Shane Hoon

It can be debated as to whether higher education as a culture and industry has become “locked-in” to its systems and processes; but what is less likely to be argued is that the underlying educational mission of higher education is to lead and advance through research and education the future of our society. We have begun to critically ask what academic institutions should be doing to address these current social challenges and who should be held accountable for not only asking these questions, but also making these impactful decisions. Understanding how academic leadership adapts and innovates in a changing societal environment and with fluctuating industry needs is important in order for both graduates and graduate programs to stay relevant and competitive. Nevertheless, as we modify our systems and processes, we need to continue to evaluate our leadership and their successes and failures, so as to learn from them moving forward. We also need to recognize how graduate education is evolving through these large and small scale changes, and what does this mean to our purpose as leaders, faculty, and staff. Identifying value and purpose should be at the core of our educational mission and influential in our curriculum development. Regardless of the role or title, an overall review of the organizational structure may led to a better understanding as to how academic roles, and in particular leadership positions, are assessed and justified both within academic culture and outside of the industry.
There are still a number of questions that have to be asked related to this topic, some that this paper has alluded to and others that this paper has not address but should be explore in future research. Some of those questions including: How do we currently measure graduate school success? Can graduate programs develop a system of longitudinal learning for their graduates and alumni? How can we add value for graduates, to be maintained through an alumni community network? How can academic administration better create this value and establish these partnerships with the professional world? What is the direction and future goal/purpose of graduate education and who is its audience?
While all of these questions have their place and deserve their time to be discussed, we circle back to the main focus of this paper, that being the position and responsibilities of leadership in graduate education and how these roles are appointed. Regardless of the responsibilities, while these individuals might have the academic, scholarly and research background, many academic leaders come in lacking the appropriate knowledge, skills, and competencies to manage and lead and administer larger program visions and responsibilities. How they gain this aptitude seems to vary, leader-by-leader and experience-by-experience. Yet, it begs the question, why can a model not be designed to standardize this process in order to ensure that we are not only identifying leaders with strong academic credentials but also individuals that have vision, passion, progressiveness, and can relate this to the institutional identity and overall mission.
I recognize that this is not a question that I can answer, but the goal here is more to explore and shed light on the question moving forward. Ultimately, this is a long process that is not, and cannot, be answered quickly. Simply substituting these leadership roles will not solve the larger challenges that graduate education faces, though it could be a starting point. There is a cultural change that needs to take place in order for longitudinal and sustainable goals, innovation, and development to occur within graduate education. What is promising however, is the growing recognition that the landscape of graduate education and education in general is shifting. There are new challenges on the horizon, some present and some predicted. Given the research and the qualitative responses from many of those in positions of power and leadership, the seeds of change lie in academic leadership. We need these inspiring, innovative, and open-minded, interdisciplinary leaders to make decisions and guide graduate education forward in the 21st century.