Howard, Christopher

Senior, Carl

Senior, Rowena

English

PubMed

Carl Senior

Christopher Howard

Rowena Senior

Frontiers - Publisher Connector

OPINION ARTICLE
published: 29 April 2014
doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00377
The future and the female academic leader: advancing
student engagement
Carl Senior1*, Christopher Howard2 and Rowena Senior3
1 School of Life and Health Sciences, Aston University, Aston Triangle, Birmingham, UK
2 School of Psychology, Derby University, Derby, UK
3 Centre for Learning, Innovation and Professional Practice, Aston University, Birmingham, UK
*Correspondence: c.senior@aston.ac.uk
Edited by:
Jason W. Osborne, University of Louisville, USA
Reviewed by:
Beth E. Bukoski, University of Louisville, USA
Keywords: academic leadership, email, technology, student engagement, student retention
The ever-changing face of academic lead-
ership demands constant consideration
and as such there is clearly much inter-
est within the community at large to
examine this most important of academic
roles. To be truly effective the academic
leader must be a unique animal who goes
beyond merely ensuring that departmen-
tal budgets are aligned at the end of
the fiscal year but use an ever evolving
technological environment to lead in all
aspects of teaching, research as well as
administrative duties in support of their
respective department. In this environ-
ment leaders not only need to be aware
of, but demonstrate proficiency, in the
use of MOOCs, cloud based computing
and even efficient use of email software
(Huang, 2001; Ruby, 2013). Such a task
may seem to be quite unnerving to the
new entrants to the field—this is espe-
cially relevant for the female academic
who may not readily adopt such emerg-
ing technologies (Venkatesh and Morris,
2000). However, in a sector where almost
all new entrants expect to achieve a leader-
ship position at some point it is important
to highlight the current orthodoxy with
regards to achieving such a position and
any possible mediating role that technol-
ogy may play. Current research endeav-
ors that highlight the moderating effects
of gender in achieving leadership posi-
tions within academia are discussed here.
It is argued that such research takes a lim-
ited perspective on both the roles required
with academia but also the unique and
very important contributions that female
leaders can provide to students. Here,
it is clear that the unique collegial and
social manner of a female style of lead-
ership that is often seen with managers
in industry is an ideal trait for leadership
within academia especially with regards to
the most important aspect of academia,
and often the most overlooked, and that
is the student (Eagly and Karau, 1991).
Student engagement is a key determinant
for improving student motivation, how
students approach learning and academic
success (Lazaros and Davidson, 2013). It
is argued here that technology, particularly
the use of email, can play an important
role in providing students with access to
the unique skill set of certain academic
leaders.
Probably the largest examination of the
effects of gender on academic leadership
is seen with the recent work by Parker
andWelch (2013). Here, an extensive anal-
ysis of a large scale dataset was carried
out to examine how an individual’s pro-
fessional network, an individual’s scien-
tific ability or the gender of an individual
independently predicted academic leader-
ship at the level of the research center,
the level of the university administrator or
even at the position of overarching lead-
ership at the level of the specific scientific
discipline (Parker and Welch, 2013). This
study is indeed a comprehensive analy-
sis and, while not without its limitations,
revealed that scientific productivity and
reputation predicted leadership roles at the
center level but this was moderated by
gender. The study also showed a paucity
of female academics at the research cen-
ter and administrative leadership level but
found that females held significantly more
leadership positions at the wider disci-
pline level. These are the positions that
are generally high profile and serve to act
as inspirational role models for students
who wish to enter that particular field.
However, even though Parker and Welch
(2013) was clearly an important study they
did not fully address what could be con-
sidered the most important aspect of aca-
demic leadership and that is understand-
ing how interactions between the lead-
ers of academic institutions and the stu-
dent body can improve the entire learning
environment (Smith and Hughey, 2006).
Here, it is argued that use of technol-
ogy can help to ensure that the students
fully interact with female leaders within
academia and benefit from their style of
leadership.
There is no doubt that engaging with
students at a social level enhances their
overall experience during their course of
study and even predicts their actual per-
formance on assessments (Tinto, 1975;
Kuh, 1993; Koljatic and Kuh, 2001; Smith
et al., 2005). Indeed, we have previ-
ously found that undergraduate students
consider the quality of their engage-
ment with staff to be the single most
important factor in driving their engage-
ment with their programme of study
(Towl and Senior, 2010). However, while
it is abundantly clear that students do
want to have more and more immedi-
acy with their teachers it is not clear
if they consider teachers who are disci-
pline leaders as more effective in meeting
this requirement.
www.frontiersin.org April 2014 | Volume 5 | Article 377 | 1
Senior et al. Advancing student engagement
A female leadership style is typ-
ically exemplified by a collegial,
friendly and democratic style of social
interaction (Bartol, 1974; Eagly and Carli,
2003)1. This is the very style of social lead-
ership that students expect. Yet there
is seems to be a misalignment occur-
ring between the positioning of leaders
to roles where they are likely to be the
most effective. As noted above female aca-
demics are less likely to find themselves
in positions of leadership at the research
center or administrative level. However,
these are the very roles that are likely to
involve interaction with students, which
is crucial as students who feel they have
a say in their learning or have oppor-
tunity to participate in debate, which
reflects the democratic approach often
employed by female academic leaders,
drives higher levels of student engagement
(Exeter et al., 2010). This is problematic
as the current orthodoxy in academia mis-
aligns the effective leadership abilities of
female style of leadership. However, it
is with the judicious use of technology
to interact with students that academic
leaders can indeed play a pivotal role
with enhancing the student learning
experience.
Email, as a means of communica-
tion, is now ubiquitous and it is fair
to say that all students enrolling on a
programme of higher education are pro-
vided with an email account and access
to computing facilities by which to use
it (Huang, 2001). However, and per-
haps more importantly, email exchanges
between student and teacher can actu-
ally serve a more social role that facili-
tates the immediacy of staff (Bloch, 2002).
Such email driven immediacy is consid-
ered in a more positive light by the stu-
dent cohort and also predicts improve-
ment in subsequent assessments (Sheer
and Fung, 2007). While the prevalence of
email exchange between student and staff
member is considered in a positive light
by the student cohort such perceptions
are always in the service of the “nurtur-
ing, open, nonthreatening, and respect-
ful” relationships with staff members
1It is worth noting that such a style of leadership is
not gender specific and can be demonstrated by both
male and female leaders (See Fitzgerald, 2014 for an
excellent discussion on this area).
(Anderson and Carta-Falsa, 2002, p. 134).
Students simply need to feel that they
are respected members of the learn-
ing community before they start to
develop an independent approach to their
learning.
Such community affiliation can be
readily developed by the friendly and
collegial approach that is diagnostic of
a female style leadership. Indeed, these
relationship-based behaviors are often
considered to be at the very core of
effective leadership (Lowe et al., 1996;
Bommer et al., 2004). As female aca-
demics tend to be discipline level leaders,
a position that is traditionally removed
from much student facing contact, it
would seem that email interaction may
be an effective means to ensure that stu-
dents benefit from the unique collegiality
of certain discipline leaders and develop
stronger ties to the immediate learning
community. The students will get ready
access to those leaders who may play an
inspirational role model in helping them
engage with their studies and shaping
their long-term aspirations. The develop-
ment of such email assisted immediacy
should in turn start to see a shift away
from the current model of management
that has evolved in academia where large
groups of students end up having little
contact with the discipline lead (Hubel,
2009). In today’s academic environment,
with the ever-growing list of demands
placed on its leaders, it is intriguing to
suggest that that by merely using e-mail
we may see a return to the model of
practice within academia where experi-
ence is shared universally and not com-
municated in a predominantly hierarchical
fashion.
REFERENCES
Anderson, L., and Carta-Falsa, J. (2002). Factors
that make the faculty and student relation-
ships effective. Coll. Teach. 50, 134–138. doi:
10.1080/87567550209595894
Bartol, K. (1974). Male versus female leaders: the
effect of leader need for dominance on follower
satisfaction. Acad. Manag. J. 17, 225–233. doi:
10.2307/254976
Bloch, J. (2002). Student/Teacher interaction via
email: the social context of internet discourse.
J. Sec. Lang.Writ. 11, 117–134. doi: 10.1016/S1060-
3743(02)00064-4
Bommer, W., Rubin, R., and Baldwin, T. (2004).
Setting the stage for effective leadership:
antecedents of transformational leadership
behavior. Leader. Q. 15, 195–210. doi:
10.1016/j.leaqua.2004.02.012
Eagly, A., and Carli, L. (2003). The female leader-
ship advantage: an evaluation of the evidence.
Leader. Q. 14, 807–834. doi: 10.1016/j.leaqua.
2003.09.004
Eagly, A., and Karau, S. (1991). Gender and the
emergence of leaders: a meta-analysis. J. Personal.
Soc. Psychol, 60, 685–710. doi: 10.1037/0022-
3514.60.5.685
Exeter, J., Ameratunga, S., Ratima, M., Morton, S.,
Dickson, M., Hsu, D., et al. (2010). Student
engagement in very large classes: the teachers’
perspective. Stud. High. Edu. 35, 761–775. doi:
10.1080/03075070903545058
Fitzgerald, T. (2014). Women Leaders in Higher
Education: Shattering the myths. London:
Routledge.
Huang, A. (2001). Innovative use of email for
Teaching. Comm. ACM, 44, 29–32. doi:
10.1145/384150.384157
Hubel, D. (2009). The way biomedial research is
organised has dramatically changed over the past
half century: are the changes for the better ?
Neuron 64, 161–163. doi: 10.1016/j.neuron.2009.
09.022
Koljatic, M., and Kuh, G. (2001). A longitudi-
nal assessment of college student engagement
in good practices in undergraduate education.
High. Educ. 43, 351–371. doi: 10.1023/A:101799
3113390
Kuh, G. (1993). In their own words: what students
learn outside the classroom. Am. Educ, Res. J. 30,
277–304. doi: 10.3102/00028312030002277
Lazaros, E. J., and Davidson, C. J. (2013). Improving
student engagement. Contin. J. Arts Human. 5,
55–59. doi: 10.1017/S1472669612000680
Lowe, K., Kroeck, K., and Sivasubramaniam, N.
(1996). Effectiveness correlates of transforma-
tional and transactional leadership: a meta-
analytic review. Leader. Q. 7, 385–425. doi:
10.1016/S1048-9843(96)90027-2
Parker, M., and Welch, E. (2013). Professional net-
works, science ability, and gender determinants
of three types of leadership in academic science
and enegineering. Leader. Q. 24, 332–348. doi:
10.1016/j.leaqua.2013.01.001
Ruby, A. (2013). Massive, Open, Online Appraisals.
Times Higher Education. Available online at:
http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/comment/
opinion/massive-open-onlineappraisals/2003678.
article
Sheer, V., and Fung, T. (2007). Can email commu-
nication enhance Professor -Student Relationships
and the student evaluation of the Professor? Some
Empirical Evidence. J. Educ. Comput. Res. 37,
289–306. doi: 10.2190/EC.37.3.d
Smith, B., and Hughey, A. (2006). Leadership
in higher education - its evolution and
potential: a unique role facing critical chal-
lenges. Indus. High. Educ. 20, 157–163. doi:
10.5367/000000006777690972
Smith, K., Sheppard, S., Johnson, D., and Johnson,
R. (2005). Pedagogies of engagment: classroom
based practices. J. Eng. Educ. 94, 87–101. doi:
10.1002/j.2168-9830.2005.tb00831.x
Tinto, V. (1975). Dropout from higher education:
a theoretical synthesis of recent research. Rev.
Frontiers in Psychology | Educational Psychology April 2014 | Volume 5 | Article 377 | 2
Senior et al. Advancing student engagement
Educ. Res. 45, 89–125. doi: 10.3102/0034654304
5001089
Towl, M., and Senior, C. (2010). Undergraduate
research training and graduate recruit-
ment. Educ. Train. 52, 292–303. doi:
10.1108/00400911011050963
Venkatesh, V., and Morris, M. (2000). Why don’t
men ever stop to ask for Directions? Gender,
social influence and their role in technology
acceptance and Behaviour. MIS Q. 24, 115–139.
doi: 10.2307/3250981
Conflict of Interest Statement: The authors declare
that the research was conducted in the absence of any
commercial or financial relationships that could be
construed as a potential conflict of interest.
Received: 11 January 2014; accepted: 10 April 2014;
published online: 29 April 2014.
Citation: Senior C, Howard C and Senior R (2014) The
future and the female academic leader: advancing stu-
dent engagement. Front. Psychol. 5:377. doi: 10.3389/
fpsyg.2014.00377
This article was submitted to Educational Psychology, a
section of the journal Frontiers in Psychology.
Copyright © 2014 Senior, Howard and Senior. This is
an open-access article distributed under the terms of the
Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The
use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is per-
mitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are
credited and that the original publication in this journal
is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice.
No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which
does not comply with these terms.
www.frontiersin.org April 2014 | Volume 5 | Article 377 | 3


The future and the female academic leader: advancing student engagement

Crossref

Frontiers in Psychology

Aston Publications Explorer

OPINION ARTICLEpublished: 29 April 2014doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00377The future and the female academic leader: advancingstudent engagementCarl Senior1*, Christopher Howard2 and Rowena Senior31 School of Life and Health Sciences, Aston University, Aston Triangle, Birmingham, UK2 School of Psychology, Derby University, Derby, UK3 Centre for Learning, Innovation and Professional Practice, Aston University, Birmingham, UK*Correspondence: c.senior@aston.ac.ukEdited by:Jason W. Osborne, University of Louisville, USAReviewed by:Beth E. Bukoski, University of Louisville, USAKeywords: academic leadership, email, technology, student engagement, student retentionThe ever-changing face of academic lead-ership demands constant considerationand as such there is clearly much inter-est within the community at large toexamine this most important of academicroles. To be truly effective the academicleader must be a unique animal who goesbeyond merely ensuring that departmen-tal budgets are aligned at the end ofthe fiscal year but use an ever evolvingtechnological environment to lead in allaspects of teaching, research as well asadministrative duties in support of theirrespective department. In this environ-ment leaders not only need to be awareof, but demonstrate proficiency, in theuse of MOOCs, cloud based computingand even efficient use of email software(Huang, 2001; Ruby, 2013). Such a taskmay seem to be quite unnerving to thenew entrants to the field—this is espe-cially relevant for the female academicwho may not readily adopt such emerg-ing technologies (Venkatesh and Morris,2000). However, in a sector where almostall new entrants expect to achieve a leader-ship position at some point it is importantto highlight the current orthodoxy withregards to achieving such a position andany possible mediating role that technol-ogy may play. Current research endeav-ors that highlight the moderating effectsof gender in achieving leadership posi-tions within academia are discussed here.It is argued that such research takes a lim-ited perspective on both the roles requiredwith academia but also the unique andvery important contributions that femaleleaders can provide to students. Here,it is clear that the unique collegial andsocial manner of a female style of lead-ership that is often seen with managersin industry is an ideal trait for leadershipwithin academia especially with regards tothe most important aspect of academia,and often the most overlooked, and thatis the student (Eagly and Karau, 1991).Student engagement is a key determinantfor improving student motivation, howstudents approach learning and academicsuccess (Lazaros and Davidson, 2013). Itis argued here that technology, particularlythe use of email, can play an importantrole in providing students with access tothe unique skill set of certain academicleaders.Probably the largest examination of theeffects of gender on academic leadershipis seen with the recent work by ParkerandWelch (2013). Here, an extensive anal-ysis of a large scale dataset was carriedout to examine how an individual’s pro-fessional network, an individual’s scien-tific ability or the gender of an individualindependently predicted academic leader-ship at the level of the research center,the level of the university administrator oreven at the position of overarching lead-ership at the level of the specific scientificdiscipline (Parker and Welch, 2013). Thisstudy is indeed a comprehensive analy-sis and, while not without its limitations,revealed that scientific productivity andreputation predicted leadership roles at thecenter level but this was moderated bygender. The study also showed a paucityof female academics at the research cen-ter and administrative leadership level butfound that females held significantly moreleadership positions at the wider disci-pline level. These are the positions thatare generally high profile and serve to actas inspirational role models for studentswho wish to enter that particular field.However, even though Parker and Welch(2013) was clearly an important study theydid not fully address what could be con-sidered the most important aspect of aca-demic leadership and that is understand-ing how interactions between the lead-ers of academic institutions and the stu-dent body can improve the entire learningenvironment (Smith and Hughey, 2006).Here, it is argued that use of technol-ogy can help to ensure that the studentsfully interact with female leaders withinacademia and benefit from their style ofleadership.There is no doubt that engaging withstudents at a social level enhances theiroverall experience during their course ofstudy and even predicts their actual per-formance on assessments (Tinto, 1975;Kuh, 1993; Koljatic and Kuh, 2001; Smithet al., 2005). Indeed, we have previ-ously found that undergraduate studentsconsider the quality of their engage-ment with staff to be the single mostimportant factor in driving their engage-ment with their programme of study(Towl and Senior, 2010). However, whileit is abundantly clear that students dowant to have more and more immedi-acy with their teachers it is not clearif they consider teachers who are disci-pline leaders as more effective in meetingthis requirement.www.frontiersin.org April 2014 | Volume 5 | Article 377 | 1Senior et al. Advancing student engagementA female leadership style is typ-ically exemplified by a collegial,friendly and democratic style of socialinteraction (Bartol, 1974; Eagly and Carli,2003)1. This is the very style of social lead-ership that students expect. Yet thereis seems to be a misalignment occur-ring between the positioning of leadersto roles where they are likely to be themost effective. As noted above female aca-demics are less likely to find themselvesin positions of leadership at the researchcenter or administrative level. However,these are the very roles that are likely toinvolve interaction with students, whichis crucial as students who feel they havea say in their learning or have oppor-tunity to participate in debate, whichreflects the democratic approach oftenemployed by female academic leaders,drives higher levels of student engagement(Exeter et al., 2010). This is problematicas the current orthodoxy in academia mis-aligns the effective leadership abilities offemale style of leadership. However, itis with the judicious use of technologyto interact with students that academicleaders can indeed play a pivotal rolewith enhancing the student learningexperience.Email, as a means of communica-tion, is now ubiquitous and it is fairto say that all students enrolling on aprogramme of higher education are pro-vided with an email account and accessto computing facilities by which to useit (Huang, 2001). However, and per-haps more importantly, email exchangesbetween student and teacher can actu-ally serve a more social role that facili-tates the immediacy of staff (Bloch, 2002).Such email driven immediacy is consid-ered in a more positive light by the stu-dent cohort and also predicts improve-ment in subsequent assessments (Sheerand Fung, 2007). While the prevalence ofemail exchange between student and staffmember is considered in a positive lightby the student cohort such perceptionsare always in the service of the “nurtur-ing, open, nonthreatening, and respect-ful” relationships with staff members1It is worth noting that such a style of leadership isnot gender specific and can be demonstrated by bothmale and female leaders (See Fitzgerald, 2014 for anexcellent discussion on this area).(Anderson and Carta-Falsa, 2002, p. 134).Students simply need to feel that theyare respected members of the learn-ing community before they start todevelop an independent approach to theirlearning.Such community affiliation can bereadily developed by the friendly andcollegial approach that is diagnostic ofa female style leadership. Indeed, theserelationship-based behaviors are oftenconsidered to be at the very core ofeffective leadership (Lowe et al., 1996;Bommer et al., 2004). As female aca-demics tend to be discipline level leaders,a position that is traditionally removedfrom much student facing contact, itwould seem that email interaction maybe an effective means to ensure that stu-dents benefit from the unique collegialityof certain discipline leaders and developstronger ties to the immediate learningcommunity. The students will get readyaccess to those leaders who may play aninspirational role model in helping themengage with their studies and shapingtheir long-term aspirations. The develop-ment of such email assisted immediacyshould in turn start to see a shift awayfrom the current model of managementthat has evolved in academia where largegroups of students end up having littlecontact with the discipline lead (Hubel,2009). In today’s academic environment,with the ever-growing list of demandsplaced on its leaders, it is intriguing tosuggest that that by merely using e-mailwe may see a return to the model ofpractice within academia where experi-ence is shared universally and not com-municated in a predominantly hierarchicalfashion.REFERENCESAnderson, L., and Carta-Falsa, J. (2002). Factorsthat make the faculty and student relation-ships effective. Coll. Teach. 50, 134–138. doi:10.1080/87567550209595894Bartol, K. (1974). Male versus female leaders: theeffect of leader need for dominance on followersatisfaction. Acad. Manag. J. 17, 225–233. doi:10.2307/254976Bloch, J. (2002). Student/Teacher interaction viaemail: the social context of internet discourse.J. Sec. Lang.Writ. 11, 117–134. doi: 10.1016/S1060-3743(02)00064-4Bommer, W., Rubin, R., and Baldwin, T. (2004).Setting the stage for effective leadership:antecedents of transformational leadershipbehavior. Leader. Q. 15, 195–210. doi:10.1016/j.leaqua.2004.02.012Eagly, A., and Carli, L. (2003). The female leader-ship advantage: an evaluation of the evidence.Leader. Q. 14, 807–834. doi: 10.1016/j.leaqua.2003.09.004Eagly, A., and Karau, S. (1991). Gender and theemergence of leaders: a meta-analysis. J. Personal.Soc. Psychol, 60, 685–710. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.60.5.685Exeter, J., Ameratunga, S., Ratima, M., Morton, S.,Dickson, M., Hsu, D., et al. (2010). Studentengagement in very large classes: the teachers’perspective. Stud. High. Edu. 35, 761–775. doi:10.1080/03075070903545058Fitzgerald, T. (2014). Women Leaders in HigherEducation: Shattering the myths. London:Routledge.Huang, A. (2001). Innovative use of email forTeaching. Comm. ACM, 44, 29–32. doi:10.1145/384150.384157Hubel, D. (2009). The way biomedial research isorganised has dramatically changed over the pasthalf century: are the changes for the better ?Neuron 64, 161–163. doi: 10.1016/j.neuron.2009.09.022Koljatic, M., and Kuh, G. (2001). A longitudi-nal assessment of college student engagementin good practices in undergraduate education.High. Educ. 43, 351–371. doi: 10.1023/A:1017993113390Kuh, G. (1993). In their own words: what studentslearn outside the classroom. Am. Educ, Res. J. 30,277–304. doi: 10.3102/00028312030002277Lazaros, E. J., and Davidson, C. J. (2013). Improvingstudent engagement. Contin. J. Arts Human. 5,55–59. doi: 10.1017/S1472669612000680Lowe, K., Kroeck, K., and Sivasubramaniam, N.(1996). Effectiveness correlates of transforma-tional and transactional leadership: a meta-analytic review. Leader. Q. 7, 385–425. doi:10.1016/S1048-9843(96)90027-2Parker, M., and Welch, E. (2013). Professional net-works, science ability, and gender determinantsof three types of leadership in academic scienceand enegineering. Leader. Q. 24, 332–348. doi:10.1016/j.leaqua.2013.01.001Ruby, A. (2013). Massive, Open, Online Appraisals.Times Higher Education. Available online at:http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/comment/opinion/massive-open-onlineappraisals/2003678.articleSheer, V., and Fung, T. (2007). Can email commu-nication enhance Professor -Student Relationshipsand the student evaluation of the Professor? SomeEmpirical Evidence. J. Educ. Comput. Res. 37,289–306. doi: 10.2190/EC.37.3.dSmith, B., and Hughey, A. (2006). Leadershipin higher education - its evolution andpotential: a unique role facing critical chal-lenges. Indus. High. Educ. 20, 157–163. doi:10.5367/000000006777690972Smith, K., Sheppard, S., Johnson, D., and Johnson,R. (2005). Pedagogies of engagment: classroombased practices. J. Eng. Educ. 94, 87–101. doi:10.1002/j.2168-9830.2005.tb00831.xTinto, V. (1975). Dropout from higher education:a theoretical synthesis of recent research. Rev.Frontiers in Psychology | Educational Psychology April 2014 | Volume 5 | Article 377 | 2Senior et al. Advancing student engagementEduc. Res. 45, 89–125. doi: 10.3102/00346543045001089Towl, M., and Senior, C. (2010). Undergraduateresearch training and graduate recruit-ment. Educ. Train. 52, 292–303. doi:10.1108/00400911011050963Venkatesh, V., and Morris, M. (2000). Why don’tmen ever stop to ask for Directions? Gender,social influence and their role in technologyacceptance and Behaviour. MIS Q. 24, 115–139.doi: 10.2307/3250981Conflict of Interest Statement: The authors declarethat the research was conducted in the absence of anycommercial or financial relationships that could beconstrued as a potential conflict of interest.Received: 11 January 2014; accepted: 10 April 2014;published online: 29 April 2014.Citation: Senior C, Howard C and Senior R (2014) Thefuture and the female academic leader: advancing stu-dent engagement. Front. Psychol. 5:377. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00377This article was submitted to Educational Psychology, asection of the journal Frontiers in Psychology.Copyright © 2014 Senior, Howard and Senior. This isan open-access article distributed under the terms of theCreative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). Theuse, distribution or reproduction in other forums is per-mitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor arecredited and that the original publication in this journalis cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice.No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted whichdoes not comply with these terms.www.frontiersin.org April 2014 | Volume 5 | Article 377 | 3

The future and the female academic leader:advancing student engagement

Carl eSenior

Chris eHoward

Rowena eSenior

Directory of Open Access Journals

The Future and the Female Academic Leader: Advancing Student Engagement

http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00377

The future and the female academic leader:advancing student engagement

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Frontiers - Publisher Connector

Crossref

Frontiers - Publisher Connector

Aston Publications Explorer

Directory of Open Access Journals