Administrative effectiveness in higher education: Improving assessment procedures

Research in Higher Education

Volumn 41, Issue 6, 2000, Pages 663-684

  Heck, Ronald H ^a   Johnsrud, Linda K ^a   Rosser, Vicki J ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF HAWAII   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF MISSOURI   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0034398313     PISSN: 03610365     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1023/A:1007096803784     Document Type: Article

References (45)

1. Airasian, P. W. (1996). Assessment in the Classroom. New York: McGraw-Hill.
2. Arter, M. H. (1981). Career advancement from institutional research to academic management utilizing institutional research. Paper presented at the 21st Annual Forum of the Association for Institutional Research (AIR), Minneapolis, May 17-20 ERIC Document No. 205119.
3. Astin, A. W., and Scherrei, R. A. (1980). Maximizing Leadership Effectiveness. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
4. Baldridge, V. J. (1971). Academic Governance. Berkeley, CA: McCutchan.
5. Bensimon, E. M., Neumann, A., and Birnbaum, R. (1989). Making sense of administrative leadership: The "L" word in higher education. ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Report No. 1, Washington, DC: School of Education and Human Development, The George Washington University.
6. Birnbaum, R. (1992). How Academic Leadership Works. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
7. Birnbaum, R. (1989). The implicit leadership theories of college and university presidents. The Review of Higher Education 12(2), 125-136.
8. Brennan, R. L. (1983). Elements of Generalizability Theory. Iowa City, IA: American College Testing Program.
9. Chemers, M. M., and Ayman, R. (1993). Directions for leadership research. In M. M. Chemers and R. Ayman (eds.), Leadership, Theory and Research: Perspectives and Directions, pp. 321-332. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
10. Clark, K. E., and Clark, M. B. (1990). Measures of Leadership. West Orange, NJ: Center for Creative Leadership, Leadership Library of America, Inc.
11. Cleveland, H. (1960). The dean's dilemma: leadership.Public Administration Review 20(1): 22-27.
12. Cole, B. R. (1983). Administrative effectiveness of deans of education on decisions affecting teacher education. Journal of Teacher Education 34(4) 48-51.
13. Cronbach, L. J., Glesser, G. C., Nanda, H., and Rajaratnam, N. (1972). The Dependability of Behavioral Measurement: Theory of Generalizability for Scores and Profiles. New York: Wiley.
14. Dibden, A. J. (1968). Academic Deanship in American Colleges and Universities. Carbondale and Edwardsville, IL: Southern Illinois University Press.
15. Dill, W. R. (1980). The deanship: an unstable craft. In E. Griffiths and D. McCarty (eds.), The Dilemma of the Deanship, pp. 261-284. Danville, IL: Interstate Publishers.
16. Feltner, B. D., and Goodsell, D. R. (1972). The academic dean and conflict management. Journal of Higher Education 43(9): 692-701.
17. Fincher, C. (1996). Theory and research in administrative leadership. In J. C. Smart (ed.), Higher Education: Handbook of Theory and Research, Vol. XI, pp. 307-336. New York: Agathon Press.
18. Glasman, N. S., and Heck, R. H. (1996). Role-based evaluation of principals: developing an appraisal system. In K. Leithwood, J. Chapman, D. Corson, P. Hallinger, and A. Hard (eds.), International Handbook of Educational Leadership and Administration, pp. 369-394. Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
19. Gmelch, W. H., Wolverton, M., Wolverton, M. L., and Sarros, J. C. (In press). The academic dean: an imperiled species searching for balance. Research in Higher Education.
20. Gould, J. W. (1964). The Academic Deanship. New York: Teachers College Press.
21. Griffiths, D. E., and McCarty, D. J. (1980). The Dilemma of the Deanship. Danville, IL: Interstate Publishers.
22. Heck, R. H., and Marcoulides, G. A. (1992). Principal assessment: conceptual problem, methodological problem, or both? Peabody Journal of Education 68(1): 124-144.
23. Heck, R. H., and Marcoulides, G. A. (1996). The assessment of principal performance: a multilevel evaluation approach. Journal of Personnel Evaluation in Education 10(1): 11-28.
24. House, E. R. (1994). Policy and productivity in higher education. Educational Researcher 23(5): 27-31.
25. Joint Committee on Standards for Education Evaluation (1988). The Personnel Evaluation Standards. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
26. Kauffman, J. F. (1990). Administration then and now. In K. M. Moore and S. B. Twombly (eds.), New Directions for Higher Education: Administrative Careers and the Marketplace, No. 72, 18(4), pp. 99-108. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
27. Kennedy, D. (1998). Academic Duty. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
28. Lasley, T. J., and Haberman, M. (1987). How do university administrators evaluate deans? Journal of Teacher Education 29(5): 13-16.
29. Marcoulides, G. A. (1996). Estimating variance components in generalizability theory: the covariance structure analysis approach. Structural Equation Modeling 3(3): 290-299.
30. Marcoulides, G. A. (1998). Applied generalizability theory models. In G. A. Marcoulides (ed.), Modern Methods for Business Research, pp. 1-21. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
31. Marcoulides, G. A., and Heck, R. H. (1992). Assessing instructional leadership effectiveness with "G" theory. International Journal of Educational Management 6(3): 4-13.
32. Matczynski, T., Lasley, T. J., and Haberman, M. (1989). The deanship: how faculty evaluate performance. Journal of Teacher Education 40(6): 10-14.
33. Morris, Van Cleve (1981). Deaning: Middle Management in Academe. Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Press.
34. Pike, G. R. (1994). Applications of generalizability theory in higher education assessment research. In J. C. Smart (ed.) Higher Education: Handbook of Theory and Research, Vol. X, pp. 45-87. New York: Agathon Press.
35. Pitner, N. J. (1988). The study of administrative effects and effectiveness. In N. J. Boyan (ed.), Handbook of Research on Educational Administration, pp. 99-122. New York: Longman.
36. Roherty, B. (1997). The price of passive resistance in financing higher education. In P. M. Callan and J. E. Finney (eds.), Public and Private Financing of Higher Education: Shaping Public Policy for the Future, pp. 3-29. Phoenix, AZ: American Council on Education (ACE), Oryx Press.
37. Sagaria, M. A. (1988). Administrative mobility and gender: patterns and prices in higher education. Journal of Higher Education 59(3): 306-326.
38. Sagaria, M. A., and Krotseng, M.V. (1986). Deans' managerial skills: what they need and what they bring to a job. Journal of the College and University Personnel Association 37(2): 1-7.
39. Seldin, P. (1988). Evaluating and Developing Administrative Performance: A Practical Guide for Academic Leaders. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
40. Shavelson, R. J., and Webb, N. M. (1991). Generalizability Theory: A Primer. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
41. Stufflebeam, D. L., and Nevo, D. (1993). Principal evaluation: new directions for improvement. Peabody Journal of Education 68(2): 24-46.
42. Tucker, A., and Bryan, R. A. (1991). The Academic Dean: Dove, Dragon, and Diplomat. New York: American Council on Education, Mcmillan Publishing.
43. Wolverton, M., Wolverton, M.L., and Gmelch, W.H. (1999). The impact of role conflict and ambiguity on academic deans. Journal of Higher Education 70(1): 80-106.
44. Yukl, G. A. (1989). Managerial leadership: a review of theory and research. Journal of Management 15(2): 251-289.
45. Yukl, G. A. (1993). Leadership in Organizations. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.