|
The multitude of organizational structures for higher education systems results in variations in their governance, leading to differences in system and campus functions (Dengerink, 2009; Lane, 2013; McGuinness, 1991). In addition, higher education systems are part of the larger economic, political, and social contexts of the state, and thus have differing environmental pressures that influence system governance and decision making (McGuinness, 2013). Differences in system and campus functions, coupled with state influences, result in a different set of leadership skills and abilities that presidents need to be effective. These leadership skills are subject to differences in the roles and contributions of the system board, system chief executive, and campus executives to system effectiveness (AASCU, AGB, & NASH, 2009). Thus, a study examining presidential decision making in a community college system can make a significant contribution to the literature.
Approach to the Study
Stebbins (2001) defines social science exploration as “a broad-ranging, purposive, systematic, prearranged undertaking designed to maximize the discovery of generalizations leading to description and understanding of an area of social or
psychological life” (p. 3). Because exploration emphasizes the development of theory from data, to explore a phenomenon, the researcher must approach it with flexibility in looking for data and open-mindedness about where to find the data (Stebbins, 2001). As such, the goal of exploratory research is the production of generalizations about the phenomenon that are derived from the data through a process of induction. The researcher then weaves these generalizations into a theory explaining the group, process, or activity under study. As researchers come to understand the group, process, or activity under study, the field of research shifts from exploration to more prediction and confirmation with the development of generalizations made possible by the accumulation of exploratory research and application of the theory that has been emerging since the initial study (Stebbins, 2001).
Stebbins (2001) suggests that exploration is the preferred approach when a group, process, or activity: (a) has received little or no scientific, empirical inquiry; (b) has been largely examined using research orientations of prediction and control as opposed to flexibility and open-mindedness; or, (c) has changed so much that it warrants new exploration. As indicated in the review of literature, governance in community college systems has not been examined to a considerable extent. Moreover, systems have evolved over the last several decades, so early research is not necessarily applicable to a study of current systems. Similarly, the presidency is changing with growth in community college systems. Literature on the community college presidency is limited to trends in personal and professional characteristics, influence, and competencies for effective leadership.
Because little or no studies have examined presidential decision making in a community college system, an exploratory study using quantitative and qualitative data is wholly
justified in order to increase the depth of knowledge of governance of community college systems and presidential decision making.
While exploratory researchers do not use specific theories or conceptualizations to guide studies, sensitizing concepts, or guiding ideas, can help guide and expand exploration while posing no threat of contamination to the collection and interpretation of data. These sensitizing concepts lead the researcher toward generalizations about the central subject of the study but also some of its marginal manifestations. Though qualitative data prevail in exploratory studies, Stebbins (2001) suggests that both quantitative and qualitative data may be gathered during exploration. This data gathering takes the form of quantitative surveys, observations, interviews and focus groups, and the contents of documents written by and about the people, process, or activity under study.
Furthermore, Johnson and Christensen (2008) note an advantage of collecting multiple sets of data using different research approaches is that it enhances the quality of the data since each of the research approaches have different strengths and weaknesses.
Moreover, both quantitative and qualitative findings can be mixed or triangulated to provide greater understanding of the group, process, or activity under study. Though it encompasses a distinctive methodological approach, exploration is “...where the art of science is most widely exercised...through inductive reasoning, as researchers discover order in what initially appeared to them as chaos (Stebbins, 2001, p. 23).
Do'stlaringiz bilan baham: |
