Project Manager) Curtin University of Technology



Leading Courses: Academic Leadership for Course Coordinators

Project Overview

Aims

The aim of the project was to develop and trial an experiential academic leadership program

designed to enhance the leadership skills of Course Coordinators (those academic staff

responsible for a course or program of study leading to a degree award) to enable them to

ultimately improve the students experience of learning.

Local Project Outcomes (Curtin University of Technology)

Project outcomes have been achieved at both the local and national level. Local project

outcomes include:

Two cohorts of CCs have completed the Academic Leadership for Course Coordinators

Program (ALCCP) (in total, 55 academic staff); There is strong senior management endorsement for the ALCCP;

Endorsement of a Course Coordinator Role Statement by the University;

Embedding of the ALCCP as part of the Universitys annual suite of leadership

development opportunities for academic staff in partnership with the Organisational

Development Unit (ODU) (face-to-face mode);

The ALCCP (both delivery and content) has informed other leadership development

programs at Curtin (for example, the Heads of School Leadership Development

Program);

Rewarding staff for their completion of the ALCCP through Curtins Teaching Performance

Index (TPI);

Links with promotion and performance review and workload systems within the

University;

An emergent Course Coordinators (CCs) Community of Practice (CoP);

Overall, an increased prole and valuing of CCs within the University; and

Planned trial of the ALCCP in fully online delivery for regional and remote CCs in 2009.

National Project Outcomes

Project outcomes at the national level include:

Linkages with other ALTC projects including:

LE8-805 The University of South Australia: Development of Academic Leadership

within the university sector through the dissemination of a web-based 360 feedback

process and related professional development workshop (Richard Ladyshewsky is a

Project Leader);

LE8-824 Murdoch University: Clarifying, developing and valuing the role of unit

coordinators (Sue Jones is a Project Team Member);

LE8-816 The University of Tasmania: Embedding and sustaining leadership



development for course coordinators (Sue Jones and Beverley Oliver are Reference

Group Members); and

CG8-735 Curtin University: Building course team capacity to identify, model and

assess graduate employability skills (Beverley Oliver is a Project Leader).

The ALCCP is available from the project website for delivery in face-to-face, fully online

and in a blended learning mode;

The associated ALCCP guide is a useful resource for academic leadership development

delivery; and

The dissemination of project outcomes through the publication of papers and conference

presentations (see Appendix 3).

I congratulate the Project Team on the outstanding success of the Academic

Leadership for Course Coordinators Program. Two pilots have been

conducted and were extremely well received by participants. Over 55participants have now completed the program. Outcomes of the project

have included development of an excellent set of resources to manage and

deliver the program, a Role Statement for Course Coordination adopted by

Academic Board, recognition of completion of the program within the Teaching

Performance Index, and increased recognition of the signicant, and often

undervalued role within the promotions process and new workload management

system. There continues to be a high level of interest and Curtin is pleased to

endorse the program, which has now been embedded within the organisation

and will be offered as a joint initiative between the Ofce of Teaching and

Learning, and the Organisational Development Unit.

Prof Robyn Quin, Deputy Vice-Chancellor (Education)



Products

Several products have been developed during the project:

Leading Courses: Academic Leadership for Course Coordinatorsthe nal project report

including evaluation data on the program pilots and ndings from the project;

The Academic Leadership for Course Coordinators Programten modules with capacity

for adaptation to suit different university environments including face-to-face, fully onlineand/or blended learning delivery;

The Academic Leadership for Course Coordinators Program: A Guide to Coordination

and Facilitation (a detailed and extensive guide to running the Program which can

be used as a basis for delivering/supporting other academic leadership development

programs);

Blackboard Program shell adaptable to other learning management systems (available

from the project website);

Extensive package of Program resources (including over 100 pre-Program, Program and

post-Program items); and

Dissemination websiteproviding a news link as developments to the Program

materials are made, and access to all the project resources.

Academic Leadership for Course Coordinators Program 1

A Guide toCoordination and Facilitation


http://academicleadership.dev.curtin.edu.au/course_coordinatorAcademic Leadership for Course Coordinators Program 1

Leading Courses:Academic Leadership for

Course Coordinators

Final Report


http://academicleadership.dev.curtin.edu.au/course_coordinator



Table of ContentsAcknowledgements 3

Project Overview 4

Table of Contents 7

List of Tables 8

Executive Summary 10

1. Introduction 13

2. The Context of Leading Courses 16

2.1 The National Context ....................................................................................................16

2.2 The Local ContextCurtin .........................................................................................18

3. Method 19

3.1 Project Method and Leadership Development Philosophy ......................................19

3.2 Program Method ..........................................................................................................30

4. The Program Pilots 37

4.1 Pilot 1 .............................................................................................................................39

4.2 Pilot 2 .............................................................................................................................45

4.3 Pilot 1 and 2 Comparison Data ....................................................................................47

5. Key Findings 51

6. Conclusions 56

References 58

Appendix 1: Program Session Evaluation Form .............................................................62

Appendix 2: Final Evaluation Form Pilot 2 .......................................................................63

Appendix 3: List of Project Conference Presentations and Publications ...................66

Appendix 4: List of Internal and External Reference Group Members ..........................67



List of Tables

1. The Leading Courses Intended Project Outcomes Matched Against Achievements

2. Project Phases

3. Course Coordinator Survey Results

4. Key Features of the Leading Courses Project for Facilitating its Adoption, Adaptation and

Implementation

5. Project Distribution and Dissemination Strategies

6. Structure of Pilot 1 and 2 Modules

7. Pilot 1 and Comparable Sessions in Pilot 2

8. Modules Added in Pilot 2

9. Pilot 1 Participants

10. Percentage Agreement with Survey Items (Appendix 1) Pilot 1 and 2

11. Final Session Feedback Data (Appendix 2) Pilot 1

12. Final Session Feedback Data (Appendix 2) Pilot 2

13. Pilot 2 Participants

List of Figures1. SPSS Text Analysis of the Course Coordinator Survey Results

2. ALCCP Structure

3. Final ALCCP Modules and their Learning Outcomes

4. Percentage Agreement for Pilot 1 and 2 based on Individual Session/Module

5. Percentage Agreement for Pilot 1 and 2 for each Session/Module Based on the Final Evaluation

6. Percentage Agreement for Pilot 1 and 2 based on the Final Evaluation Ratings for each Session/

ModuleAspects of the ALCCP

7. Percentage Agreement (Strongly Agreed) for Pilot 1 and 2 based on the Final Evaluation Ratings for

each Session/ModuleAspects of the ALCCP



List of Appendices

1. Program Session Evaluation Form

2. Final Evaluation Form

3. List of Project Conference Presentations and Publications

4. List of Internal and External Reference Group Members

Abbreviations and Acronyms Used

ACR Annual Course Review

ALCCP Academic Leadership for Course Coordinators Program

ALTC Australian Learning and Teaching Council

ATN Australian Technology Network

C2010 Curriculum 2010

CC Course Coordinator

CoP Community of Practice

Curtin Curtin University of Technology

CVF Competing Values Framework

iCVF Integrated Competing Values Framework

EI Emotional Intelligence

ERG External Reference Group

IRG Internal Reference Group

HOS Head of School

LEAP Learning Effectiveness Alliance Program

LMS Learning Management System

MBTI Myers Briggs Type Indicator

ODU Organisational Development Unit

OTL Ofce of Teaching and Learning

T&L Teaching and Learning

TPI Teaching Performance Index

LTPF Learning and Teaching Performance Fund

WA Western Australia



Executive SummaryThe Leading Courses: Academic Leadership for Course Coordinators project developed and

trialled an experiential cross-disciplinary academic leadership program designed to enhance

the leadership skills of Course Coordinators. Although nomenclature varies across the sector,

Course Coordinator (CC) is used here to designate those academic staff responsible for a

course or program of study leading to a degree award. Based on existing education research,

the rationale behind the project was that CCs would be better able to manage the quality of the

courses for which they are responsible if they had increased awareness of academic leadership

and improved leadership capabilities, thereby ultimately enabling them to improve the student

experience of learning and teaching. Focusing precisely on the CC role, the project advocated

an inclusive and distributed model of leadership that recognised the crucial contribution of CCs

in inuencing learning and teaching outcomes for students.

The project has successfully developed, trialled and produced the Academic Leadership for

Course Coordinators Program (ALCCP): an extensive exible resource designed to enable

CCs to lead and manage course quality and their course team. Feedback from the two pilots

has been excellent providing evidence that suggests the ALCCP has the potential to ll anexisting gap by providing leadership development for a cohort of middle level leaders who

have traditionally been overlooked in leadership development. Furthermore, the exibility of

the ALCCP resources should enhance the possibilities of the Programs adoption by other

Australian universities and increase its potential for sector-wide impact. The Programs modular

structure is designed for delivery in face-to-face mode, fully online and/or a blended learning

model. Central to the successful adoption and adaptation of the ALCCP is the guide produced

to complement the Program. The guide should be read in conjunction with this nal report as it

provides detailed information on successfully implementing the ALCCP and incorporates the key

ndings of this project.

The developmental needs of course leaders are targeted at three levels in the ALCCP:

personal leadership developmentreective practice, setting developmental goals, peer

coaching and emotional intelligence;

conceptual understandingacademic leadership theories applied to practice,

pedagogical concepts and curriculum design, implementation, assessment and

evaluation; and

skill developmentteam building, conict resolution, communication, quality

improvement, working with staff, students and external stakeholders.

Notably, the ALCCP contains the elements identied as important for leadership development

by Australian higher educational leaders (Scott et al., 2008; Parrish and Lefoe, 2009). It:

is role specic, practice based, authentic and custom-made;

employs coaching and much of the learning is peer driven;

is self-guided;

employs a role specic 360 leadership survey;

has the potential to link to performance review systems;

utilises action learning;

emphasises responsive, exible facilitation; and



provides opportunities for dialogue, networking and sharing of experiences.

It is envisaged that the ALCCP will evolve and additional resources will be made available

through the project website as they become available. For example, Curtins recently awarded

ALTC project CG8-735: Building course team capacity to identify, model and assess graduate

employability skills, is intended to capitalise on, and utilise, the ALCCP resource by embedding

mechanisms for improving CCs knowledge and skills in building course team capacity for

graduate employability.The key ndings of the project are listed below and outline the lessons learnt from the

experience of designing and delivering academic leadership development. They include the

nature of academic leadership in general and the critical factors for the successful delivery

of academic leadership development programs in particular. The experience of implementing

and delivering two pilots of the ALCCP made it clear that successful academic leadership

development requires a keen appreciation of current academic working conditions and culture

and their effect on academic leadership.

Project Key FindingsAcademic LeadershipThere are a number of key ndings from the project in relation to academic leadership within

higher education. They are:

Higher educational reform impacts on leadership development, both as a driver and as a

potential constraint for developing leadership capacity;

Workload and work practice changes which are not conducive to leadership development

(strong emphasis on administrative duties to the exclusion of leadership reection and

development) have a considerable impact. Time release for leadership development for

this particular cohort is therefore crucial;

There is a need to attend to the issues arising from the tension between traditional

academic culture and work practices and the emerging corporate management culture

of higher education by avoiding the use of managerial or corporate terminology;

It is important to be aware of, and sensitive to, specic work practices of academia that

inuence leadership and its development. For example, the revolving door aspect of the

CC role emphasises the need for a collegial approach to academic leadership as distinct

from other leadership approaches. This is due to the fact that many CCs will move back

into peer-based relationships with their colleagues once their appointment in this role is

complete; and

Staff must be empowered to realise their leadership capacity in the CC role.



Project Key FindingsAcademic Leadership Development

Key ndings in relation to the successful provision of staff development in relation to academic

leadership for CCs are:

Contextualise all material to the CC role;

Address the issue of clear role statements for CCs prior to leadership development;

Be prepared to meet the needs of a diverse group of staff who are very busy withteaching commitments;

As in good teaching practice, incorporate formative evaluation strategies, be exible and

responsive to the group dynamics and their needs;

Be aware of the diverse discipline knowledge of the group;

Allow time for peer-to-peer discussion, critique and debate;

Critically engage with concepts and theories delivered in the Program;

Apply a collegial approach to communications and interactions;

Allow plenty of time for networking, socialising and sharing best practice and issues;

Employ small group work where possible;

Take time to form the group at the outset;

Value staff by providing a prestige venue and quality catering;

Acknowledge staff commitment through their participation; and

Ensure the facilitation and coordination team are experienced and skilled facilitators in the

higher educational context, preferably with experience in teaching.



1. Introduction

Effective higher education leaders not only take an active role in making

specic changes happen by engaging people in the process of personal and

institutional change and improvement; they also help reshape the operating

context of their institutions to make them less change averse, more efcient and

agile, and more change capable. Scott et al. (2008, xiv)

Academic development has been successful when it has drawn on a deep

understanding of the ethos of higher education institutions, their cultural

practices and the discourse of academia. Boud (1999, 10)

[Within academia] there is a general tendency for managers and management

processes to be identied as signicant sources of stress and dissatisfaction.

Bryman (2007, 22)

As argued by Scott et al. in Learning Leaders in Times of Change (2008), the greatest challengefacing higher education in Australia is rapid and ongoing change and the extent to which its

leaders are change capable. Signicantly, higher educational change has impacted on the

project, for which this nal report has been written, in ways that were not anticipated when

the project began. Initially titled Building Academic Leadership Capability at the Course

Level: Developing Course Coordinators as Academic Leaders, this project was funded by

the Australian Learning and Teaching Council (ALTC) under the category of Institutional

LeadershipPositional/Structural. Motivated by higher educational reform the project aimed to

enhance the leadership skills of Course Coordinators (CCs) (also known as program, degree

or academic coordinators/directors) by developing, trialling and disseminating an experiential

academic leadership program. The rationale was that, with an increased awareness ofacademic leadership and improved leadership capabilities, staff in this role would be better able

to manage the quality of their courses and ultimately improve the student experience of learning

and teaching.

What emerged as the project developed was the extent to which the effects of the changes to

higher education over the last quarter of a century not only functioned as a driver for the project

but as a potential stumbling block for the effective uptake of academic leadership (Flavell et al.,

2008). In particular, some participants of the rst pilot reacted against what was perceived as a

management approach in the Program content. Some academic staff familiar with a collegial,

autonomous working environmentwho had been experiencing continuous changeinitiallyappeared to align the Program with a management approach seen to be responsible for, and

a part of, the changes impacting on their academic, collegial working culture (Gordon, 1995).

What surfaced was the need for the project team to demonstrate an appropriate and efcient

responsivenessin the same way it is required within the context of a changed and changing

tertiary sectorfor the project potential to be realised. Through the rst and second pilot of

the Academic Leadership for Course Coordinators Program (ALCCP) at Curtin University of

Technology (Curtin) the project team employed the same experiential learning principles (Kolb,

1984) that underpinned the academic leadership program they were trialling to ensure the

success of the project. By reacting quickly and appropriately to early feedback in the rst pilot

the project team saw an improvement in evaluation data for the Program, and a substantialreduction in comments that suggested a dissatisfaction with perceived management speak.

Whilst Pilot 1 was very well received, Pilot 2 registered an improved percentage agreement in



overall satisfaction. In the evaluations carried out at the end of each session, ve out of nine1

sessions in Pilot 2 registered 100 percentage agreement in overall satisfaction. The remaining

four registered above 94 percentage agreement with improvement in all but one item. The

impact of change was, therefore, not only reafrmed as a primary challenge for academic

leadership (and its development) but also the importance of change capability in ensuring

higher education remains viable.

I have really enjoyed this and though I teach leadership/management/change

management, being on the receiving end has changed my outlook towards the

organisation. Though I preach it I dont necessarily practice it! Thanks and well

done! Pilot 1 Participant.

Consequently, the project, through experiential learning and the capacity of the project

management team to modify their approaches, successfully met its outcomes. Now re-titled

Leading Courses: Academic Leadership for Course Coordinators2, the project boasts an

extensive package of exible Program resources (available from the project website). These

materials have been developed through the two pilots, and completed two processes of

review and revision, as well as formative evaluation processes whist the pilots were underway.These resources show evidence of the practical application of the lessons learnt in trialling the

Program, including an accompanying guide to running the Program; The Academic Leadership

for Course Coordinators Program: A Guide to Coordination and Facilitation. This report should

be read in conjunction with the guide to support the effective adaptation and implementation of

the ALCCP to other universities.

This report documents the projects storyunderpinned by the theme of changeand points

to areas for further research and development, critical reection and investigation in relation to

academic leadership for CCs. The report is divided into ve main sections:

the context, which explores the drivers for the project and local and national issuesimpacting on the project;

the method undertaken in the project, the Programs approach and the projects aims and

objectives and dissemination strategies;

an evaluation of the two pilots;

the key ndings and lessons learnt from the project; and

a conclusion including future directions for consideration.

Finally, this report afrms the need for academic leadership development to be responsive to the

context in which it is delivered. That means facilitators and coordinators of academic leadershipprograms such as the ALCCP must be attuned to the impact of the ever changing Australian

higher educational environment, and be aware of the impact of educational reforms on the

traditional working practices of academia. They must also be sensitive to, and demonstrate

an understanding of, local pressures and traditions within their university that could impact on

academic leadership programs.

1 Only nine of the ten sessions offered in Pilot 2 were measured in this way as a longer form evaluating the Program

as a whole was used in the nal session (ten). The same process was used in Pilot 1, hence, there is only data oneight of the nine sessions offered in Pilot 1. See Chapter 4, The Program Pilots.2 This title is the new name for the original ALTC project Building Academic Leadership Capability at the CourseLevel: Developing Course Coordinators as Academic Leaders. It is also the title of the nal report for this project.



Therefore, as outlined in the guide to the ALCCP, the local context in which the Program is

delivered and the individual skills of the facilitation and coordination team has the potential

to have a substantial impact on the successful adoption and adaptation of the Program to

a particular university. Their ability to change the Program to meet their universitys specic

context and requirementsand to continue to be responsive to feedbackis likely to have

a measurable effect on its reception and subsequent outcomes. As a result, the guide to

coordination and facilitation emphasises the adaptability of the Program materials and outlines

the exibility of the ALCCP.

The project team hope that the ALCCP proves to be a useful resourceas it is at Curtin

becoming embedded and accepted as part of academic leadership development, assisting in

ensuring quality course outcomes and improvements in teaching and learning.



2. The Context of Leading Courses

2.1 The National Context

Higher educational reforms that have occurred in recent years have made quality teaching

and learning an institutional priority for Australian universities. The Learning Leaders in Times

of Change study (Scott et al. 2008, 29-39) identied a number of change forces in highereducation which dictate the need for good academic leadership including:

Opening up of access and a resulting diversied student body;

Changes in funding;

Pressure to generate new sources of income;

A trend towards user-pays;

Rapid growth in the higher education export market;

Growing competition;

The challenge of maintaining standards with the changing nature of the student cohort;

Students seeing themselves as consumers;

Paid employment patterns of students for survival (average student works 14.8 hrs per

week); and

Changing characteristics of a new generation of students (Generation Y).

For universities to remain competitive in this environment they need excellent leadership at

all levels of the organisation (Hotho et al., 2008). However, CCs (also known as program,

degree or academic coordinators/directors)3 have been the least well recognised for their role in

determining whether change is effectual (Scott et al., 2008). Whilst quality is often measured atthe unit level by examining student feedback and performance, course level feedback is equally

as important. CCs carry much of the leadership responsibility for ensuring their courses are of

high quality and industry relevant. CCs are the King Pins of course quality (Ladyshewsky and

Jones, 2007) and their engagement with the change agenda is vital, as they focus efforts and

assist staff to learn how to make the desired change work in practice (Scott et al. 2008, xvii).

Yet in the development of its academic leaders, the Australian higher education system has

tended to rely upon the wisdom of experience or learning on the job in relation to learning

and teaching (Southwell et al., 2005). Course Coordinators are one such group of academic

leaders who tend to be highly competent and qualied senior academics who, by virtue of theiracademic accomplishments, advance to the role of managing and leading a university course

(Yielder and Codling, 2004). Due to their focus on academic pursuitsand given that few

development opportunities exist for themthese important academic leaders are often not well

prepared for the demands of their role. This is particularly so given the increasing load on CCs

under higher educational reform. The role requires leadership skills that enable them to create

a vision of what a course might be and then to foster a culture that supports and achieves that

vision (Yielder and Codling, 2004). The responsibility vested in CCs for achieving the desired

quality and credibility of course learning and teaching outcomes more often than not comes

with little or no line management authority. As a result, CCs have to rely on personal inuence

3 Signicantly, and as outlined by Scott et al. (2008), the range of nomenclature for the same or similar roles withinAustralian higher education presents problems of mobility for academic leaders (reducing their capacity to movebetween universities).



and networks to achieve desired goals. Add to this the fact that many academics end up in

leadership and management roles without aspiring to them, and the result is what Rowley and

Sherman (2003, 1058) have identied as the unique challenge of campus leadership.

Due to this complex operating context and its consequences, course coordination is often

viewed as all-consuming and as having an adverse impact on personal teaching and scholarly

activities (Carroll and Wolverton, 2004). Anecdotal evidence from Curtins CCs certainly

suggests that student counselling on course related matters (particularly with the shift to amore client based model of interaction between students and staff) takes considerable time.

According to Antonakis and House (2002) CCs often focus on the managerial or transactional

aspects of their role, which includes planning and budgeting, organising and stafng, course

control, monitoring, and generally solving problems. As a result, the academic leadership aspect

of the role (Antonakis and House, 2002) is often subsumed by the managerial role. Ramsden

(1998) noted similar ndings in situations where academic leadership is lacking, resulting in

the absence or neglect of strategic functions such as setting future directions and aligning

people and groups with departmental and organisational goals. Developing and enabling

academic teams to achieve a common direction for facilitating student-focused learning is

often impoverished as is motivating and inspiring the academic team to ensure scholarly andprofessional learning. Furthermore, as a result of these pressures and demands, planning that

focuses on improving the quality of academic courses is frequently absent or neglected.



2.2 The Local ContextCurtin

Curtin, based in Perth, Western Australia, is a large, comprehensive and research-intensive

university, with a strong international focus in all of its activities. Consistent with its vision to

serve its wider region, the University has campuses across Western Australia (WA), in Sydney

and in Sarawak, Malaysia, and recently established a campus in Singapore. Curtin is the fth

largest university in Australia and the third largest enroller of international students (more than

17,000). Research student numbers are approaching 2,000. Curtin has the highest Indigenousstudent enrolment in Australia, now accounting for over 60 per cent of all tertiary Indigenous

students in WA. The Universitys Reconciliation Action Plan is the rst for a university in

Australia and serves to underline the Universitys long-standing commitment to Indigenous

Australians. Curtin aims to apply innovation and excellence to teaching and learning programs

and its research initiatives.

The Leading Courses project, therefore, emerged from a culture which increasingly promoted

teaching and learning innovation, and a network of drivers common to all Australian Technology

Network (ATN) universities demanding improved teaching and learning outcomes. At the same

time, Curtin was embarking on several initiatives including: Curriculum 2010 (a university-wide

course review project) and the implementation of Course Review policy which included an

Annual and Comprehensive (ve yearly) review process. Curtins online system for gathering

and reporting students perceptions of their learning experiences and for gathering feedback

from employers and graduates for the purpose of comprehensive curriculum review (eVALUate)

was also evolving, providing more course data, thereby aiding the curriculum and course review

processes. Already underway by the time of the rst pilot, the Curriculum 2010 (C2010) project

had thus raised the prole of the CC role as they are central to any curriculum review process.

Consequently, the project was able to garner support from senior management who saw the

logic inherent in such a development opportunity for CCs. Conditions were therefore ripe at

Curtin, not only for the implementation of the Leading Courses project but also its endorsementand success. Certainly, the changes focussed on CCs through the convergence of eVALUate,

implementation of the Course Review policy, and the C2010 project combined to facilitate the

uptake of the Leading Courses project. Thus this ALTC project developed at Curtin through a

desire to improve learning and teaching outcomes from the strategic and key positioning of the

CC.



3. MethodThis section outlines the method and rationale for the overall project and the ALCCP, divided

under two sub-headings. This division has been made to provide a clear framework for

understanding and distinguishing between the leadership development philosophy underlying

the projects method and the Programs method.

3.1 Project Method and Leadership Development Philosophy

This project adopted an inclusive and distributed model of leadership with its focus on

developing and implementing an academic leadership program for CCs. These middle

management academics were identied for leadership development in this project since they

play a signicant role in leading and inuencing teams of academics teaching within a course.

More importantly, however, there is often little support within Australian universities to prepare,

develop and recognise academics in this important leadership role with the focus tending to

be on the Heads of School (HOS) and above (DAgostino, 2006).4 The aim of the ALCCP was,

therefore, to build the leadership capability in current and prospective course leaders across the

range of academic disciplines. One of the projects outcomes helps to address the leadership

succession crisis facing Australian universities through up-skilling these crucial leaders.

Hence, Leading Courses assumed a decit model (Boud, 1999) in respect to academic

development, with a linear change approach through its focus on increasing the knowledge

and skills of CCs. Part of the project also involved the exploration of the role of the CC and the

development of a role description, which has now been ratied by Curtins Academic Board

(November 2008). Systemic change has also been a part of the projects approach and is

an important aspect for successful leadership development. As Scott et al. (2008) report in

Learning Leaders in Times of Change the lack of clarity around roles means that many may

perceive there is no room to lead. Specically, it is academic staff in positions such as coursecoordination that feel even less empowered to inuence (Scott et al., 2007). Lack of role clarity,

or role uncertainty, have been identied as obstacles to effective departments and signicant

causes of stress, leading to reduced levels of effectiveness (Briggs 2001, 234). Along with role

clarication, the ALCCP has also been linked at Curtin to promotional processes, performance

review, the Teaching Performance Index (TPI), and course coordination has been recognised in

workload management systems more equitably.

Emergent change is the nal approach undertaken in the project, with attention being given

to capitalising on the peer learning that evolved from the Program through establishing a peer

network or Community of Practice (CoP). The dissemination of the ALCCP resources to otheruniversities similarly represents an emergent change focus that has sector-wide potential. The

project has, in other words, taken a three-fold approach to improving teaching and learning

outcomes within the scope of the CCs role.

4 It could be argued that the ALTCs Leadership for Excellence in Learning and Teaching in Australian HigherEducation Program (which funded this project and others) is helping to realise the importance of staff in suchmiddle management roles, thereby shifting the conceptualisation of what constitutes leadership within academia.



The table below (1) lists the overall intended project outcomes and the projects achievements:

Table 1: The Leading Courses Intended Project Outcomes Matched AgainstAchievements

Leading Courses Intended Outcomes Leading Courses Outcomes

A review of national and international academicleadership research and current best practice, and

the publication of reports and journal articles.

The literature review undertaken was used toinform the ALCCP program development, and it has

been reviewed and updated with recent research.

Conference papers, workshop presentations, journal

articles and reports within the scope of the project

have been produced (see Appendix 3).

Clearly dened roles and responsibilities for courseleaders recognising their critical role in achieving

excellence in teaching and learning at the course

level.

A Course Coordinator Role Statement was endorsed

by Curtins Academic Board in November 2008.

A Course Leader Development Program andpackage of exible learning resources which canbe adapted for implementation in cross-discipline

and wide ranging university contexts for current and

prospective course coordinators.

The ALCCP has been produced through the processof two pilots and substantial review and revision. The

package is exible and demonstrates the elementssuggestive of its successful adaptation, adoption and

implementation. The ALCCP: A Guide to Coordination

and Facilitation has been produced to enable this

process, along with extensive resources and careful

design of the ALCCP.

Identication of systems level outcomes which haveimplications for university academic career pathways,

promotion processes, University staff proles, StaffProfessional Development programs for current

and prospective academic leaders; and change

management in higher education.

The ALCCP is linked to: Curtins system for

measuring and recognising teaching performance

(TPI) and performance review systems. The CC role

has also been better recognised in the workload

system and the ALCCP has been embedded into the

annual suite of leadership development and offered

in conjunction with the ODU at Curtin. The ALCCP

targets existing and aspiring CCs, and is focussed on

empowering staff to be change capable and to lead

their course team to improve teaching and learning

outcomes.

Up-scaling of the project through a national network

of users in the ATN who have been involved in

the development of the program through their

involvement with the Project Reference Group, and

more broadly across the sector.

The projects outcomes including the ALCCP and all

its resources will be made available to the tertiary

sector. The External Reference Group were invited

to access materials and provide feedback, however,

this was hampered at times due to workloads andpersonnel changes. The University of Tasmania

is utilising the modules as part of their ALTC grant

LE8-816 Embedding and sustaining leadership

development for course coordinators through tailored

curriculum review.

By supporting the CC both locally at Curtinand nationallythrough raising the prole of

the CC as leader and enhancing their leadership capacity, the project hoped to build on the

evidence that sound academic leadership ultimately improves student learning. For example,

Gibbs (2006) found that if department leaders facilitate a good teaching environment then

teachers are more likely to use a student-focused approach to learning, which in turn results infar superior learning outcomes due to a deep approach to learning (Prosser and Trigwell, 1997;



Martin et al., 2003; Ramsden et al., 2007). This approach was proposed by Ramsden (1998)

who indicated that teaching which focuses primarily on student learning, rather than teaching

activity, is best supported by academic leaders who provide clear goals and enable people

to embrace change. Martin et al. (2003) also found that teachers are more likely to adopt a

student focused approach to learning when they experience transformational and transactional

leadership, clear goals and contingent rewards, and teacher involvement in decisions about

curriculum and collaborative management. Throughout the project academic leadership

for the CC role was conceptualised as both transformational and transactional in nature.Transformational leadership is inspiring, risky, visionary, and involves paying close attention

to individual team members potential and development (Bass qutd. by Bryman 2007, 8).

Transactional leadership invests in a more conventional reward and punishment system to gain

compliance and involves monitoring the teams performance (Bass qutd. by Bryman 2007, 8).5

Clearly, the CCin this middle management academic role with little or no line management

authority and responsibility for the learning experience of large numbers of studentsneeds to

be competent across both leadership styles.

When course leaders operate within a transformational and transactional leadership framework,

the effect on the course team is to increase the student focus, resulting in improved learningoutcomes for students. Course leaders require support and development to incorporate both

transformational and transactional leadership capabilities into their personal repertoire, and to

develop a contemporary pedagogical framework for improving curriculum design, development,

assessment and evaluation. The impact of management and leadership development is

enhanced when opportunities for feedback, discussion and support are included (Bolden et al.,

2006). The ALCCP thus incorporates both peer coaching and a reective journal, collectively

embedded into an experiential learning cycle (Kerka, 1996; Kolb, 1984).

The skills gained in the Program enabled me to build a good relationship within

the team. Thanks a lot. Pilot 2 Participant.

Furthermore, a distributed leadership model in which CCs are the focus of academic leadership

development is one which is likely to impact upon Heads of Schools, a large number of teaching

staff and, ultimately, students. Within Curtin, for example, there are approximately 400 CCs who

in turn are in a position to inuence the learning outcomes of many students through enhancing

the student-focused approach of the teaching staff within their course team. In addition,

Heads of Schools will be freed up to focus on strategic direction and initiatives if CCs assume

responsibility for academic leadership at the course level. With the dissemination of a exible

learning package such as the ALCCP, academic leadership has the potential to be more widely

distributed across the higher educational sector. This compliments and enhances the broaderwork of the ALTC in raising the prole of academic leadership and in shifting the perception of

what leadership is in the tertiary sector (Parker, 2008).

5 For a clear overview between the distinction between transformational and transactional leadership see AlanBrymans Effective Leadership in Higher Education (2007, 8) published by the Leadership Foundation for HigherEducation. Brymans survey of the literature on higher educational leadership reveals a lack of consistent use ofleadership key terms and often a failure to adequately dene terms.



3.1.1 Project Phases

The initial project proposal identied four phases, however, a fth phase was added when

synergies with another ALTC project enabled the extension of the Curtin project (Table 2). The

associated project, led by Professor Tricia Vilkinas at The University of South Australia, was

focussed on developing a 360 degree survey tool specically for the CC role (Vilkinas et al.,

2007).6 This meant that the Leading Courses project could carry out a second pilot in which the

new survey tool was used. Based on the feedback from the initial pilot the provision of a tailormade 360 survey tool was expected to be very well received as the tool used in the rst pilot

was the Competing Values Framework which is designed for a business/management context.

The benets of a second pilot can be measured through the evaluation data comparing the two

pilots and discussed in the following chapter The Program Pilots.

Table 2: Project Phases

Phase Activity

1. Review national and international literature to determine current best practice in academic

leadership development and to assist in dening the roles and development needs of courseleaders

CC survey undertaken to determine their development needs.

CC survey was extended to HOS, asking them to identify the development needs of CCs.

Paper presented at the Teaching and Learning Forum 2007, Perth, Western Australia, discussing

the ndings of the CC and HOS surveys (Jones, S., Ladyshewsky, R., Oliver, B. and Shortland-Jones, B. 2007, January. Enhancing course coordinators' leadership and management for

increased student engagement.)

2. Design and development of the ALCCP in consultation with the CC Internal Reference Group.

Preparation of the ALCCP course materials and learning objects including the online resources.

Paper presented at the Australian Universities Quality Forum 2007, Hobart, with details of the CC

survey (Ladyshewsky, R., and Jones, S. 2007. Academic Leadership and the Course Coordinator:

King Pin in the Quality Process.)

3. Pilot 1 undertaken in face-to-face mode using supplementary online learning resources with a

representative sample of CCs across the Universitys teaching areas to ensure cross-disciplinary

representation.

CCs develop as a Community of Practice.

Evaluation of participant reactions to Program and learning outcomes.

Publication of a paper presented at the Australian Universities Quality Forum 2008, Canberra,

exploring lessons learnt from the rst pilot (Flavell, H., Jones, S., and Ladyshewsky, R. 2008.Academic Leadership Development for Course Coordinators and the Inuences of HigherEducational Change.)

Revision of ALCCP package based on Pilot 1 participant feedback.

6 The University of South Australia ALTC project, led by Professor Tricia Vilkinas, is titled The development of aweb based 360 degree feedback process for utilisation by Australian universities to develop academic leadershipcapability in academic coordinators.



Phase Activity

4. Pilot 2 undertaken in face-to-face mode using supplementary online learning resources. Pilot 2

limited to CCs only.

ALCCP embedded into the Universitys leadership professional development offerings (in

collaboration with the ODU).

System level processes identied and utilised, including; endorsement by the University of a CCRole Statement, ALCCP linked to TPI, and promotions and performance review processes and

workload models.

Paper published in the International Journal of Learning discussing the online delivery of the

ALCCP in Pilot 1 (Ladyshewsky, R., Geoghegan, I., Jones, S., and Oliver, B. 2008. A Virtual

Academic Leadership Program Using a Blend of Technologies.14.)

Paper presented at the HERDSA Conference 2008, Rotorua, New Zealand, exploring the emerging

CC CoP (Jones, S., Oliver, B., Ladyshewsky, R., and Flavell, H. 2008, July. Engaging Academic

Leaders: Improving Teaching Quality.)

5. Final revision and preparation of the ALCCP package for national dissemination.

Dissemination of the ALCCP package and resources through the project website.

Interviews with Pilot 1 participants to explore how well the Programs outcomes had been

transferred into the workplace begun (not yet completed at the end of the project).

Phase 1

The project began with a review of national and international literature on best practice in

academic leadership development to assist in dening the roles and development needs of

course leaders. An email survey was then distributed to all CCs at Curtin to determine theiracademic leadership development needs and to inform the structure and delivery of the

professional development program. Heads of School were also surveyed using the same

questionnaire, to determine what they saw as the development needs of CCs. There were 12

broad areas with options to add open ended comments. Respondents were required to answer

each question using a ve point Likert Scale. Hard copies of the survey were then distributed as

a follow up. A total of 179 course coordinators were identied in the University, and 48 replied

which represents a response rate of 26.8% (Ladyshewsky and Jones, 2007). Quantitative

results of the survey are shown in Table 3 on page 24.



Table 3: Course Coordinator Survey Results (Ladyshewsky and Jones, 2007)

Low - - Priority - - High Score

Percentages 1 2 3 4 5 4+5

Q10: Providing a positive and supportive environment for the

teaching team engaged in this course*

2 10 10 39 39 78

Q2: Establishing & maintaining the quality of assessment

practices within the course*

0 2 22 46 30 76

Q3: Ensuring that the assessment practices align with the

unit and course learning outcomes*

0 2 30 38 30 68

Q7: Having a clear and consistent understanding of the role

and responsibilities of the Course Coordinator*

6 10 20 28 36 64

Q4: Developing a high performance culture within the course

team*

6 6 24 24 40 64

Q6: Student management issues* 4 6 26 40 24 64

Q5: Undertaking course reviews to enhance the quality of

the course outcomes*

4 6 32 32 26 57

Q1: Ensuring appropriate and consistent application of the

outcome focused education (OFE) framework

6 16 25 43 10 53

Q12: Understanding of online teaching and learning

technologies

14 8 26 42 10 52

Q8: Understand the course management and committee

processes

2 16 32 28 22 50

Q9: Understanding the course administrative processes. e.g.

enrolment, StudentOne etc.

10 14 36 24 16 40

Q11: Understanding career paths available to you 18 24 28 16 14 30

Note: * Indicates Head of School agreement with Course Coordinator development needs.



Qualitative ndings of the survey in relation to the three biggest challenges CCs faced in their

role were reported by Ladyshewsky and Jones (2007, 88). They found that of the 48 responses

received, 40 course coordinators (84%) provided written feedback. Themes that emerged most

strongly from the feedback included:

Workload was a signicant issue;

Coping with the growing number of administrative burdens being allocated to academic

staff along with complex internal information systems;

Prescribing and managing quality assessment practices;

Reviewing, planning and monitoring course curriculum load, overlap and strategies;

Ambiguity about the role of the course coordinator, scope of inuence, decision making

power;

Finding the time to manage the myriad of student issues and to provide a quality service

and as well as nding the resources to support student needs;

Supporting staff, managing non-compliant staff, and trying to build a high performance

team; and

Lack of time to complete responsibilities adequately, which also impinges on research,

teaching and professional development.

The key themes from the qualitative feedback are highlighted in the SPSS text visualisation

shown in Figure 1 below. The SPSS Text Analysis indicates that CCs have difculty nding

adequate time for staff and students, are unclear about responsibilities, and nd administrative

processes tedious and complex.

Figure 1: SPSS Text Analysis of the Course Coordinator Survey Results

Finding placements (2)

Development (3)

Complexity (8)

Changes (4)

Admin issues (10)

Student One (2)

Workload (6)

Varying abilities (1)

Unclear (8)

Tedious (3)

Students (19)

Staff (10)

Responsibilities (8)

Resources (8)

Recognition (3)

Processes (14)

Multiple venues (5) Marketing issues (2)

Maintaining consistency (3)

Lack of support (7)

Lack of information (9)

Finding time (33)

Industry (4)



Phase 2

Based on this data and input from the Internal Reference Group (IRG) at Curtin an academic

leadership development program was designed and written. Survey results were reviewed with

the IRG, along with the proposed professional development program. The IRG approved the

nal structure, style and frequency of delivery. The Project Team then nalised the design of

the ALCCP and developed teaching resources and supporting materials, including an extensive

range of online learning resources to support a blended delivery approach. A collaborativeapproach involving the potential users of the ALCCP at the outset of the project was utilised

as this has been identied as an important element of effective innovation in higher education

(McKenzie et al., 2005). Signicantly, the design and development of the Program was based on

an award winning model employed in the Graduate School of Business at Curtin (Ladyshewsky,

2003).

Phase 3

The ALCCP was then trialled in face-to-face mode in semester two, 2007, at Curtin for the rst

time. The program consisted of nine modules, each of two hours duration and were conducted

every second week from 3-5pm on a Wednesday. Supplementary online resources were madeavailable to participants through Blackboard.

Feedback from the rst pilot participants was captured at the end of each module, and at

the completion of the Program. During Pilot 1 changes were made to the delivery approach

and the activities based on feedback and at the close of Pilot 1 all the feedback data (both

qualitative and quantitative) was captured. Part of the process of reviewing the materials

involved formatting them into templates and developing a consistent visual identity for the

ALCCP. A renement of the online resources resulted in the face-to-face materials being more

easily identiable and user friendly. The Blackboard resources were able to model best practice

in the area of online learningthrough their ease of navigation and layoutand reected oneof Curtins key teaching and learning initiatives in relation to exible delivery. Curtins Teaching

and Learning Committee endorsed moving to a single LMS, namely Blackboard. As part of the

migration to a single LMS online units have been upgraded into a similar format and standard

to that of the ALCCP online resources. The inclusion of a blended learning model option for

delivery added a further dimension to the ALCCP by enhancing the CCs knowledge and skills

to enable them to act as change agents for exible delivery.7

During this phase the ALCCP received strong support from the Deputy Vice-Chancellor

(Education), who agreed to provide ongoing funding for the Program including Pilot 2. This

phase also saw the ALCCP become embedded into the Universitys suite of professional

development offerings in partnership with the Universitys Organisational Development Unit,

and use of the ALCCPs resources and the projects key learnings into Curtins leadership

development program for Heads of Schools. Completion of the ALCCP was also recognised

within the TPI system at this stage.

7 Signicantly, a Pilot 2 participant recently adapted an aspect of the ALCCP online Program for their own onlineunit. This suggests that the inclusion of the online Program resources has had the desired effect, that is, throughmodelling best practice exible delivery the ALCCP has inuenced online teaching practices.



Phase 4

The revised phase four saw the second pilot of the ALCCP trialled in semester two, 2008. Prior

to Pilot 2 the Program underwent modication to address the issues that arose, and the features

of the ALCCP that were rated well enhanced where possible (for example, providing more

time for networking). A tenth module was added, which addressed managing staff and student

performance and several modules were modied (including extending Developing Academic

Leadership Capacity into two modules

8

). The inclusion of the online iCVF 360 survey tool(Vilkinas and Cartans 2001, 2006) in Pilot 2 was an important change as the online delivery

system was much simpler to manage, the survey tool is tailor made for CCs and therefore a

much better diagnostic tool for CCs to gauge their leadership capability. The same evaluation

process was used in the second pilot, however, feedback was much improved and therefore far

fewer changes were made in the nal package.

During the second pilot a detailed guide to facilitation of the ALCCP was written capturing the

key issues to ensure successful implementation of the Program. This was seen as an important

resource to facilitate successful adoption and adaptation of the ALCCP to other universities and,

signicantly, such documents are recommended for the success of innovative projects in higher

education (McKenzie et al., 2005). At this point, the Program resources were nalised andordered for distribution through the project website.

During phase four the CC Role Statement was developed and provided to the broader university

for comment. During this period a reunion of Pilot 1 participants was held and they were invited

to provide feedback on the draft CC role statement as well as participants within Pilot 2. The

role statement was endorsed by the University Academic Board in November 2008 and links

with the workload management system were also made to better acknowledge the workload

associated with the CC role. The outcomes achieved as a consequence of effective leadership

in the role of a CC were also clearly aligned with some of the criteria for demonstrating teaching

and learning leadership within the guidelines for promotion.

The reunion for Pilot 1 participants also included an opportunity to participate in using the iCVF

tool (Vilkinas and Cartans 2001, 2006). Several CCs took advantage of the opportunity.

An external evaluator was found for the project and this process put in motion.

Phase 5

Phase ve was concerned with preparing the revised ALCCP package ready for dissemination

through the project website. The nal report for Leading Courses was written and the external

evaluation report completed. Interviews with Pilot 1 participants were undertaken to ascertainthe transfer of training and how well the Programs outcomes had been implemented within CC

work settings. At the time of writing the nal report these interviews were still in progress.

3.1.2 Dissemination Strategy

The project incorporated strategies that address not only the distribution of the projects

outcomes but also enhance the likelihood of its successful dissemination. Some early evidence

of successful dissemination is already available with the Program materials being utilised in

8 In Pilot 2 Developing Academic Leadership Capacity was expanded into two modules and renamed Developing

Academic Leadership Capability 1 and 2. The shift to capability from capacity was made so that the contentresonated with the approach taken in Learning Leaders in Times of Change (Scott et al. 2008) (which is employedin the introductory module). Capability also better reects the Programs focus, as it is a more empowering termthat suggests developing an used or underdeveloped faculty. Capacity, on the other hand, implies only potential.



the 2008 ALTC project at the University of Tasmania. Embedding and sustaining leadership

development for course coordinators (LE8-816), builds on the ALCCP in its project, which aims

to improve the capacity of course coordinators to lead discipline-based curriculum review and to

offer peer review of curriculum (Trivett and Lines, 2009).

Table 4 below lists the aspects of the project matched against the key features identied by

McKenzie et al. (2005) for successful adaptation, adoption and implementation of innovations

in higher education. Signicantly, the products and outcomes produced from the projectdemonstrate the qualities desirable in successful innovative projects in higher education.

Table 4: Key Features of the Leading Courses Project for Facilitating its Adoption,Adaptation and Implementation

Features Present in Successful

Innovative Higher Educational Projects

(McKenzie et al., 2005, ix)

Leading Courses Project Features

Offer different and valuable ways of learning andteaching, or enable particular kinds of learning

outcomes, or addressed common resource needs or

solved common problems.

The ALCCP lls a gap in leadership developmentby targeting CCs, who have traditionally beenoverlooked for professional development of this

kind. The Project approaches learning and teaching

quality through the crucial role of the CC who has

considerable potential to impact on student learning

outcomes.

Recognisable scholarly qualities. The ALCCP resources are grounded in leadership

development theory and draw on a wide range of

scholarly papers published in the eld of academicleadership. Similarly, the projects method is

underpinned by recognised research in academic

leadership development and academic staffdevelopment.

Provide evidence that they worked or were likely to

work with the intended learners.

Evidence from the evaluation feedback from Pilot

1 and 2 participants indicates that the ALCCP has

been very well accepted by CCs at Curtin. The

approach of the Program also mirrors the qualities

identied by academic leaders in Learning Leadersin Times of Change (Scott et al., 2008) for leadership

development.

The ALCCP was also developed based on the

work undertaken in creating a leadership programin the Graduate School of Business at Curtin

(Ladywshewsky, 2004, 2006).

Adaptable, either in themselves or in the ways they

could be implemented.

The ALCCP is cross-disciplinary and has a modular

structure that maximises the potential to modify the

materials and their delivery schedule. The exibledelivery options (fully online/blended) give a further

dimension of adaptability.

The guide to coordinating and facilitating the Program

is extensive, and provides the necessary information

to best enable the successful use of the Program and

its materials.



Building institutional academic leadership capacity at the CC level through the ALCCP is the

cornerstone of the project and its distribution to the broader national context has the potential to

provide a mechanism for embedding change and second generation innovation (Southwell et

al., 2005). Table 5 (below) gives an overview of the distribution and dissemination strategies of

the project, including both local and national implications. According to McKenzie et al. (2005),

distribution is generally taken to mean making information and resources available whilst

dissemination implies embedding innovations.

Importantly, lessons learnt from the local Curtin context may assist other universities in

embedding the ALCCP or similar programs, and has implications for other ALTC project

outcomes and their successful implementation. For example, the focus of the project in

anticipating, promoting and encouraging the ongoing relevance of the ALCCP, the CC role

and targeting system level outcomes has assisted the enduring impact of the project. In the

same way, having the right project team membership to provide the best possible conditions

for securing senior management support is pivotal to meeting project outcomes and their

dissemination.

Table 5: Project Distribution and Dissemination Strategies

Distribution Strategies

Project website.

Academic papers and conference presentations based on the research and project outcomes.

Attendance and presentations at the ALTC workshops and meetings.

Use of the ALTC Exchange to promote outcomes from the project.

Publishing: Leading Courses: Academic Leadership for Course Coordinators

Publishing: The Academic Leadership for Course Coordinators Program: A Guide to Coordination and

Facilitation

Dissemination Strategies

Links with other ALTC projects including:

LE8-805 The University of South Australia: Development of Academic Leadership within the University sector

through the dissemination of a web-based 360 feedback process and related professional development

workshop;

LE8-824 Murdoch University: Clarifying, developing and valuing the role of unit coordinators;

LE8-816 The University of Tasmania: Embedding and sustaining leadership development for course

coordinators; and

CG8-735 Curtin University: Building course team capacity to identify, model and assess graduate employability

skills.

In some cases the materials produced as part of the project are being adapted and modied to otheruniversities (for example the University of Tasmanias ALTC leadership project is building on the ALCCP).

The overall exibility of the Program and its resources should actively assist in its adaptation and adoption.



Distribution Strategies

Whilst tailored to the CC role the project and its resources have implications across the sector as it can be

modied to suit other academic roles given most of the content of the ALCCP is relevant for all academicleadership as are many of the key issues learnt around academic leadership development in higher education.

For example, some of the ALCCP resources and project outcomes have been used in Curtins HOS leadership

program.

The ALCCP is cross disciplinary.

The ALCCP has been embedded into Curtins suite of staff development offerings and is now funded by the

University.

The identication of system level outcomes required to enhance the success of the ALCCP. At Curtin: a newCC Role Statement has been endorsed; the ALCCP is linked with the Teaching Performance Index (TPI);

workload models now better recognise the CC role; the ALCCP has also been linked to promotion systems and

performance review.

Support from senior management was actively sought to ensure the sustainability of the ALCCP.

3.2 Program Method

The academic leadership development model employed in the Program was based on an

adaptation of models of education developed by Wolverton et al. (2005), Ramsden (1998),

and from the broader leadership eld (Antonakis and House 2002). In the revised and nal

iteration of the Program (trialed in the second pilot) the capability and competence framework

for academic leadership presented in the 2008 report on the ALTC project, Learning Leaders

in Times of Change, was incorporated into the Programs conceptual framework (Scott et al.,

2008). This research into academic leadership was welcome as it provided evidence of the

relevance of the ALCCP and its approach within an Australian higher educational context. The

framework presented by Scott et al. (2008) took a similar approach to the Integrated Competing

Values Framework (CVF) (Vilkinas and Cartan 2001, 2006) employed in the Program as the

basis for the 360 survey. Both models provide frameworks for isolating and identifying different

capabilities and competencies across different domains, thereby assisting in measuring current

leadership skills and in setting leadership developmental goals. In particular, both frameworks

reect the need for a similar range of competencies for effective leadership, although the

Learning Leaders in Times of Change framework is focussed specically on academic

leadership rather than leadership in a broad sense.9

Based on these models and theoretical frameworks, the developmental needs of course leaders

are targeted at three levels in the ALCCP:

personal leadership development

conceptual understanding, and

skill development.

Personal leadership development included: learning to lead through understanding leadership

theory and development (focusing on academic leadership), emotional intelligence (enabling,

inspiring and motivating others); personal management; creating vision and focusing on

9As mentioned earlier, the iCVF was trialed in the second pilot (based on Quinn et al.s (2003) CVF model yet

tailored to the CC role and academic leadership). It is also worth noting at this point that whilst the iCVF andLearning Leaders in Times of Change frameworks have similarities the tool developed through the LearningLeaders in Times of Change project provides a tool for self-assessing ones leadership rather than a 360 view ofan individuals leadership.



strategic action; encouraging participants to learn from past experiences through reective

journaling of leadership experiences; observations and reections of effective and ineffective

practice; and writing development outcomes incorporating a peer-coaching approach to

implement performance targets (Ladyshewsky and Varey 2005, Ladyshewsky 2006).

Conceptual understandings included: the application of key leadership theories and principles

to practice; understanding and application of pedagogical concepts in curriculum design,

implementation, assessment and evaluation; and the roles and responsibilities of course leaderswithin a local (university) system and the national higher education context.

Skill development included those group academic leadership skills at a departmental/school

level necessary to achieve the desired results when working with staff, students and external

stakeholders and other academics, for example: communication, team building, conict

resolution, planning and managing resources; recognising, developing and assessing course

performance, quality improvement and change management.

3.2.1 The Experiential Learning Cycle

As signalled, the leadership development philosophy underlying the project emphasises self-reection through peer coaching, journaling and goal setting underpinned by an experiential

learning cycle (Kerka, 1996; Kolb, 1984). Consequently these elements are incorporated

into the ALCCP as participants are asked to keep a reective journal or blog, establish peer

coaching relationship/s, and use the experiential learning cycle as a method to extend learning

and increase transference into the academic setting (Ladyshewsky, 2005).

The Integrated Competing Values Framework (Vilkinas and Cartan 2001, 2006) was

used to provide participants with considerable information including a detailed report that

allows individuals to identify their leadership issues and work on a development plan for

implementation and review. The integrated learning approach was adopted to promote reectivegrowth in participants. Through nding the time and opportunity to obtain non-evaluative

feedback from peers, and engaging in continuous self-improvement based on that feedback,

more positive outcomes are anticipated from participation in the Program (Raines and Alberg,

2003).

According to Bennis (1989) leadership development requires more than training or career

planning; what is required is the opportunity to learn through experience in a supportive

culture that allows growth and change. Furthermore, Gaither (2004) in his review of academic

leadership asserts that experience and observation is critical for learning about leadership.

He views leadership development as a continuous learning experience requiring ample

opportunities to practice with the right to fail as part of the development process. Interestingly,

Scott et al. (2008) argue that a university culture that is more willing to accept poor performance

as an opportunity for improvement is much more effective in managing change than one

which responds to criticism around poor performance defensively. Thus the ALCCP has the

components to enable CCs to address areas that need attention, plan strategies, implement

them and reect on their effectiveness as part of a continual quality management process,

which takes place within a supportive learning environment (provided there is adherence to the

recommendations made in the ALCCP guide).

Change is, thus, a key focus of the ALCCP which aims to foster change capability in CCs

and promote a work culture that not only accepts change as an inevitable factor impactingon leadership but one in which leadership development is a process that takes time and

experience. Signicantly, the ALCCP is strengthened by an underlying emphasis on change



management (personal and professional) linked to the CC role through applied learning.

Overall the Program is designed to empower CCs to recognise their leadership capacity and

to provide them with the necessary tools, conceptual understandings and skills to enhance

their leadership, thereby enabling improved course outcomes. Emotional intelligence and

team building capability is foregrounded in the Program and reects a recognition and

acknowledgement of the shift from a work culture attuned to individuals to one of cooperation

and collaboration (Boud, 1999).

I had bells go off with the vision of the different [personality] types and how we

struggle with motivating others. I have the desire to enhance my management

skills and will be interested in implementing some of these ideas. Pilot 1

Participant.

The key learning outcomes of the ALCCP include:

Understanding academic leadership in higher education (leadership capabilities required,

what best practice looks like, the nature and level of commitment required, extending

views of leadership); Identication of participants leadership skills against those required for academic

leadership (using the iCVF);

Implementation of a personal development plan and life long learning skills to enhance

leadership;

Review of curricula, learning experiences and assessment appropriate for university

learning within a framework of outcomes focused education and evidence based

teaching;

Knowledge of course management and administrative requirements within the context of

university policies and procedures;

Application of a course review process for continuous quality improvement; and

The development of peer coaching, interpersonal, team management and performance

management skills. This includes skill development and awareness of managing upwards

and networking.

The approach used in this Program reects the ndings published in Learning Leaders in Times

of Change (Scott et al., 2008) as it emphasises practice based learning. According to Learning

Leaders in Times of Change, CCs expressed a preference for the following:

Learning on the job;

Being involved in informal/mentoring coaching;

Undertaking self-guided reading on leadership;

Participating in higher educational leadership seminars;

Participating in leadership development programs that are custom-tailored to their needs;

Participating in annual performance reviews; and

Participating in 360 feedback based on known leadership capabilities.

The ALCCP utilises all of these concepts (with the exception of higher education leadershipseminars) and provides participants with an opportunity to embed experiential learning

principles in their leadership development journey. Throughout the Program a case-based and



problem-based learning approach is used which allows participants to critically reect on the

issues and apply the theory underpinning leadership development. Furthermore (and again

reecting the research published by Scott et al. (2008)), the Programs approach employs the

elements desired by academic leaders in leadership development, including:

the ALCCP is role-specic;

it is practice-based;

it is peer-supported; and

it is self-managed.

Facilitators of the ALCCP are encouraged in the guide to model good teaching practice as it has

been identied that higher educational leadersjust like university studentswant exible,

responsive, active, problem-based, just-in-time, just-for-me learning methods (Scott et al. 2008,

xvii). Similarly, another ALTC funded project found that participants trialing their leadership

development tool (the Leadership Capacity Development Framework) identied critical factors

for its success, including:

formal leadership training and professional development activities;

authentic learning activities that are situated in real contexts;

engagement in reective practice;

opportunities for dialogue about leadership practice and experiences; and

activities that expand current professional networks.

(Parrish and Lefoe 2009,1)

The ALCCP provides structures that support these crucial elements through its focused

attention on the CC role, modeling of good teaching and learning practice, reective journaling,peer coaching and networking opportunities. Furthermore, the ALCCP contains processes for

enabling responsive facilitation through inbuilt formative evaluation practices thereby ensuring

that the nee

LE64 Academic Leadership for Course Coords Final

Documents

Transcript of LE64 Academic Leadership for Course Coords Final