Training Higher Education Policy Makers and Leaders: A Graduate Program Perspective (review)

Training Higher Education Policy Makers and Leaders: A Graduate Program Perspective offers various scholars' perspectives on a wide range of higher education programs issues. An ongoing challenge for higher education programs is a lack of agreement on a common knowledge base. In her chapter evaluating the development of higher education as a specialized field, Dianne Wright notes that, although higher education has made great progress as a specialized field, there is still a "limited amount of research-based teaching materials in higher education" (p. 23) and "no commonly accepted knowledge base" (p. 24). She proposes a three-dimensional framework and specific competencies, performance indicators, and assessments that could be used to begin developing a "formally recognized knowledge base" in higher education (p. 32). She urges instructional leaders to expand her proposed models and collectively work toward developing "program standards, or at [a] minimum, 'best practice' program guide-lines" (p. 33).

Jennifer Miles, in her chapter about student affairs programs, discusses how these programs use the Council for the Advancement of Higher Education Standards (CAS) as a framework to help students develop key competencies to become effective student affairs professionals. Marilyn Amey's comprehensive review of the growth and development of community college leadership programs also illustrates the benefits of collaboration between the American Association of Community and Junior Colleges and the Kellogg Foundation in developing effective programs to prepare future community college leaders. Perhaps student affairs programs that have used CAS standards or the collaboration employed by community college programs could serve as models for developing standards in higher education programs.

Other chapters focus on program structures, curriculum, and resources. Michael Harris describes using program websites to identify program structures, areas of specialization, degree options, and the number of program faculty members. To determine the current status of the core curriculum, Nathaniel Bray explains how he used program websites to determine that most programs require three or four courses as the core curriculum, usually history, organization, and administration; student development/affairs; and multiculturalism/ foundation or philosophy.

Marybelle Keim describes using the ASHE directory of higher education graduate programs to solicit faculty's perceptions of exemplary higher education programs and their selection rationale. By emailing surveys to the top eight programs, Keim found that the exemplary programs (a) included faculty members with national reputations, students, and graduates who became leaders in the field, (b) formed intentional learning communities, and (c) offered well-balanced, research-based curricula.

These authors used program websites listed on the ASHE Higher Education Program Directory to collect data on higher education programs. The frequent use of this resource indicates the importance of maintaining an accurate directory. ASHE and CAHEP intend to revise the format of the current directory into a database format that may be even more useful. In addition, the authors note the challenges of studying higher education programs from websites: Information is not always updated and key information about program specifics often cannot be retrieved. These chapters are informative but perhaps employing more qualitative approaches to the study of higher education programs could provide greater insights into program specifics.

I was pleased that three chapters identified innovative program delivery modes. Brian Bourke described how cohort graduate programs can foster learning communities, which are becoming increasingly important as more students enroll part-time. Nataliya Ivankova and Sheldon Stick's case study of the University of Nebraska-Lincoln's development and implementation of its online program provides keen insights and advice for programs that may be considering online program delivery. Ashley Tull explains the benefits of higher education programs that offer graduate certificates as a format and delivery method to help both new and seasoned professionals develop specific skills and competencies in the changing environment of higher education. These chapters provide useful information for those in charge of programs who are researching and developing new delivery strategies.

The text also addresses...