Higher education system governance: an exploratory study of presidential decision making in the kentucky community and technical college system

Participant Solicitation and Informed Consent................................
83
Data Sources................................................................................................	85
Quantitative Data Collection and Analysis..................................................	85
Survey Instrument............................................................................	86
Quantitative Data Collection...........................................................	89
Quantitative Data Analysis..............................................................	90
Preliminary Analysis...........................................................	90
Descriptive Statistics...........................................................	91
Qualitative Data Collection and Analysis...................................................	92
Interview Protocol...........................................................................	93
Qualitative Data Collection.............................................................	95
Document Collection...........................................................	97
Qualitative Data Analysis................................................................	98
Interview Data Analysis......................................................	99
Document Analysis..............................................................	102
Quantitative and Qualitative Analysis.............................................	103
Validity and Reliability................................................................................	103
Quantitative Validity and Reliability...............................................	104
Qualitative Validity and Reliability.................................................	105
Summary......................................................................................................	106
Chapter Four: Results..............................................................................................	108
Description of the System............................................................................	110
Quantitative Results.....................................................................................	111
Descriptive Statistics.......................................................................	111
Academic Decision Making………………………………	112
Administrative Decision Making………………………….	115
Personnel Decision Making……………………………….	119
Frequencies………………………………………………..	123
Measures of central tendency and dispersion……………..	125
Qualitative Findings.....................................................................................	129
Research Question Two...................................................................	129
Flexibility.............................................................................	129
System Alignment...............................................................	132
Governance Structures.........................................................	137
Combined Effort..................................................................	141
Location of Authority..........................................................	148
Summary..............................................................................	152
Research Questions Three and Four................................................	154
Roles, Responsibilities, and Power......................................	154
Decision Effect....................................................................	158
Feedback and Recommendations........................................	162
Summary..............................................................................	164
Summary......................................................................................................	165

Chapter Five: Interpretations and Recommendations..............................................	168
Summary of Results.....................................................................................	168
Discussion....................................................................................................	170
Quantitative Results.........................................................................	170
Qualitative Findings.........................................................................	172
Governance Structures.........................................................	172
Presidential Decision Making..............................................	175
Theoretical Framework................................................................................	177
Structural Elements..........................................................................	177
Political Elements............................................................................	179
Anarchical Elements........................................................................	181
Environmental Constraints..............................................................	183
Limitations of the Study..............................................................................	185
Implications for Higher Education Policy, Governance, and Administration.................................................................................	187
Suggestions for Future Research.................................................................	188
Summary......................................................................................................	190
Appendix A: UK IRB Approval..............................................................................	192
Appendix B: UK IRB Approval of Modification Request......................................	193
Appendix C: KCTCS HSRB Approval...................................................................	194
Appendix D: Initial Participant Solicitation Email..................................................	195
Appendix E: Consent Form for Initial Participant Solicitation...............................	197
Appendix F: Survey Solicitation Email...................................................................	200
Appendix G: Survey for Presidents Participating in the Study...............................	201
Appendix H: Interview Solicitation Email..............................................................	204
Appendix I: Interview Protocol – College President...............................................	205
Appendix J: Interview Protocol – System President...............................................	207
References................................................................................................................	210
Vita..........................................................................................................................	216

LIST OF TABLES

Table 3.2: Survey Items Forming Decision Areas..................................................	88
Table 3.3: Range of Possible Values for Location of Decision Making.................	91
Table 4.1: Frequency of Participant Responses by Location of Decision Making.	112
Table 4.2: Range of Possible Values for Location of Decision Making.................	116
Table 4.3: Summary of Mean Values by Decision Area.........................................	119
Table 4.4: Frequency of Participant Responses by Decision Area..........................	123
Table 4.5: Range of Possible Values for Location of Decision Making.................	125
Table 4.6: Summary of Mean Values by Decision Area.........................................	127

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 3.1: Data Collection and Analysis Procedures.............................................	80
Figure 4.2: Relationship Among Qualitative Themes.............................................	153

CHAPTER I INRODUCTION
The notion of a comprehensive state higher education system garnered attention as a result of California’s Strayer Report of 1948, which advanced systems of higher education comprised of multiple institutions with differing missions, some of which were open access colleges or universities. This report prompted the California Master Plan of 1960, which created a new structure of higher education composed of three statewide systems, including: (a) the University of California system; (b) the California State University system; and (c) the California Community Colleges system. According to O’Hara (2005), the California Master Plan of 1960 was the forerunner of similar policies adopted and amended by other states. While each state maintained distinctive economic, political, and social factors that influence higher education policy and policy formation, systems of community colleges began to emerge across the states.
Though higher education systems provided new models of governance designed to address state economic, political, and social needs, the multitude of organization structures for these systems implies variation in their governance (Dengerink, 2009; Lane, 2013). Moreover, systems are comprised of multiple campuses or colleges, resulting in functional and operational differences between the system and the colleges within the system (McGuinness, 1991). This exploratory study examines the location of presidential decision making in the Kentucky Community and Technical College System and how presidential decision making is shared between the KCTCS president and college presidents for academic, administrative, and personnel decisions.