Dissertations and Theses @ UNI

Availability

Open Access Dissertation

Keywords

College department heads--United States; Technical education teachers--Training of--United States;

Abstract

The object of this study was to help future industrial technology department leaders in higher education develop effective planning strategies and prioritize their preparation before they sought leadership positions in industrial technology. Two hundred fifty-four industrial technology department leaders in higher education from all over the United States were asked to respond to a questionnaire. A five point Likert-type scale was used to rate the importance of 58 statements identified from Marshall's (1984) study. One hundred sixty (62.99%) usable responses formed the basis of this study.

Mean values and standard deviations were determined for all the statements. The grand mean was used to identify important statements. The two-tailed t test for independent means was used to determine significant differences identified in the research questions.

Thirty-one of the 58 activity statements had a mean value greater than the grand mean of 3.893. Funding had six important activity statements, followed by personnel, curriculum, and administration with five each, technology/change with four, external relations and recruitment with three each, and department designation without any important activity statement.

It was concluded that there was a significant difference in the perceptions of newer department leaders and more experienced department leaders regarding important activities. Also, use of computers was more important to department leaders with only undergraduate programs, whereas research was more important to department leaders who also had graduate programs. Department leaders in large departments wanted a partnership with industry for curriculum input, whereas department leaders in small departments were more concerned in ensuring that an appropriate range of programs and offerings were available.

Identification of external sources of funding was more important to department leaders in public institutions. Providing leadership in establishing and maintaining program accreditation was important to leaders in predominantly ($>$50%) minority institutions.

Year of Submission

1991

Degree Name

Doctor of Industrial Technology

Department

Department of Industrial Technology

First Advisor

John T. Fecik (Advisor)

Second Advisor

Rex W. Pershing (Co-Advisor)

Date Original

8-1991

Object Description

1 PDF file (vi, 111 pages)

Language

en

File Format

application/pdf

Download

Comments?

Share

COinS