DOCUMENT RESUME HE 034 563 ED 459 665 Muhammad, Habibah P. AUTHOR Leadership in Higher Education for the New Millennium. TITLE 2002-00-00 PUB DATE NOTE 12p. Information Analyses (070) PUB TYPE MF01/PC01 Plus Postage. EDRS PRICE *Administrators; *Educational Change; *Futures (of Society); DESCRIPTORS *Higher Education; *Instructional Leadership; Social Change ABSTRACT The challenges that higher education in the United States will face in the future are like none seen before. This paper discusses some of the issues that will confront educational leaders in the future. In the age .of information technology, new areas of learning will be discovered, and the emergence of the World Wide Web and virtual universities will bring new challenges. Future educational leaders must be able to work with an inclusive body of scholars and learn the culture, values, and traditions of other people. Educational leaders in the new millennium will need good interpersonal communication skills, expertise in management and development, and the knowledge to direct organizations and groups effectively. Issues that did not exist in the past will be paramount in the future. (SLD) Reproductions supplied by EDRS are the best that can be made from the original document. Leadership p.1 Running head: LEADERSHIP IN HIGHER EDUCATION FOR THE NEW MILLENNIUM LEADERSHIP IN HIGHER EDUCATION FOR THE NEW MILLENNIUM PERMISSION TO REPRODUCE AND DISSEMINATE THIS MATERIAL HAS BEEN GRANTED BY iMuh Habibah P. Muhammad TO THE EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES INFORMATION CENTER (ERIC) 630 Malcolm X. Blvd. 1 New York, NY 10037 (718) 636-7046 (212) 690-4448 carolbOl @attnet U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION Office of Educational Research and Improvement EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES INFORMATION CENTER (ERIC) 4-riis document has been reproduced as received from the person or organization originating it. Minor changes have been made to improve reproduction quality. Points of view or opinions stated in this document do not necessarily represent official OERI position or policy. BEST COPY AVAILABLE Leadership p.2 Abstract The importance of having effective leadership in higher education institutions in the 21st century is of paramount significance for many reasons. The challenges that leaders will face are like none seen before. We are a global community that is moving away from many of the foundational structures of the industrial age, its ideas, concepts and perceptional values. As we move into a new millennium leaders in higher education will be faced with new challenges and opportunities. As we embark upon the age of information technology broad new areas of learning will be discovered, and changes will occur. In addition the information age is bringing societies closer, and with the World Wide Web and virtual colleges, and universities emerging higher education has taken on a new dimension. Future educational leaders must be able to envision and work with an inclusive body of scholars and learn the culture, values and traditions of other people. If we are to be effective leaders in higher education in the global context, we have to provide our constituents with an integrated global consciousness. Educational leaders of the new millennium will have to have, good interpersonal communication skills, expertise in management /development and, knowledge of how to effectively direct organizations and groups. The leaders of tomorrow will be faced with issues that before now were non- existent, issues i.e., the global implications of distant education and technology, teaching and learning, the emergence of virtual colleges, and universities, for-profit educational institutions, accreditation changes, accountability, and higher education and multiculturalism. These and other issues and concerns will be at the forefront of change for leaders of higher education in the new millennium. In this paper I will discuss some of the issues that leaders in higher education will be faced with. 3 Leadership p.3 Leadership n Higher Education There are many issues that are surfacing in higher education, and leaders will face new challenges and opportunities in the 21st Century. The importance of having effective leadership is of paramount significance, because issues such as; distant learning and technologies, the changing demographics of the country, professional development, education reform, finance, policy and governance, developing integrated instructional technology programs to improve student performance, retaining, tenure and promotion of people of color into administrative positions, forging kindergarten higher education collaborative partnerships, legal issues pertaining to areas of employment for academic administrators, and faculty members. These are but a few of the issues and concerns that are expected to require strong educational leadership. The effective leader will have to have a strong knowledge of the collegial model of leadership, the ability to motivate and empower colleagues, board members, administrative staff, business advisors, and others. The new leaders in higher education in the 2l st Century will have to understand the complexities of effective communications with other cultures and societies. Twenty first century leadership requires the leader to be able to develop trust, and respect for differences in learning styles, methodologies, and projected outcomes. The new effective and efficient administrator will have excellent managerial and concept development skills, in addition to the power, to allow academics the freedom to explore and develop further knowledge. In today's world of continuous change, successful leaders will be those who keep abreast of what's currently happening and making decisions that will be insightful for the institution as well as the constituents that are served. Leadership p.4 Today more than ever before educational leaders must have new visionary goals and, the know how to gain support from board members, faculty and others that will enhance productivity, accountability and responsibility. The leaders of tomorrow will be accomplished in the arts of effective management and negotiation skills. Garner (1990) declares that effective management skills falls into the following areas: planning and prioritizing, organizing and institution building, keeping the system functioning, agenda setting and decision making. He further states" Most managers exhibit some leadership skills, and most leaders on occasion find them-selves managing. Leadership and management is not the same thing, but they overlap. It makes sense to include managing in the list of task leaders perform" (p.14). The new administrators will have exemplary character, and display qualities of honesty, and foresightedness, they will demonstrate stability and proactive-ness in confrontational situation rather than being reactive; they will also exhibit patience, and tolerance. The 21st Century leaders will show morality, humbleness, strength, and charisma in addition to having the knowledge of how to be team- builders as well as being team player in an evolving environment of learning. According to Julius, Baldrigde & Jeffrey (1999) issues of leadership and power in institutions of higher learning derive from the ability of leadership to accept multidimensional perspectives that are characterized by interdependence, diversity, and vary paradigms of authority. They further assert that effective leadership is a combination of structural attributes, (rank/position) being in the right unit and location, the amount of control over resource Leadership p.5 allocation, and the organizational culture. They attribute personal qualities of a leader as one that demonstrates vision, ethos, integrity, intellectual and socialization skills; in addition to having appropriate dress appearance and maintaining social activities. Furthermore they declare that leaders must have the ability to influence others. Julius, Baldridge, & Jeffrey (1999) contend that the structural attributes of leadership is the ability to manage and contain external and internal conflicts. Julius et.al., identify, exercising influence and persuasion in strategic ways, setting priorities, building a team, and managing conflict as skills efficient leaders utilize; in addition to using structural decision- making processes and establishing policy convergences (17).1 ). But, there are some leaders in higher education who assert that we are now in a time of transformation in higher education and that we must prepare ourselves for the new changes that are occurring. They declare that in the last five hundred years there been no change in the structural governing policies of higher education, although many strives have been made in higher education in terms of perpetuating the continuous of building and expanding wisdom, knowledge, and the sciences. According to Garmon (2000) it is very important to know who is in the leadership position. Garm on states: In these times of great opportunity and risk, it is important to be sure of the leadership in our institutions of higher education. Who is really running the show? Is it the institution's governing board? Is it a president who is afraid or unwilling to share the responsibilities of leadership? Leadership p.6 Is it the local community making demands on the college for the satisfaction of particular political agendas? Is it the state and the powerful legislatively enacted funding mechanism? Or could it be a faculty who wants to preserve their vested employment interests? Furthermore Gamon (2000) asserts that in today's educational environment institutions that are micromanaged by faculty, governing boards or from external pressures be they private or government opinionated stand little chance of sustained accomplishments. Gamon continues by announcing that we are in an age of transformation in higher education institutions, and educational leaders must be tough enough to resist the past demands for strong central control of colleges or universities. Gamon expounds the principles that all of the primary participants that are directly involved in the institution, need to be involved in the operational aspects of the institution and, active participants in governing the educational community. He states," These times call for creative, responsible involvement of all of the constituents in a colleges operations"(p. 1). Gamon cites Cross (2000), who contends that micromanaged institutions limit the growth of both students and the institutional environment. Cross- asserts that it is wrong to allow one individual or an individualized group to manage a learning environment i.e., a college or university. She sees this approach as detrimental to synthesizing involvement between faculty and students. She states" If only one entity is in control, students will not be positively involved in the academic life of the college, and they will not have positive views of the institution or their own roles as learners" (p.2). Leadership p.7 She continues by declaring that people who are under the influence of a micromanaged learning institutions tend to wait for instructions from the top or from whatever entity that is in power. Cross (2000) states: we can safely conclude that learning communities, whether academic, vocational, or a combination provide students with that important feeling of involvement only when they are true to their name in creating a "community of learners"-- a true community in which participants are interactive, challenging, respectful, cooperative and sharing in their common goal of learning (p.2). Cross concludes, by asserting that those who are involved in community colleges must resist the temptation to micromanage. Other proponents of change contend that advanced and improved leadership practices for higher education is needed in the 21st Century if colleges and universities are to raise their standards, status, and improve the overall campus environment. Eddy, Murphy, Spaulding, & Chandras (1997) proclaim that there is an emerging crisis within colleges and universities due to failed practices in certain areas of leadership. Eddy et.al refer to the "Polizing Scheme" as an example of the unethical conduct of leaders and officials (Board of Regents and Trustees, presidents, legal counsels, vice presidents, business advisors, ect.) in higher education. According to Eddy et.al, in 1995 the Foundation for New Era Philanthropy swindled millions of dollars from seminaries, universities, and colleges by presenting get rich quick schemes to leaders in higher education. Leadership p.8 Eddy et.al (1997) state: The Pronzi's scheme was based on the long chanced theme of huge profits in return for large investments. In repeated articles, higher education journals and periodicals, including the Chronicle of Education, relate accounts of "get rich quick" schemes initiated and approved by leaders of academic institutions. Truly, there seems to be an unethical crisis within our campus leaders" (p.1.). Eddy et.al continue by announcing that academic leaders of the 21st Century must re-evaluate their ethical practices, they contend that members of the Boards of Regents and Trustees, presidents, vice presidents, deans, and any others who are involved in leadership roles in higher educational institutions must, by deeds, speech, and action portray commitment to higher ethical standards. Other areas that are identified as needing new leaderships standards are in accountability, and multicultural leadership, Eddy et.al. declare that issues of accountability in higher educations is prompting legislators, parents, students, government leaders, accrediting bodies, industry, and the business community to insist that colleges and universities produce competent graduates. They cite the Oldahoma State Regents for Higher Education as an accrediting body that has initiated new leadership policies, with its decision to issue a degree warranty for selected technical school degrees. Furthermore Oklahoma State has established a policy of issuing similar degree warranties for some non-technical and professional degrees awarded by colleges and universities under its jurisdiction. Leadership p.9 But, I am of the opinion that the biggest challenges in higher education will come from the integration of technology and global teaching/ learning. Recently the Chronicle of Higher Education published an article on December 10th 2001 that has wide spread implications for the future of higher education and distance learning. The article discusses the U.S. Army's distant education project. According to Arnone (2001) since January the U.S. Army has enrolled 12,000 soldiers in 23 colleges and universities, in its distance's education program called eArmy; and is looking for more colleges and universities that can provide higher education to its enlisted personnel. PricewaterhouseCoopers, the consulting fmn that is coordinating this effort identifies Fort Beiming in Georgia, Fort Campbell in Kentucky and Fort Hood in Texas as the first three Army bases where soldiers are now actively engaged in eArmy learning. In addition PricewaterCoopers has secured a contract of $453-million dollars to run this operation whose goal is to have 80,000 student/soldiers enrolled by 2005. The consultant firm has issued a call for new applicant institutions to apply to become eArmy providers, these new providers will have to develop new standards according to Barbara J. Lombardo director of programs. Arnone (2001) cites Lombardo as stating "The new standards reflect lessons learned in eAnny U's first year of operation, and from suggestions made by its higher education partners". She continues by saying the 23 institutions that currently are under contract will implement the new policy standards when they renew their contracts at the end of March 2002. The new standards will require that all institutions participating in the eArmy project will offer online examinations, in addition many of the degree programs will require students to take paper exams in classrooms with proctors.