Leadership and Equity-Driven Change in Program Review

October 2019

Leadership and Equity-Driven
Change in Program Review

By: Jason A. Keist

The Office of Community College Research and Leadership (OCCRL) was established in 1989 at the University
of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. Our primary mission is to use research and evaluation methods to improve
policies and programs in order to enhance community college education and transition to college for diverse
learners in Illinois and the United States. The Illinois Community College Board (ICCB), along with other state,
federal, and private and not-for-profit organizations, supports projects of this office.
The content in our publications does not necessarily represent the positions or policies of our sponsors or the
University of Illinois. Comments or inquiries about our publications are welcome and should be directed to
[email protected].
This document can be found online at https://occrl.illinois.edu. This publication was prepared pursuant to a
grant from the ICCB (ICCB Grant Number, D5538). The principal investigator of this grant was Dr. Eboni M.
Zamani-Gallaher, who can be reached at [email protected].

Program ReviewIllinois General Acknowledgments

The author of this brief would like to express his gratitude
to the experts from across the state that contributed their
expertise to the Program Review Illinois project, including the
members of the ICCB staff who participated and contributed
in this work. I would also like to thank Dr. Eboni M. Zamani-
Gallaher for her continued leadership and guidance as well
as Sal Nudo and Dr. Marci Rockey for their suggestions and
edits to this report.

Suggested Citation

Keist, J.A. (2019). Leadership and equity-driven change in Program Review. Champaign, IL: Office of
Community College Research and Leadership, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.

i

Introduction

The purpose of this brief is to expand on findings from the publication Advancing Program Review: Evaluating
and Envisioning the Future of Program Review at Illinois Community Colleges (Fox, Thrill, and Keist,
2018), which resulted from a study conducted by the Office of Community College Research and Leadership
(OCCRL), the Illinois Community College Board (ICCB), and participating community colleges in Illinois.
According to ICCB,

The purpose of program review submissions at the statewide level is to support campus-level
planning and decision-making related to: assuring the continuing need and improving the quality
and cost-effectiveness of instructional programs; assessing, improving, and updating programs
on a regular basis; discontinuing programs when there is no longer sufficient demand, quality
cannot be maintained at an acceptable level, or they are no longer cost effective; and to identify
best practices, exemplary innovations, and program issues that need to be addressed at the state-
level by the ICCB.

Focus-group participants discussed the implementation of ICCB’s new evaluation criteria for FY18 in reference
to the evaluation of career and technical (CTE) programs of study. This brief examines leadership and equity-
driven change and how those entities inform the program review process. Additionally, suggestions are given to
assist leaders in the practice of equity-mindedness.

Equity and Equity-Minded Change

When I think about it [equity] in program review, I focus on what do we have the
ability to have control over, to do something about, and at what level?

As the above quote from focus-group participants (Fox, Thrill, and Keist, 2018, p. 9) suggests, efforts to achieve
equity across college programs involves capacity-building and an understanding of macro- and micro-level
factors affecting institutional outcomes. Yet prior to conceptualizing societal and institutional factors, we must
first start with a definition of what equity is and what it is not.

Welton and LaLonde (2013) discuss how equity and equality are often confused or used interchangeably, and
how policies and practices on community college campuses may undercut equity efforts. Educators may laud
nondiscriminatory offerings to all students, but they often lose sight of structural barriers that bar many students
from accessing those services and reaching desired outcomes. In this case, equality offers all students the same
while equity ensures they will receive what they need to succeed academically. This holds especially true for
supporting underrepresented and racially minoritized students. The authors go on to cite Nieto and Bode (2009)
when noting that equity is the central process needed to reach equality of outcome.

Equity as a process is an important conceptualization, for it positions the desired outcome as one that
demands cooperation and intentionality across college stakeholders who use data-informed practices to
remedy programmatic inequities. Fox, Thrill, and Keist (2018) cite from within the literature seven factors
that intimately affect an institution’s ability to proactively implement equity-minded change. Factors such as
data literacy, engagement, strategic investments, and statewide guidance and governance all impact how an
institution uses collected data. Additionally, college leadership (formal and informal) plays a critical role in
creating a culture of evidence that supports efforts to address inequitable outcomes.

ii

Equality offers
all students the
same while equity
ensures they will
receive what they
need to succeed
academically.

iii

The Role of Leadership in Equity

Data-informed leadership provides the necessary foundation of values and skills on which equity-mindedness
can be cultivated, leading to meaningful data that can be collected to assess programs and pathways of study. In
discussing data-informed educational leadership, Copeland, Knapp, & Swinnerton (2009) state, “While they can
be fully knowledgeable of available data when taking action, wise leaders also bring to their work core values
and insights into those aspects of practice for which there is not yet good data, and may never be” (p. 156).
Nonetheless, fostering and sustaining equitable outcomes requires more than data collection and disaggregation.

As one focus-group participant noted, “Looking at equity is great, but the next step should be building in what
you are going to do about it and being very specific about how you’re going to close those gaps” (Fox, Thrill,
& Keist, p. 8-9). Asking what will be done about inequities speaks largely to what Paulo Freire (1970) termed
“critical consciousness.” Freire viewed reflection and action as a cyclical, change-oriented process that held
stakeholders responsible for acting upon the knowledge of which they are aware. In the context of program
review, educational leaders such as college presidents, deans, institutional research staff, faculty, advisors, and
others all play critical roles in planning and reifying equitable student outcomes. Furthermore, approaches to
leadership can either facilitate or stymie equity-driven efforts.

Carolyn M. Carolyn M. Shields (2010) directs us to the relationship between transformative leadership and
socially just learning environments:

Transformative leadership begins with questions of justice and democracy; it critiques
inequitable practices and offers the promise not only of greater individual achievement but of a
better life lived in common with others (p. 559).

Transformative leaders turn a critical lens toward the greater societal factors impinging upon learners’ academic
performance and overall educational success. As previously noted by a focus-group participant, outside factors
may fall outside the purview of a college’s control, but educators on a larger scale must better understand
the impact that poverty, racism, sexism, and classism play in shaping students’ educational histories and
biographies and respond proactively to build sustainable and effective practice models. College leadership that
embodies a transformative approach to a change in the system recognizes and takes into account inequities that
are embedded in institutional-level programs and pathways and acknowledges the ways in which power and
privilege manifest material disparities in higher education and beyond.

Throughout the program review process, leaders can ask questions of college-level processes and practices that
may unintentionally create inequities. Bensimon, Malcolm, et al. (2007, 2016) pose two such questions that
could benefit everyone involved in program review:

1. In what ways are my practices, or the practices of this institution, related to racial inequities in outcomes?
2. In what ways do they underpin the institutional practices enabling or reinforcing racial inequities in

outcomes (p. 25)?

By shifting the onus away from student agency (i.e., meritocratic assumptions) and taking responsibilities for
student outcomes, colleges can proactively craft equity plans that are relevant to their student population as well
as within distinct college contexts and programs of study.

iv

References
Bensimon, E.M.; Malcolm, L; & Loganecker, D. (2007). Confronting equity issues on campus: Implementing
the equity scorecard in theory and practice. Sterling, Virginia: Stylus Publishing LLC.
Copeland, M.A.; Knapp, M.S.; & Swinnerton, J.A. (2009). Principal Leadership, Data, and School
Improvement in T.J. Kowalski & T.J. Lasley II (Ed.), Handbook of data-based decision making in education (p.
156). New York, New York: Routledge.
Fox, H. L.; Thrill, C. R.; & Keist, J. (2018). Advancing program review: Evaluating and envisioning the future
of program review at Illinois community colleges. Champaign, IL: Office of Community College Research and
Leadership, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.
Freire, P. (1972). Pedagogy of the oppressed. New York: Herder and Herder.
Illinois Community College Board (n.d.). Retrieved from Academic affairs and career & technical education,
program review.
Nieto, S.; & Bode, P. (2009). Affirming diversity: The sociopolitical context of multicultural education. New
York, NY: Pearson/Allyn and Bacon.
Welton, A. D.; & La Londe, P. G. (2013). Leadership for college and career pathways.

v