FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2474836833> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W2474836833 abstract "This preliminary study asked, Who's the most exceptional living scholar in educational leadership? Four scholar-practitioners were nominated. The reasons nominators gave for their selections were analyzed. The criteria signi cant and broad impact on scholarship, national spheres of public in uence, and mentoring and multi-authoring systems are included along with contextual issues. note: This module has been peer-reviewed, accepted, and sanctioned by the National Council of the Professors of Educational Administration (NCPEA) as a scholarly contribution to the knowledge base in educational administration. This preliminary study asked, Who's the most exceptional living scholar in the eld of educational leadership? Four scholar-practitioners who were the most frequently nominated by fellow academics from 2002 to 2003 were identi ed. The reasons given by nominators for their selections were analyzed, resulting in criteria that can be used for characterizing exceptional scholarship at this time or pursuing a more comprehensive study. The criteria signi cant and broad impact on scholarship and the eld, national spheres of public in uence, and mentoring and multi-authoring systems appear in table form, complete with representative quotes. Importantly, issues of context and tension are raised as di erent perspectives were o ered on the survey question itself from both voting and non-voting respondents. On the one hand, a survey respondent commented, I realize the impossible task of selecting the greatest living scholar in our eld. ∗Version 1.1: Jun 26, 2006 5:15 pm -0500 †http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/ http://cnx.org/content/m13677/1.1/ OpenStax-CNX module: m13677 2 Some are naturalistic methodologists rather than mainstream educational administration scholars, while others approach scholarship with very narrow or very broad perspectives. On the other hand, another declared, Some scholars do stand out. There is one who I think is simply the greatest mover `n' shaker in the profession. This individual has done more than any to shape the direction of the eld his work is widely read by both scholars and practitioners, and his contributions to educational leadership are widely recognized. Introduction For this study, academics in educational leadership and administration were asked, Who's the most exceptional living scholar in the eld of educational leadership? The respondents (university faculty constituents) were encouraged to provide an explanation for their votes. The focus here is on the perceptions of nominators relative to outstanding scholarship in educational leadership. Not only the who, but particularly the why, served as the guiding framework for this analysis. Throughout this survey research spanning 2002 to 2003, four scholar-practitioners in particular were most frequently nominated, leading to their eventual identi cation. The reasons given by nominators for their selections were analyzed, resulting in criteria that are discussed here; these can be used for characterizing exceptional scholarship at this time or pursuing a more comprehensive study. The criteria signi cant and broad impact on scholarship and the eld, national spheres of public in uence, and mentoring and multi-authoring systems appear in Table 1, complete with representative quotes from the data. Importantly, issues of context and tension were raised as di erent perspectives were o ered on the survey question itself from both voting and non-voting respondents. The tension evident in the opening quotes signi es deep, unresolved issues that surfaced during the data analysis. The complexities of this picture are also brie y explored in this article and are open to further interpretation. Conceptual Framework and Research Sca olds In addition to my own curiosity as a professor in this area, four sources inspired this preliminary exploration: (1) the National Council of Professors of Educational Administration's (NCPEA) Living Legend Awards, recognized annually since 1999 (http://www.ncpea.net); (2) Kiewra and Creswell's (2000) study of highly productive educational psychologists, which identi ed living legends Richard Anderson, Richard Mayer, Michael Pressley, and Ann Brown through nominators' eyes; (3) Culberton's (1995) seminal work on the University Council for Educational Administration's (UCEA) history that provides insight into the creation of this organizational inter-university system and those pioneering scholars involved; and (4) Murphy's (1999) self-portrait of the profession, informed by professors in school administration programs. Kiewra and Creswell's (2000) study bene ted from their ongoing research on productive scholars. They combined a eld-based survey approach with dialogic case study methods, interviewing the most successful nominees. Adapting but also modifying this approach to satisfy my own objectives, I surveyed practicing educational leadership professors in their role of peer nominator. To obtain as many responses as possible and to dilute the in uence of any particular lter on the outcomes, I did not seek sponsorship from an association or funding agency, instead accessing di erent venues over time. Murphy's (1999) study also explored professors' concepts of important markers in the academy over one decade (e.g., reform e orts and publications and presentations within the eld). Interestingly, those authors and works cited as seminal from 1987 to 1996 overlapped with the results of my own study carried out seven years later. Of the top four nominees in my own study in alphabetical order, John Goodlad (University of Washington, retiree), John Hoyle (Texas A&M University), Joseph Murphy (Vanderbilt University), and Thomas Sergiovanni (Trinity University) all but one (John Hoyle) were listed in Murphy's results. Since my survey question did not specify what con gures a living legend, the possibilities for naming new and di erent individuals extended beyond the use of publications and citations as a traditional marker of excellence in the academy. The results outlined in Table 1 support this perception, as criteria generated by nominees for making these decisions were much more comprehensive and show value for theory/practice links. However, despite these di erences between the two studies (e.g., my own pool of participants was greater, list of nominations longer, and survey question open-ended), the core selections of Murphy's respondents mirrored my own. This suggests outcomes beyond http://cnx.org/content/m13677/1.1/ OpenStax-CNX module: m13677 3 the scope of either of the studies, each reinforcing the other and, perhaps, enhancing validity. However, neither Murphy's study nor my own claim to have comprehensively sampled the discipline, opting instead for a purposeful sampling, consistent with a preliminary exploration. This is also the case for Kiewra and Creswell's study. Participant Pool and Study Method Nominated Scholars The many persons forwarded as exceptional by faculty peers may all qualify as scholar-practitioners for whom their academic productivity inextricably links to impact and application within the eld. While most can be described as fulledged scholars who have signi cantly in uenced national trends and policies in addition to local contexts, others were selected for their leadership roles within school districts and the community. However, the majority of exceptional scholars nominated work within the academy in various disciplines, primarily educational administration, in one of two respects: (1) broadly representing educational studies within such areas as business, politics, humanities, and philosophy, or (2) specializing in educational leadership with a focus on school leadership, higher education, or teacher education, and in such areas as supervision, school university collaboration, leadership preparation, policy, and reform." @default.
• W2474836833 created "2016-07-22" @default.
• W2474836833 creator A5071869136 @default.
• W2474836833 date "2006-01-01" @default.
• W2474836833 modified "2023-09-26" @default.
• W2474836833 title "Perceptions within the Discipline: Exceptional Scholarship in Educational Leadership and Administration." @default.
• W2474836833 cites W1556808170 @default.
• W2474836833 cites W1984037027 @default.
• W2474836833 cites W2148013952 @default.
• W2474836833 cites W2726991206 @default.
• W2474836833 cites W605530844 @default.
• W2474836833 hasPublicationYear "2006" @default.
• W2474836833 type Work @default.
• W2474836833 sameAs 2474836833 @default.
• W2474836833 citedByCount "0" @default.
• W2474836833 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W2474836833 hasAuthorship W2474836833A5071869136 @default.
• W2474836833 hasConcept C111366508 @default.
• W2474836833 hasConcept C120912362 @default.
• W2474836833 hasConcept C144024400 @default.
• W2474836833 hasConcept C15744967 @default.
• W2474836833 hasConcept C169760540 @default.
• W2474836833 hasConcept C17744445 @default.
• W2474836833 hasConcept C190248442 @default.
• W2474836833 hasConcept C19417346 @default.
• W2474836833 hasConcept C199539241 @default.
• W2474836833 hasConcept C26760741 @default.
• W2474836833 hasConcept C2778061430 @default.
• W2474836833 hasConcept C2778456998 @default.
• W2474836833 hasConcept C2780765947 @default.
• W2474836833 hasConcept C2994297111 @default.
• W2474836833 hasConcept C2994608149 @default.
• W2474836833 hasConcept C36289849 @default.
• W2474836833 hasConcept C39549134 @default.
• W2474836833 hasConceptScore W2474836833C111366508 @default.
• W2474836833 hasConceptScore W2474836833C120912362 @default.
• W2474836833 hasConceptScore W2474836833C144024400 @default.
• W2474836833 hasConceptScore W2474836833C15744967 @default.
• W2474836833 hasConceptScore W2474836833C169760540 @default.
• W2474836833 hasConceptScore W2474836833C17744445 @default.
• W2474836833 hasConceptScore W2474836833C190248442 @default.
• W2474836833 hasConceptScore W2474836833C19417346 @default.
• W2474836833 hasConceptScore W2474836833C199539241 @default.
• W2474836833 hasConceptScore W2474836833C26760741 @default.
• W2474836833 hasConceptScore W2474836833C2778061430 @default.
• W2474836833 hasConceptScore W2474836833C2778456998 @default.
• W2474836833 hasConceptScore W2474836833C2780765947 @default.
• W2474836833 hasConceptScore W2474836833C2994297111 @default.
• W2474836833 hasConceptScore W2474836833C2994608149 @default.
• W2474836833 hasConceptScore W2474836833C36289849 @default.
• W2474836833 hasConceptScore W2474836833C39549134 @default.
• W2474836833 hasIssue "1" @default.
• W2474836833 hasLocation W24748368331 @default.
• W2474836833 hasOpenAccess W2474836833 @default.
• W2474836833 hasPrimaryLocation W24748368331 @default.
• W2474836833 hasRelatedWork W139133643 @default.
• W2474836833 hasRelatedWork W1566604207 @default.
• W2474836833 hasRelatedWork W1962784355 @default.
• W2474836833 hasRelatedWork W1984025653 @default.
• W2474836833 hasRelatedWork W2033643330 @default.
• W2474836833 hasRelatedWork W2127191707 @default.
• W2474836833 hasRelatedWork W2171499850 @default.
• W2474836833 hasRelatedWork W2208236838 @default.
• W2474836833 hasRelatedWork W2234677628 @default.
• W2474836833 hasRelatedWork W2284643892 @default.
• W2474836833 hasRelatedWork W2338612703 @default.
• W2474836833 hasRelatedWork W2462680948 @default.
• W2474836833 hasRelatedWork W2598464117 @default.
• W2474836833 hasRelatedWork W2728578674 @default.
• W2474836833 hasRelatedWork W2997894986 @default.
• W2474836833 hasRelatedWork W3092766923 @default.
• W2474836833 hasRelatedWork W3190952086 @default.
• W2474836833 hasRelatedWork W36608883 @default.
• W2474836833 hasRelatedWork W766077972 @default.
• W2474836833 hasRelatedWork W1834771590 @default.
• W2474836833 hasVolume "1" @default.
• W2474836833 isParatext "false" @default.
• W2474836833 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W2474836833 magId "2474836833" @default.
• W2474836833 workType "article" @default.