Academic Leadership: Fundamental Building Blocks
260
between the multiple stakeholders in teaching and learning in universities today. They
are also the Heads of School/Department and the Pro Vice Chancellors and Vice
Chancellors of the future. Thus, not only is it important to build the capacity of this group
as leaders for the immediate quality improvement of our programs, it is also necessary
for the long term. Preliminary results of research conducted into the role of academic
coordinators at the University of South Australia suggests that ICVF has the potential to
provide guidance to academic coordinators and others who seek to improve the
leadership capability of academic coordinators in an organised and planned way – for
those wishing to manage and plan their own professional development as well as for
those who are responsible for promoting and supporting strategic change through
professional development.
Acknowledgements
Support for this research has been provided by the ALTC an initiative of the Australian
Government Department of Science and Training.
The views expressed in this paper do not necessarily reflect the views of the ALTC.
References
Argyris, C., & Schön, D. (1996). Organizational learning II: Theory, methods and practice.
Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Ash, S. L., & Clayton, P. H. (2004). The articulated learning: An approach to guided reflection and
assessment. Innovative Higher Education, 29(2), 137–154.
Askling, B., & Stensaker, B. (2002). Academic leadership: Prescriptions, practices and
paradoxes. Tertiary Education and Management, 8(2), 113–125.
Booth, S., & Anderberg, E. (2005). Academic development for knowledge capabilities: Learning,
reflecting and developing. Higher Education Research & Development, 24(4), 373–386.
Carrick Institute for Learning Teaching in Higher Education. (2006). Leadership Colloquium
[Report; Electronic version]. Canberra, The Australian Capital Territory: Author.
D'Agostino, F. (2007). Closing the gap in curriculum development leadership [Report]. Brisbane,
Australia: University of Queensland.
Denison, D. R., Hooijberg, R., & Quinn, R. E. (1995). Paradox and performance: Toward a theory
of behavioral complexity in managerial leadership. Organization Science, 6(5), 524–540.
Fisher, K. (2003). The mystifying critical reflection: Defining criteria for assessment. Higher
Education Research & Development, 22(3), 313–325.
Fraser, R., & Mathews, A. (1999). An evaluation of the desirable characteristics of a supervisor.
Australian Universities Review, 42(1), 5–7.
French, J. R. P., Jr., & Raven, B. (1959). The bases of social power. In D. Cartwright (Ed.),
Studies in social power (pp. 150–167). Ann Arbor, MI: Institute for Social Research, The
University of Michigan.
Hendry, G. D., & Dean, S. J. (2002). Accountability, evaluation of teaching and expertise in higher
education. The International Journal for Academic Development, 7(1), 75–82.
Hooijberg, R. (1992). Behavioral complexity and managerial effectiveness: A new perspective on
managerial leadership. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.
Hooijberg, R., & Quinn, R. E. (1992). Behavioral complexity and the development of effective
managers. In R. L. Philips & J. G. Hunt (Eds.), Strategic leadership: A multiorganizational-level
perspective (pp. 161–175). Westport, CT: Quorum Books.
Hoppe, S. L. (2003). Identifying and nurturing potential academic leaders. New Directions for
Higher Education, 2003(124), 3–12.
