Part II: The Cohort Leadership Development Model: Student Perspectives

Writtent by;

Christine Johnson McPhail, Mary Robinson, and Harriette Scott
Community College Leadership Doctoral Program,
Morgan State University, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.

We argue that the concept of leadership preparation for community college leaders has to be central to the discussion about the leadership pipeline in community colleges. During the fall of 1998, Morgan State University (MSU) joined the ranks of universities offering a doctoral program with a specialization in community college leadership.

The university designed a 3-year leadership preparation program for working professionals based on a ‘‘cohort collaborative learning model.’’ McPhail (2001) reported that the intent of MSU’s program was to design a distinctively different community college leadership doctoral program that would provide opportunities for students to develop competencies to lead the nation’s community colleges. Manyof the instructors in the program are local and national community college leaders, some classes are taught on site at local community colleges, and some classes are even taught on-line. Students at MSU enter and matriculate through the program of study in a cohort.

According to Reynolds and Hebert (1998), the term cohort refers to a group of learners who begin course work together and remain together to complete a degree, certificate or series.

In keeping with the theoretical underpinnings of cohort and collaborative learning, MSU’s cohort model is a structured environment that develops a perspective on leadership that attends to the learner’s thinking and action. The framework provides a structure for students to think about leadership as it relates to their ability to work collaboratively with others within an organization. To gain insight on the effectiveness of this approach to leadership preparation, this study was designed to capture students’ voices about their leadership development experiences. It was also designed to make community college leadership preparation more transparent through an up-close examination of the participants engaged in the leadership development process.

METHODOLOGY

The following is the overall question guiding the study: How do doctoral students as a ‘‘community of learners’’ perceive their experience in a cohort preparation program?


Data Collection and Analytical Approach

We used surveys and focus groups with doctoral students to collect the data for the investigation. The questions on the surveys covered the basic elements of cohort learning. Specifically, we queried students on four distinct features of the cohort experience: (a) collaboration and shared knowledge, (b) learning options and connections to new information, (c) interdependence and interaction, and (d) instruction and facilitation. We also asked students to identify the most and least beneficial aspects of the cohort experience.

Cohort Leadership Development Model

We administered surveys to first and second year doctoral students (N ¼ 50) enrolled in the Community College Leadership Doctoral Program (CCLDP) at MSU. Two focus groups (N ¼ 20) were also conducted. The first focus group was conducted with first and second year graduate students enrolled full-time in the CCLPD. The secondfocus group was doctoral students participating a round table discussion at the Council for the Study of Community Colleges (CSCC)(2007) annual convention in Tampa, Florida. The intent of the focus groups was to draw upon respondents’ attitudes, feelings, beliefs, experiences, and reactions (about the cohort experience) in a way that would not be feasible using other methods. Since the main objective of the study was to examine perceptions of MSU’s doctoral students, the observations from the round-table discussions collected at the 2007 CSCC convention were not included in the findings of the study. In addition to MSU students, the participants in the focus group in Florida were primarily engaged in doctoral studies with traditional program formats. The researchers used the April discussions as a form of triangulation of previous studies and the data collected from MSU students. We used a simple content coding and analysis process to categorize the responses from the participants. Duplicate responses were noted and the summaries for each question were organized sequentially by interview question. The summaries were grouped according to the four major themes of the cohort learning experience used in the survey questions.

MAJOR FINDINGS

Results indicated that although participants (doctoral students) generally reported positive cohort experiences, some students reported that certain factors or characteristics and behaviors of cohort members were not beneficial to the cohort-learning experience.

Cohort Experience

Barnett and Muse (1993) suggested that a cohort represents a collegial support system for improving the teaching and learning process. Significant relationships can develop as a result of the unique membership and mission of the cohort. Saltiel and Russo (2001) suggested that the defined membership and common goal and the structured meetings over time contribute to the definition and formation of a cohort. The leadership challenge, as many leaders are quick to realize, is the acquisition of skills to work with and lead teams in the workplace. McPhail (2001) suggested that the MSU experience would inherentlydevelop a wide-range of leadership skills among the doctoral students. Our analyses examined students’ voices about their experiences in the cohort leadership doctoral program.

Student Perspectives on Collaboration and Shared Knowledge

Considering the cohort model as developing a community of learners, Lawrence (2002) examined how cohort learning groups in higher education create and sustain community. He offers that ‘‘cohorts foster a spirit of cooperation by involving the members in collaborative decision making . . . (and) they recognize that individual success depends on the success of the collective’’ (p. 86). He looked at the cohort as ‘‘co-creating knowledge through collaborative learning and experiential knowing as an outcome of cohort learning’’ (p. 83). Lawrence further noted how these communities develop is important to the learning:

Communities develop over time and with intention . . . members of the community must come to know each other and develop a respect forone another’s strengths, weaknesses, similarities, and differences. When commitment is high and contributions from all members are valued, communities have the potential to co-create knowledge, make effective decisions, and affect change (p. 84).

In this study, we asked students to share their perspectives on their collaboration and shared knowledge derived from the cohort experience. The participant’s answers were revealing:.

• The collaborative learning has made me a better team player.
• The cohort prepares me to work with all team players..
• Other cohort members have expanded their knowledge base.
• We profit from the collective knowledge.
• I use the cohort experience on my job.
• The cohort broadened my ability—it stretched me.
• It enhanced my desire to complete my doctoral studies.
• We share the workload with others.
• I learned to work with all types of people.
• We develop groups for projects but sometimes we lose a group member.
• We learn different information from each other.
• The workload can get heavy.
• Each person in the class brings a different perspective.
• Sometimes it is difficult to get people in the class to sharei nformation.

Reflections on Learning Options and Connections to New Information

The second area that we asked students to share their reflections on concerned the extent to which the cohort experience provided different learning options and connections to new information. Norris and Barnett (1994) indicated that the feeling of community of learners construct in a cohort grouping is described by various terms: (1) security, (2) validation, (3)connectedness, (4) bonding, (5) family tree, (6) fellowship, (7) acceptance, (8) community, (9)close relationships, and (10) spirit of the group. In this way, a cohort group becomes one community of learners.We asked students to respond to this question: How did the cohortprogram provide learning options, and describe how you were afforded opportunities to connect to new types of information? In general, the doctoral students participating in this study reported that the cohort experience provided different learning options in a varietyof ways:

• It inspired me to do scholarly research.
• The cohort increased awareness at many levels of opportunity.
• The cohort expanded my knowledge base.
• The Leadership Institute prior to each fall semester gives an opportunity to hear from national speakers.
• Research workshops identified ways to apply myself.
• I learned research.. The seminars outside of course work were helpful.
• I have dyslexia but the program fits my needs.
• Professor’s reading list was helpful for getting new information.
• The textbooks were relevant to the courses taught.

Student Reflections on Interdependence and Interaction

Since this qualitative research provided an opportunity for us totake a closer look at the relationships between cohort members(within the context of the investigation), the students were asked to reflect on the interdependent and interaction features of the cohort learning experience. Research indicates that both individual and group development are important aspects of cohorts (Chairs, McDonald, Shroyer, Urbanski, & Vertin, 2002; Lawrence, 1997; Norris & Barnett, 1994). Cohort structure should support the personal development of its members within a collaborative, cohesive group environment. Research on cohorts (e.g., Brooks, 1998; Chairs et al., 2002; Lawrence, 1997; Maher, 2001; Norris & Barnett, 1994) reveals that successful cohorts balance the needs of the group with those of the individual members by fostering a sense of belonging, creating an environment in which mutual respect flourishes, supporting risk taking, providing a place for critical reflection and the development of shared understanding, and encouraging and sustaining multiple perspectives. We asked students to share their reflections on the interdependenceand interaction features of their cohort experiences: How doesthe cohort experience foster interdependence and interaction among and between cohort members? In spite of the many challenges that students face in the scramble to engage in work and their doctoral studies, our participants reported that they found the interdependence and interaction aspects of the program to be rewarding and productive:

• Cohort members push each other to greater heights.
• The interaction with others has exposed my weaknesses and now it is hard to work with certain people.
• This program is definitely preparing me for leadership.
• I think the females value my knowledge and judgment.
• We share information about assets and liabilities.
• You can grow professionally.
• I’m more open to opinions by interacting with my cohort.
• I can be assertive.
• My interpersonal skills are enhanced by working with mygroups.
• You have to build your confidence.
• The feedback from cohort members and professors is helpful.
• The professors do not monitor your schedules; you have tomanage your own time and engage in less interaction with otherstudents.

Reflections on Instructional Delivery and Facilitation

Research on learning in cohorts reveals that cohort members tend to have positive and a wide range of feelings about their experiences. Cohort members indicate such benefits as increased development of critical thinking skills (Chairs et al., 2002), greater individual development as a cohort member (Chairs et al., 2002), development of an enhanced knowledge base (Norris & Barnett, 1994), opportunity to examine one’s own knowledge (Tisdell et al., 2004), motivation to learn more (Brooks, 1998), and changes in perspectives on their own and others’ learning (Lawrence, 1997). Norris and Barnett(1994) made this comment about cohorts:

A cohort is more than an administrative arrangement. In fact, ‘‘to view the [cohort] structure merely as a method of course delivery, avehicle for socialization, a convenient scheduling design, or as anupbeat, fashionable ‘in’ approach is to do cohort structure an injustice (p. 34).

Cohorts must be purposefully formed and structured if they are to succeed as environments that foster learning and development. Inreference to the instruction and facilitation aspects of the cohort experience, we asked students the following question: Tell us about instruction and learning facilitation in the cohort program—what were your experiences? From an instructional perspective, the participants shared perspectives about competencies developed and the rewards of learning and growing. Their experiences were exemplifiedby the following reflections:

• Faculty provided insights to help me realign my professional values.
• The critical evaluation by the instructors has helped me to improve my writing.
• We learned to confront and resolve issues.
• My time management has improved.
• I now have the ability to prioritize work and study.
• My professors challenged me to do stellar work.
• I felt challenged to go beyond the normal—and the normal was steep.
• It maximized my knowledge base.
• I use collaborative approaches on my job—and it works for me.

DISCUSSION

Part three of this three part series will be posted on July 21, 2009