effectiveness of the ignition leadership program

Running Head: Effectiveness of the Ignition Leadership Program 1

Effectiveness of the Ignition Leadership Program at a

Community High School

Gerald Havens

October 16, 2016

Presented to the Gainey School of Business

Spring Arbor University

In Partial Fulfillment of the

Requirements for the Degree of

Masters of Business Administration

Ignition Leadership Program 2

Acknowledgment (optional)

I would like to thank all my instructors at Spring Arbor University who guided me with

patience and understanding through this Living Case Study project. I would especially link to

thank Dr. James Loughran for his guidance and understanding with my many email and phone

calls answering all my questions and reassuring me when I had doubts. I would also like to

thank all my Cohorts both on campus and online, who have provided me with inspirations and

insights that I have never considered before.

Thank you all!


Abstract

This study will evaluate of the Ignition Leadership Program at a small community high

school in the Midwest. What affect does the program have to develop student leaders and

preparing them for leadership roles after high school; How does the ILP have on Grade Point

Averages (GPA)? Do parents and see leadership traits in student leaders outside of school?

Chesnut, and Tran-Johnson, (2013) conducted research on the effectiveness of the Student

Leadership Development Series (SLDS) enrolled at Drake University in Des Moines, Iowa.

Pharmacy students found students who were able to identify their leadership styles, problem-

solving, overcoming various barriers, building relationships and the opportunity to put their

knowledge, and leadership skills into practice were the strengths of the program. Continuing,

they found students felt they did not learn to mentor other students effectively through the SLDS

although, the research did indicate that mentoring did occur to some extent with since most of

the SLDS participants indicated previous students who participated in the program encouraged

them to join the program, (p. 6).


Table of Contents

Cover Page..............................................................................................................................1

Acknowledgments...................................................................................................................2

Abstract...................................................................................................................................3

Table of Contents....................................................................................................................4

List of Figures and Tables.......................................................................................................8

Host Organization......................................................................................................10

Research Problem......................................................................................................11

Research Question.....................................................................................................12

Evaluation of Ignition Leadership Program...............................................................12

Purpose and Benefits..................................................................................................13

Research Design, Methodology, and Procedures......................................................16

Participants.................................................................................................................16

Sampling Techniques.................................................................................................17

Potential Risks...........................................................................................................19

Use of Deception........................................................................................................19

Ethical Considerations...............................................................................................20

Thesis Structure.........................................................................................................20

Theoretical/Conceptual Framework...........................................................................21

Ethical Considerations...............................................................................................23

Summary....................................................................................................................23

Concept and Hypothesis............................................................................................24

Research Design, Methodology, and Procedures......................................................25


Variables....................................................................................................................26

Demographics............................................................................................................27

Participants and Population........................................................................................29

Grade Point Averages (GPAs)...................................................................................29

Email Distribution......................................................................................................30

Response Rate............................................................................................................31

Quantitative Data Collection Process........................................................................32

Data Analysis and Tools............................................................................................33

Qualitative Survey Data.............................................................................................33

Secondary Data Analysis...........................................................................................34

Ethical considerations................................................................................................34

Summary....................................................................................................................34

Qualitative Survey.....................................................................................................41

Validity of Findings...................................................................................................43

Summary....................................................................................................................44

Discussion..................................................................................................................42

Limitations.................................................................................................................44

Recommendations for Future Research.....................................................................45

Evaluating Leadership Programs...............................................................................46

School District Sponsored Research..........................................................................47

Conclusions.........................................................................................................47

Recommendations for Host Organization..................................................................48

Further Research........................................................................................................49


Expanding Research...................................................................................................49

Two Separate Leadership Programs..........................................................................49

Monitoring and Evaluation........................................................................................50

Personal Reflection................................................................................................................51

Living Case Study Process.........................................................................................51

Lessons Learned.........................................................................................................51

Organizational Change and Improvement.................................................................51

Living Case Study Experience...................................................................................52

Growth as an Organizational Researcher...................................................................52

Ethical Leader, and Business Consultant...................................................................52

A - Complete Demographics.....................................................................................57

B - Qualitative Survey Questions and Responses......................................................59

C - Concept Map........................................................................................................60

D - Institutional Review Board Approval Form........................................................61

E - Institutional Review Board Exempt Form...........................................................62

F - Informed Consent.................................................................................................68

G - Host Approval Form ...........................................................................................70

H - NIH Certification.................................................................................................71


List of Figures

Figure 3.1 Graduate of Lakeview high school.......................................................................28

Figure 3.2 Residency in the Lakeview Community ..............................................................28

Figure 3.3 What is the highest level of education..................................................................29

Figure 3.4 Weekly Response Rate.........................................................................................32

Figure 4.1 Number Disciplinary Referral’s...........................................................................35

Figure 4.2 Effectiveness of ILP Developing Student Leaders...............................................35

Figure 4.3 Improvement of Test Scores.................................................................................36

Figure 4.4 Improves Students Overall Academic Performance.............................................36

Figure 4.5 Respondent’s Perception of Improved GPAs.......................................................37

Figure 4.6 Students’ Overall Social Behavior.......................................................................38

Figure 4.7 ILP Inspiration on Freshman and

Sophomore’s Academic Performance.............................................................38

Figure 4.8 ILP Prepares Students’ for College......................................................................39

Figure 4.9 Developing Future Community Leaders..............................................................40

Figure 4.10 Overall Attitude of Students...............................................................................40

Figure 4.11 Students' Participation in More Community Organizations...............................41

Figure 4.12 Efficient Means of School funds........................................................................41

List of Tables

Table 3.1 Student Mentor GPAs Statistics............................................................................30

Table 3.2 Email Distribution..................................................................................................31

Table 4.1 Overall Academic Performance Statistics.............................................................36

Table 4.2 Respondent’s Perception of Improved GPAs Statistics.........................................37


Table 4.3 Overall Social Behavior Statistics.........................................................................38


Host Organization

To protect the confidentiality of the organization and study participants, all real names

have been replaced with pseudonyms.

The host organization for this LCS project will be a community school district in a small

Midwest town. This community school district has been in existence for 63 years and has seen

many changes since the communities’ children attended school in 10 separate one-room. Today

the district operates three separate schools with a combined student body of approximately

1,200; it has a full-time faculty and staff of 150.

In the 1800’s the community schools consisted of 10 one room school houses scattered

throughout the township located in the South Central part of the state. When the village was

founded, the children of the village attended school at various churches and the township hall. In

1926 the community elected to borrow $72,000 to build a new permanent school. The project

built a new school for kindergarten through eighth grades while the high school students would

continue meeting at the township hall. In 1927 construction began on a new addition to the

school that would have four classrooms, kitchen, gym, and auditorium latter becoming the High

School.

Emelo, R. (2011) describes leaders as “understanding the future is vital to success”. In

1950 Mr. Johnathan Smith superintendent of Lakeview Community Schools (1949-1959) had a

vision of consolidating and reorganizing the communities ten school houses, so the Educational

Problem Study Group was formed to explore the feasibility of Mr. Smith’s vision. Construction

of a new elementary school began in 1953 and opened in 1954, the Lakeview Community

Schools District (LCS) became a reality. Mr. Smith’s vision did not stop, realizing the growth of


the community Mr. Smith’ realized the need for a new Junior-Senior high school and in 17.4

acres were purchased in 1960. On February 28th, 1960 a dedication ceremony inaugurated

construction for the new Junior-Senior high school providing more space at the current high

school for the fifth and sixth grades. The new Junior-Senior High School opened in 1962, and

all the students that were to attend the new school started moving all the desk, books, and chairs

three blocks in a long procession that lasted several days. With the district growing in the 1900’s

the district built a new high school behind the existing elementary school that opened in 2002,

(Mapes, 2015). LCS has 63 years of providing students with a quality education although the

district in recent years has faced some challenges from low test scores, lower than normal

graduation rates, much discontent with the leadership of the district including the superintendent,

and school board. According to U.S. News & World Report on education for 2015 LCS

academic indicators are grades 9-12 enrollment of 406, mathematics proficiency of 2.1, reading

proficiency of 2.6, college readiness of 13.8, a graduation rate of 94% and a college readiness of

13%.

Research Problem

Just a couple of weeks into the new school year, the current superintendent announced

that he would be retiring in December 2015. The school board hired a consulting firm to search

for a new superintendent; survey posted on the district website and the new superintendent

assumed his position on January 1st, 2016. The original proposal for this LCS project was to

conduct the search for a new superintendent, but that was not possible with the timeline for this

thesis study project and the need to find an immediate replacement. During a personal

conversation with the President and Vice President of the school board, it was decided to have


the thesis study project examine the Ignition Leadership Program (ILP) instituted in the high

school in 2008.

Research Question

This LCS project will try to answer several questions: How effective is the ILP in

developing student leaders who serve as role models for other students, improve student test

scores, GPA’s, academic, scholastic and social behaviors positively or negatively? Do

underclassmen view the student leaders as role models that inspire them to improve their

academic, scholastic, social interactions? What effect does the ILP have on standardized test

scores? How does the program prepare leaders for college life or the workforce? How does the

faculty/staff view the ILP is an effective tool in developing student leaders and better preparing

them for life after high school? Finally, do parents see a difference in their child’s overall

attitude when they participate in the ILP, do they feel the ILP is an effective and efficient use of

school funds?

Hypothesis’s that will be tested concerning the Ignition leadership program are:

h0 - The Ignition Leadership Program is having a positive effect on the student body

h1 – Standardized test scores, GPA’s improve under the Ignition leadership program

h2 - Graduation, Retention Rates and College Readiness increase and dropout rates

decrease under the Ignition leadership program

h3 – The perceptions of the Ignition leadership program are positive among Parents,

Faculty, Students, and Community leaders.

Evaluation of Ignition Leadership Program

The Ignition Leadership Program trains volunteer juniors and seniors as student

mentors/leaders. At the beginning of the year, each mentor is paired with an incoming freshman


whom he/she mentor and help adjust to high school life throughout their first year. Since this

program has been active for eight years now without any measurable benchmarks, this LCS

study will establish baseline benchmarks for future study.

Purpose and Benefits

The purpose of this research project is to examine if the Ignition Leadership Program has

a positive effect on developing student leaders who and better prepared for life after high school.

The benefit is the research will also examine the practices of the Ignition Leadership Program

provided by the school administration and staff as facilitators for teaching leadership traits

required to being a student leader creating positive change in the community and school to

ensure the program improving student test scores, GPAs, academic, scholastic and social

behaviors.

The purpose of this LCS project will be to evaluate of the ILP what affect does the

program have to develop student leaders and preparing them for leadership roles after high

school. How does the ILP effect Grade Point Averages (GPAs)? Do parents see leadership traits

in student leaders outside of school? Chesnut, and Tran-Johnson, (2013) conducted research on

the effectiveness of the Student Leadership Development Series (SLDS) enrolled at Drake

University in Des Moines, Iowa. Students found, students who were able to identify their

leadership styles, problem-solving, overcoming various barriers, building relationships and the

opportunity to put their knowledge, and leadership skills into practice were the strengths of the

program. Continuing, they found students felt they did not learn to mentor other students

effectively through the SLDS although, the research did indicate that mentoring did occur to

some extent since most of the SLDS participants indicated previous students who participated in

the program encouraged them to join the program, (p. 6).


Other objectives of the study are to determine if the ILP is an effective use of school

resources, especially in the current economy when schools are experiencing shrinking budgets

and more demand for resources. Another objective is to determine if the ILP provides a culture

of teamwork and respect for students, faculty, staff, and others. Personal initiative and

competitiveness are values that are strongly valued in the United States, (Cummings and Worley,

2015, p. 166), this type of culture is very prevalent for many decades in our schools, has the ILP

changed this culture at LCS?

This research study will examine if the ILP has a positive or negative effect on the culture

of the school and community. Do the practices of the ILP provide the school administration and

staff the necessary tools for teaching leadership traits required to being a student leader?

Pedersen, Yager, and Yager (2012) found that to prepare students for the workforce there are

three themes that schools should align themselves. Those three themes are:

1. Leadership teams are critical support mechanisms.

2. Growth and development nurtured by providing adequate time.

3. Leadership effectiveness is determined by how well the school community

collaborates and trust one another to all stakeholders, including students, to have a

voice.

By examining the aggregation scores of individual, group participants and the ILP as a

whole, it is the expectation this study will lead to further study of the LCS ILP program with

more comprehensive and qualitative studies providing the host organization quality data to make

well-informed changes to the ILP.

This study will seek to justify the need for the development of student leaders at LCS,

better preparing them for college or the workforce. The study will also evaluate the achievement


orientation value of the ILP. Cummings and Worley (2015) define achievement orientation the

value which a culture favors resource acquisition and power, (p. 166). In this study that would

be the Junior and Senior mentors at LCS becoming leaders and displaying those leadership traits,

they learn in the ILP as mentors to the underclassmen. Additionally, this study will seek to

determine if the ILP enhances student’s overall GPA’s, improve their academic, scholastic and

social attitudes, improving the overall attitudes of the community towards the new direction the

school district has taken.

Lakeview Community Schools utilizes the “Leader in Me” leadership program developed

by the late Dr. Stephen Covey (2008) in their elementary school designed to develop leadership

skills in students through the fifth grade. Eight years ago the High School instituted a leadership

program called “Ignition Leadership.” This program matches Senior’s and Junior’s, with

incoming freshmen to be their mentor not only in their first year of high school but all the way

through their high school career. In the middle school, there is no student leadership program.

This study will also seek to discover why the district does not have a student leadership program

also.

Classification of research is either technique or purpose, techniques used in research can

be observational, experimental, or studies conducted by surveys, (Zikmund, Babin, Carr, and

Griffin, 2013, p.52). This study examined an existing leadership program that has no

comparative data. There will be a large population for this research consisting of approximately

450 students (it was determined students would mot participate), 20-30 faculty/staff, an

undetermined number of community leaders and 400 or more parents. A research population of

this size there will be several groups, sub-groups, and demographic groups to analyze and draw

conclusions. Utilizing a descriptive research examining who, what, when, why to draw a picture


of the success or failure of a program, (Zikmund, Babin, Carr, and Griffin, 2013, p. 53).

Research Design, Methodology, and Procedures

This study will use a mixed method of research utilizing both qualitative and quantitative

research methods using systematic, methodological, and integrative reviews for analyzing data.

There will be several units of analysis in this research project. Zikmund, Babin, Carr and Griffin

(2013) explain that units of analysis can be individuals, households, groups, and organization this

study will attempt to use all these groups in the study possibly discovering of underlying

problems that require further investigation (p. 118).

Responses provided by the participants to the survey questions may lead to the additional

questions, thereby modifying the concept map (Appendix B). Using unstructured interviews will

allow for the researcher to compare the actual behavior and accounts of individual respondents

(McKechnie, 2008). The ability of the researcher to keep an unbiased view will be vital to the

results of the study, James 1:5 states “If any of you lacks wisdom, let him as God, who give

generously to all without reproach and it will be given him”, (The Holy Bible, 2013). Keeping

this in mind and remembering, although there are many stakeholders in this study the ultimate

stakeholder that receive the greatest benefit will be the students themselves.

Participants

Lakeview Community School District operates three separate schools with a combined

student body of more than 1,200 with a full-time faculty and staff of 150. The high school has a

current total enrollment of 406 students, 104 students in 9th grades, 107 in 10th graders, 101 in

11th graders and 94 in 12th graders. The ethnic makeup of the school is 97 percent Caucasian, 2

percent Hispanic, 0.5 percent Asian, and 0.5 percent American Indian/Alaskan Native, 47

percent male, and 53 percent female, (U.S. News & World Report Education, nd). This study


will use this information for demographic information only and will not associate it with any

students.

Participants for this study will be parents or guardians of the high school students. These

participants selected due to their intimate interaction with the students who do or do not

participate in the Ignition Leadership Program and will provide an adequate cross-section of the

community that has close interactions with students away from school. The method of selecting

subjects is a self-selection method. Parents/guardians will decide to participate or not in this

study. The Lakeview high school has a current enrollment of approximately 376 students; the

752 surveys received. Statistics provided by Survey Monkey, previous surveys conducted

utilizing this media the Lakeview community has a 53% response rate. Based on that statistic

that statistic it is estimated that approximately 398.56 surveys will be received. With this

amount of respondents, ten percent or 39.86 percent of the respondents will be randomly selected

and asked to complete an additional qualitative questionnaire. Random selection of participants

for the qualitative study will be most beneficial and eliminate any possible bias by the researcher.

Sampling Techniques

Utilizing an internet survey resource of SurveyMonkey to develop a survey-based using

five-point Likert scale scoring method. Distribution of surveys will be accomplished by the

school Director of Transportation via the school's email distribution list. Surveys will be with

questions specifically for this study concerning the culture of and the ILP. Gathering specific

data concerning the perception and question of participation in the ILP, characteristics, and other

questions developing a descriptive study to “draw a picture” (Zikmund, Babin, Carr and Griffin,

2013, p. 53), of the ILP.


Primary participants for this study will be the parent or guardian of the students. This

research project will draw heavily on the previous research of Chen, Gully, and Eden (2001) who

explain the importance of general self-efficacy contributing to the theory, and practice of the

organization. Does the ILP prepare students to be leaders in their community, prepare them for

college, and life after high school. Phan and NGu, (2015) conducted research of personal

wellbeing of a student in secondary schools and found inconclusiveness and inconsistency in

existing research on this subject. Continuing to explain the context of this research in the

wellbeing of schools is in the early stages of research requiring continued research in

sociocultural validation and development. They continued arguing the significance of the

individual wellbeing “for its not-deficit emphasis” and human behavior is essential for quality

learning. Also, Phan et al. (2015) say that positive experience encouragement of the individual

greatly benefits the community, understanding and incorporating these theories in research

projects assist researchers in the development of various research instruments, such as

measurement, analysis, and data collection from interviews and surveys. The ILP at LCS is

designed to teach students to be peer leaders in their school; this study will focus on that aspect

of the program including how the program develops the necessary skills for students to achieve

success not only in school but the community and life after high school as well.

Study intents are to utilize an internet survey Resource Survey Monkey to develop a

survey-based using Likert scale scoring method. Surveys will be designed utilizing questions

from previous studies and questions designed specifically for this study concerning the culture of

LCS and the ILP. Garnering specific data concerning the perception and question of

participation in the ILP, characteristics, and other question to develop a descriptive study and

“draw a picture”, (Zikmund, Babin, Carr and Griffin, 2013, p. 53), of the ILP.


Wellbeing of students is a primary concern in this study, Phan, and NGu, (2015)

conducted research of personal wellbeing of a student in secondary schools and found

inconclusiveness and inconsistency in existing research on this subject. Continuing to explain

that the context of this research in the wellbeing in schools is in the early stages of research

requiring continued research in sociocultural validation and development. They continued

explaining that the significance of the individual wellbeing “for its not-deficit emphasis” and

human behavior is essential for quality learning. Also, Phan et al. (2015) state that positive

experience encouragement of the individual greatly benefits the community, understanding and

incorporating these theories in research projects assist researchers in the development of various

research instruments, such as measurement, analysis, and data collection from interviews and

surveys. The ILP at LCS is designed to teach students to be peer leaders in their school. This

study will focus on that aspect of the program as well as how the program develops the necessary

skills for students to achieve success not only in school but the community and life after high

school as well.

Potential Risks

The potential risk to participants is extremely minimal. The only risk foreseen is that

data collected will be made public. This possibility is extremely unlikely since the researcher

will be the only party to have access to any personal information collected with the specific

purpose of identifying respondents should they be randomly selected for the qualitative portion

of the study. The researcher will ensure that all personal data is kept confidential and destroyed

upon completion of the study.

Use of Deception

There will be no deception in any part of this research project. The researcher is very


familiar with the use of the Socratic Method of questioning. Utilizing this method of proposing

open-ended questions to draw the appropriate response from participants will prove to be an

essential tool in conducting interviews and developing survey questions. The Socratic Method is

useful in critical thinking and getting respondents to open up concerning their true perceptions

and issues, (Zare, and Mukundan, 2015).

Ethical Considerations

Every ethical consideration made throughout the research study. Participants will be

made fully aware of the purpose and scope of the study and instructed that maintaining all

personal information will be done in the strictest of confidence any only known to the researcher.

It has been decided to not to utilize students in the study due to time constraints of the research

project.

Thesis Structure

The first chapter of this research study of the ILP provides an introduction to the host

organization, research problem, research question, initial ILP evaluation, the purpose and

benefits of the study and finally the design, methodology, and procedures.

Chapter two consist of a review of the literature used during the study of many scholars

documents used as a reference for this study based on a keyword search for, leadership, student

leaders, and organizational leadership of several scholarly databases. Additional references

included textbook sources of research and design, leadership, and self-leadership.

The third chapter explains the methods, design, descriptive statistics, data collection

procedures, variables, survey questions, participants, sampling methods and the method of

analyzing the collected data.

The results of the study are discussed in chapter four. Discussed are the descriptive


statistics, analysis of data including approval and/or disproval of the hypotheses being tested,

and validity of findings.

Chapter five discusses the conclusions drawn from the results of the findings,

suggestions for future research, personal reflections of the Living Case Study,

recommendations for the host organization, and the limitations that affected this study.

Theoretical/Conceptual Framework

Yukl (2012) discovered specific performance goals guiding efforts to increasing

motivation is a great start, providing useful goals. Developing student leaders to understand this

is paramount to successful leadership. Bowman (2014) cites a study by Jennings and Stahl-Wert

(2003) saying “The leadership lesson for future leaders is that effective leaders “run to great

purpose” in pursuit of something truly significant, (p. 100). Bowman continues, deliberate

leadership involves “confronting an organization at its roots” pointing out two foundational

questions concerning student leadership that might be asked in a social studies class, “Why does

the world need our high school, and what would be different in the world if this high school did

not exist?”, (p. 61).

Pedersen, Yager, and Yager, (2012) found that a high school diploma today does not

mean college readiness it merely implies that a student has college eligibility, (p. 2). Vollmer’s

book (as cited in Pedersen, Yager, and Yager, 2012) state, a decade’s long movement towards

standards, schools must face the reality that they are not adequately preparing high school

students for productivity. Pedersen et al. (2012) found teachers do not emphasize college

readiness and assessments are not an accurate measurement for readiness. Society faced with the

fact that our schools are inadequately preparing our student to be productive members of society.

Pedersen et al. (2012) cited a 2011 survey conducted by MetLife that found “approximately 93%


of secondary school parents, 85% of secondary teachers, and 80% of business executives believe

college and career readiness should be a priority in our nation's K-12 classrooms (p.2).

This inadequacy of preparedness has created readiness gaps in colleges and the

workforce, (Pedersen, Yager, and Yager, 2012, p.2). Continuing, Pedersen et al. (2012)

explained that the workforce is changing rapidly with the recent economic condition,

globalization, and technology advancements. Additionally, they argue that capabilities and

qualities once thought frivolous, such as inventiveness, joyfulness, meaning and empathy, now

determine success in an individual. Schools like business organizations must transform their

efforts to be more aligned with growing needs and demands of the changing global economy and

society. Incorporating these skills in secondary school students and the education system, in

general, will better prepare our students for life after high school, and leadership development is

a good start.

According to Zikmund, Babin, Carr, and Griffin (2013) when problem symptoms are

scattered they are more difficult to combine them into a coherent problem statement, (p. 110).

Continuing Zikmund et al. (2013) explain that people are uncomfortable with uncertainty

creating ambiguity, (p. 110). This ambiguity will only make this LSC project even more

problematic.

Evidence-based management (EBMgt) may be very useful in conducting this study.

Briner and Walshe (2015) define EBMgt decision making using the best available,

critically appraised evidence from four sources: (1) Is evidence derived from managers’

expertise and experience? (2) Are organizational values and evidence derived from

stakeholders’ views and concerns? (3) Are internal organizational evidence and data or metrics

from the local context? (4) Is evidence derived from scientific research? Zikmund, Babin, Carr,


& Griffin, (2013) explain the process of problem definition involves several steps that are

interrelated. When one step is defined it will lead to the next step, this will lead to each of the

six steps in the process being addresses, (p. 111). The six steps in the process are:

1. Understand the business situation – identify key symptoms

2. Identify key problems from symptoms

3. Write managerial decision statement and corresponding research objectives

4. Determine the unit of analysis

5. Determine the relevant variables

6. Write research questions and/or research hypotheses

Ethical Considerations

Every ethical consideration made throughout the research study. All participants will be

made fully aware of the purpose and scope of the study. All personal information will be

maintained in the strictest of confidence any only know to the researcher. If it is decided to

utilize students in the study careful consideration will be made to accommodate any special

needs, any personal contact with students will be in the general area of the school where

faculty/staff will have sight of both the student and researcher. If private sessions will be in the

library or other school location that is under video surveillance. No contact with students will

occur without the expressed permission of their parent or guardian, and a signed informed

consent form, including a signed form of Assent and no persons with diminished capacity, will

be used in this study.

Summary

Numerous books and studies written on leadership will be utilized in this study drawing

on their advice and results as a guide and model for conducting a thorough and proper research


study. The author is extremely knowledgeable with the United States Marine Corps Leadership

Course. Another author that did a great deal of research on leadership writing several research

papers and books is Stephen Covey. Covey's book The Leader in Me – How Schools and

Parents Around the World are Inspiring Greatness is the basis of the Lakeview Elementary

Schools “Leader in Me” program. Other literature the author plans on utilizing include several

dissertations, articles, and studies conducted on leadership.

The contention that “one size fits all approach” to employee engagement probably is not

the most effective for this study, (Rana, Ardichvili, and Tkachenko, 2014, p. 263). Creating a

cohesive, effective, and efficient team is a tedious task in its self but when it works it is very

rewarding. The purpose of this study to discover if the ILP is effective, efficient and builds

cohesiveness within the school. Wolven (2015) explains that there is well-established research

to continue efforts refining the characterization, measurement and associated drivers of the

choices university level students make in their study habits. Continuing the study also explains

that business educators have used those frameworks to exploring how to get students to complete

their assignments.

Concept and Hypothesis

Lakeview high school Ignition Leadership Program trains volunteer juniors and seniors

as student mentors/leaders. At the beginning of the year, each mentor is paired with an incoming

freshman whom he/she mentor and help adjust to high school life throughout their first year.

There are no measurements, feedback or benchmarks to evaluate the effectiveness of this

program. This research will also determine the effectiveness of the Ignition Leadership Program

in developing student leaders, not only in school but the community. Additional questions asked

will be: Do student leaders serve as role models for other students? Does involvement in this


program improve student test scores and GPAs? Does this program improve student academic,

scholastic and social behaviors?

Research Design, Methodology, and Procedures

The research design will utilize a mixed research methodology applying both qualitative

and quantitative methods using systematic, methodological, and integrative reviews for

analyzing data. Zikmund, Babin, Carr and Griffin (2013) explain that units of analysis can be

individuals, households, groups, and organization this study will attempt to use all these groups

in the study providing possible discovery of underlying problems that require further

investigation (p. 118). The research will collect (1) existing organizational quantitative data, (2)

quantitative data through surveys of parents/guardians, and (3) qualitative data through

interviews with parents/guardians.

Interviews will be will not be conducted in this study to avoid any possibility of

interviewer bias. According to Zikmund et al. (2013) the presence of an interviewer may

influence the interviewee to give the responses that they feel the interviewer is looking for, (p.

192).

This study will use a mixed method of research utilizing both qualitative and quantitative

research methods using systematic, methodological, and integrative reviews for analyzing data.

There will be several units of analysis in this research project. As Zikmund, Babin, Carr and

Griffin (2013) explain that units of analysis can be individuals, households, groups, and

organization this study will attempt to use all these groups in the study providing possible

discovery of underlying problems that require further investigation (p. 118).

Responses to the survey questions and initial interviews may lead to an additional

question answered, thereby modifying the concept map. Using unstructured interviews will


allow the researcher to compare the actual behavior and accounts of individual respondents. The

ability of the researcher to keep an unbiased view will be vital to the results of the study,

Variables

Variables faced in this study include the original study intended to seek participation

from parents of high school students only. After discussion with the ILP Advisor, he insisted

that all parents who have students attending all Lakeview Community Schools from the Little

Warrior Pre-School to LCS. The researcher was not given direct access to email addresses there

for the Director of Transportation for the school district acted as a middle man and sent emails to

all the parents with a link to the survey. This middle man then provided data of how many

emails sent including how many families registered in the school district.

The results were, 14 respondents having children attending preschool, 44 attending

elementary school, 22 attending the middle school, and 31 attending LCS. No distinction as to

how individual respondents distributed throughout the school district. Participants were asked:

How many students do they have attending Lakeview Community Schools?

How many students do they have attending Little Warriors Preschool?

How many students do they have attending Lakeview Elementary?

How many students do they have attending Lakeview Middle School?

How many students do they have attending Lakeview high school?

Respondents had options of, 1 – 3; 4 – 6; 7 or more; and Not Applicable.

Initial participation request sent via the middle man, after a slow response for the first two weeks

a second email was sent out at the end of the second week. With only 52 responses after week

four, it was decided to offer an incentive of two gift cards to respondents who completed the

entire quantitative survey. This incentive gained 25 more responses; the survey closed after


seven weeks. The middle man was once again used to distribute the emails informing

prospective participants of the incentive.

Demographics

A study of the Ignition Leadership Program at LCS invited 1,132 parents of Kindergarten

to 12th-grade students to participate in the study. Seventy-seven responded with four not

completing any part of the survey and 12 respondents only completing the demographic portion.

That resulted in 73 responses to the demographic questions and 60 respondents completing the

entire quantitative survey. Demographics measured other than the standard gender, age, and

ethnicity included the number of students the respondents had attending the school district

segmented by the elementary, middle, and high school. Additionally, questions included, how

long they have lived in the community and what education level they had achieved, including if

their child has graduated and what they did after graduation. Appendix C provides complete

demographic responses to each question.

Most respondents fell into the 35 – 44-year age range, while 94% of the respondents

reported being of the Caucasian race followed by 4.2% preferring not to answer and 2.8%

reporting Hispanic/Latino ethnicity and American Indian/Alaskan Native ethnicity. Figure 3.1

illustrates the percentage of respondents who are graduates of the host Lakeview High School in.


Figure 3.1 Graduate of Lakeview high school

Yes

No

0.0% 20.0% 40.0% 60.0% 80.0% 100.0%

Series1

Figure 3.2 Residency in the Lakeview Community

0.0%5.0%

10.0%15.0%20.0%25.0%30.0%35.0%

Years< 5

6 - 10

11 - 15

16 - 20

21 - 24

> 25Residency

Residency in the community. Residency statistics of the 73 respondents show 28.8% of

the respondents have lived in the community for 6 – 10 years while 27.4% of the respondents

have lived in the community for 11 – 15 years. Seventeen or 23.3% of respondents have resided

in the community for less than five years, and only three respondent or 4.1% have lived in the

community for more than 25 years. Descriptive statistics for residency has a mean of 12.167

with a median of 12, standard error of 3.290 and a standard deviation of 8.060 with a sample

variance of 64.967, a skewness of 0.004 and a kurtosis of -2.798.

Education levels of respondents ranged from one respondent answering none of the

above, 5 receiving a high school diploma or GED, 22 or having some college education but have


not obtained a degree. While those completing two years of college were 12, four-year college

20 for and 13 or completing graduate school. Figure 3.3 shows the percentages of the

respondents’ education level.

Figure 3.3 What is the highest level of education

0.0%5.0%

10.0%15.0%20.0%25.0%30.0%35.0% Primary school

Some high school, but no diplomaHigh school diploma (or GED)Some college, but no degree2-year college degree4-year college degreeGraduate-level degreeNone of the above

Participants and Population

Participants were asked what their student(s) did after graduating high school. Only

seven students or 9.6% attended a 4-year college, and four students (5.5%) attended a 2-year

college. One respondent replied they had three students attend LCS, one participated in the ILP

as a mentor is currently attending a 2-year college with intentions of transferring to a 4-year

school and a fourth child who just completed their freshman year. Another respondent said their

child was attending the Jackson Area Career Center’s 3-year welding program. One respondent

indicated that they had four children who did not complete high school. Other responses

indicated their students are not attending LCS (they are attending elementary or middle school)

or have not graduated yet.

Grade Point Averages (GPAs)

The GPA data provided by the school consisted of data only for the 16 mentors.

Cumulative data of each grade requested for as many years as possible, but no response was


received from the contact person at the school. It is unknown if the cumulative data is available

for each grade or how many years the school can maintain that data.

Table 3.1 Student Mentor GPAs Statistics

Male FemaleMean 3.855 3.427

Standard Error 0.105 0.166

Median 3.907 3.527

Range 0.772 1.496

Minimum 3.419 2.667

Maximum 4.191 4.163

Count 6.000 10.000

Largest (1) 4.191 4.163

Smallest (1) 3.419 2.667

Standard Deviation 0.257 0.525

Sample Variance 0.066 0.275

Kurtosis 1.656 -1.305

Skewness

-

0.786 -0.174

Confidence Level (95.0%) 0.269 0.375

Sum

23.12

7 34.270

Email Distribution

Initially, surveys were going to be sent to parents of high school students only; the

Ignition Leadership Program advisor though wanted the surveys to send to all parents who have

children attending Kindergarten through 12th grade. The researcher requested access to all the


email address but denied due to FERPA regulations, so the transportation director sent emails to

1,132 email addresses of the 1,207 families who have students enrolled in the school district.

Table 3.2 Email Distribution

# of Emails # of FamiliesK – 5 466 617

6th - 8th 403 304

9th - 12th 263 286

TOTAL 1,132 1,207

Note. Emails reflect all emails the school has on record. Some parents may have two or more

email addresses on record, or both parents may have emails on file with the school district.

Response Rate

According to the ILP advisor, the average response rate for surveys conducted by the

school district ranges between 10% - 12%. This study sent 1,132 emails to prospective

participants. Seventy-Seven participants responded to this survey study resulting in a seven

percent response rate, well below the average response rate for previous surveys for the school

district. Of the 77 respondents, sixty respondents completed the entire survey, 13 completed

only demographic questions, and four respondents did not complete any questions. Figure 3.5

below illustrates the response rate by weeks the survey was created; initial surveys were sent out

on April 25th, 2016.


Figure 3.4 Weekly Response Rate

Quantitative Data Collection Process

This research study of a local high school Ignition Leadership Program (ILP) used a

mixed method of research utilizing Survey Monkey to administer the quantitative survey which

was emailed to prospective participants. The researcher was not given access to the email

address, so the school district Transportation Director acted as the contact point for the research

study. An initial email was sent to all email address on file with the school, followed by a

second email due to low response rate. The response rate was still low, so a third email was

requested to be sent out offering an incentive of a $50 gift card to two respondents who

completed the entire survey. This incentive resulted in an additional 24 respondents participating

in the study.

The qualitative portion of the study consisting of ten additional questions sent to 33% of

the respondents who completed the entire quantitative survey. All care was taken to ensure


respondents anonymity kept at the highest level of confidentially. Results from Survey Monkey

downloaded into an Excel spreadsheet. This data was sorted by the metadata creating

randomization to which the first 20 respondents (33%) listed were sent a link to Survey Monkey

qualitative surveys requesting their continued participation. During this process, the researcher

omitted any personal information from the decision by hiding those cells in the spreadsheet that

contained such information.

Data Analysis and Tools

Quantitative survey questions used a Likert scale of 0 – 5 with 1 Strongly Disagree - 5

Strongly Agree and a Not Applicable score of 0. Figures 4.1 – 4.12 illustrate the mean, median

and standard deviation for each question. Most of the questions have a median score of three

except questions two which has a median score of 0.00 and questions 4, 8, 9; and12 received

median scores of 1.00. Table 3 below shows the mean, median, and standard deviation for each

of the 13 quantitative questions.

Qualitative Survey Data

The qualitative portion of the study consisted of an additional survey of 10 additional

open-ended questions asking the participant to explain: 1) If the ILP is effective in developing

student leaders. 2) Improved students academic performance, improve student social behaviors,

3) Inspired underclassmen academically scholastically, and socially, 4) Prepared students’ for

college, 5) Was a positive tool to develop student leaders, 6) Made a difference in the overall

attitude of students’, 7) Effective in developing community leaders for the future, 8) Effective in

developing student leaders, 9) Improved student academic performance, 10) Improved student

social behaviors. Answers provided by the two respondents were very brief and not detailed; this

information did not provide any clear explanations to the ILP effectiveness either.


Secondary Data Analysis

Secondary data is limited to school enrollment numbers for each grade, and any GPA

data the school will be able to provide. This data will be used to establish baseline comparisons

evaluating the respondent’s perceptions provided through the quantitative and qualitative data

collection process with actual data provided by the school.

Ethical considerations

During this study, the researcher maintained the utmost integrity and security of

participants’ identities ensuring no personal information was disclosed. All reports to the host

organization maintained the secrecy of all participants. Psalms 25:21 states “May integrity and

uprightness preserve me, for I wait for you, (The Holy Bible, 2013).

Summary

This chapter examined the descriptive statistics for the study. The primary discussion of

chapter 3 were demographics of LCS. Also discussed were the response rate for the study,

variables, method of data collection, analysis tools and design of both quantitive and qualitative

surveys.

Hypothesis h0 – unproven, only data that was collected or provided by the school was

disciplinary actions from the first full school year the ILP inception. The data collected supports

the hypothesis, yet there are other factors that were not measured proving this hypothesis. The

data for disciplinary actions taken and some students from 2009-2010 to the 2013-1014 school

years shown in figure 1. Although this data is limited and only shows disciplinary actions, it

does provide a basic indication that the ILP does have a positive effect on the student body.

Figure 4.1 Number Disciplinary Referral’s


2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-2013 2013-2014 TOTAL0

200400600800

1000

206290

164 146 98

904

72 113 75 78 63

401

# of REFERRALS # OF STUDENTS

Hypothesis h1 – unproven, the school was only able to provide the GPA’s for the student

leaders, cumulative GPA’s for the entire school and test scores were not provided. The data

provided is skewed since a student must have a 3.0 GPA or better to become a student leader,

Figure 4.6 below show the GPA data for the ILP student leaders. Data collected from the 52

respondents to the quantitative survey show 11 parents or 21.15% believe the ILP has a positive

effect on student GPA’s.

Hypothesis h2 – unproven, data collected did not indicate any effect of the ILP in

graduation rates for LCS.

Hypothesis h3 – unproven, the data collected does not indicate a positive or negative

perception by parents of the ILP

Figure 4.2 Effectiveness of ILP Developing Student Leaders

Figure 4.3 Improvement of Test Scores


Table 4.1 Overall Academic Performance Statistics

Mean 2.05

Standard Error 0.24

Median 3.00

Standard Deviation 1.85

Sample Variance 3.44

Kurtosis -1.74

Skewness -0.01

Range 5.00

Figure 4.4 Improves Students Overall Academic Performance.

Table 4.2 Respondent’s Perception of Improved GPAs Statistics


Mean 1.80

Standard Error 0.24

Median 1.00



Kurtosis -1.61

Skewness 0.29

Range 5.00

Figure 4.5 Respondent’s Perception of Improved GPAs

Mean

Standard Error

Median

Standard Deviation

Sample Variance

Kurtosis

Skewness

Range

-2.00

-1.00

0.00

1.00

2.00

3.00

4.00

5.00

1.80

0.241.00

1.87

3.48

-1.61

0.29

5.00


Table 4.3 Overall Social Behavior Statistics

Mean 2.02

Standard Error 0.25

Median 3.00



Kurtosis -1.71

Skewness 0.13

Range 5.00

Figure 4.6 Students’ Overall Social Behavior.

Figure 4.7 ILP Inspiration on Freshman and Sophomore’s Academic Performance

-2.00-1.000.001.002.003.004.005.006.00

1.80

0.251.00

1.96

3.82

-1.53

0.40

5.00

Mean Standard Error Median Standard DeviationSample Variance Kurtosis Skewness Range


Hypothesis h2 – Graduation, Retention Rates and College Readiness increase and dropout

rates decrease under the Ignition leadership program. Unproven, data provided by the school did

not include any information regarding graduation, drop-out, or college readiness rates.

Respondents answers had a median score of 1.00, indicating they do not believe the program

better prepares students for college any more than those students who do not participate as a

student mentor.

Figure 4.8 ILP Prepares Students’ for College

-2.00

-1.00

0.00

1.00

2.00

3.00

4.00

5.00

6.00

1.95

0.26

1.00

2.04

4.15

-1.66

0.29

5.00


Hypothesis h3 – unproven, perceptions of the Ignition Leadership Program are positive

among Parents, Faculty, Students, and Community leaders. With a median score of 3.00, the

results do not indicate the ILP has any effect on developing students to be community leaders.

Respondents were asked about their perceptions of student’s overall attitudes which received a

mean score of 2.28 with a median score of 3.00, and participation in community organizations

outside of school received a median score of 1.00 and a mean of 1.67. Both questions had a

kurtosis of -1.70 and skewness of -0.09 and -0.02 respectively.


The last question of h3 asked respondents it the ILP was an efficient means of spending

school funds. Respondents answers also did not indicate positively or negatively the ILP was a

good use of school funds. Respondent’s answers received a mean score of 2.23 with a standard

error of 0.25 and a median score of 3.00; standard deviation was 1.96, sample variance of 3.84,

kurtosis of -1.59 and a skewness of 0.04

Figure 4.9 Developing Future Community Leaders.

-3.00

-2.00

-1.00

0.00

1.00

2.00

3.00

4.00

5.00

6.00

2.43

0.27

3.00

2.08

4.32

-1.70

-0.09

5.00


Figure 4.10 Overall Attitude of Students.

-3.00-2.00-1.000.001.002.003.004.005.006.00

2.28

0.26

3.002.02

4.07

-1.70

-0.02

5.00



Figure 4.11 Students' Participation in More Community Organizations

-2.00

-1.00

0.00

1.00

2.00

3.00

4.00

5.00

6.00

1.67

0.241.00

1.87

3.48

-1.27

0.57

5.00


Figure 4.12 Efficient Means of School funds

-2.00

-1.00

0.00

1.00

2.00

3.00

4.00

5.00

6.00

2.23

0.25

3.00

1.96

3.84

-1.59

0.04

5.00


Qualitative Survey

Thirty-three percent of the respondents to the quantitative survey (20/60), were sent an

email asking for their participation of the qualitative portions of the study. Much like the

quantitative survey responses were minimal with only participants completing the qualitative

survey for a response rate of 10%.

Validity of Findings

The validity of the findings is reinforced through the responses to the qualitative survey

responses. Although the qualitative survey consisted of only two respondents, their answers to


the open-ended questions provided support to the findings of the quantitative responses.

Findings in both surveys suggest the ILP is not as effective as it could be and there is a great

deal of improvement that can be made. While the findings do provide base benchmarks for the

ILP, the low response rate to the study does not provide a great deal of reliability.

Summary

This chapter described the findings of both the quantitive and qualitative surveys by

examining the descriptive statistics for the 13 quantitive survey questions and the additional 10

qualitative open-ended questions portions of the study. Due to the low response rate, the

findings did not prove or disprove any of the four hypotheses.

Discussion

This study set out to examine four hypotheses of the ILP at a community high school in a

small Midwest town. The study consisted of two parts a quantitative survey and a qualitative

survey. The quantitative survey consisted of 17 demographic questions and 13 program specific

questions. The study stayed consistent with the original concept map with one exception of one

quantitative question being eliminated. Questions were scored using a Likert scale of zero to

five with zero being not applicable and five being strongly agreed. Originally only parents of

high school students were to be surveyed, the school administrator and program advisor

requested that all parents of the school district be surveyed. The results were 1,132 parents that

have children registered in the school district in grades Kindergarten to 12th-grade requested to

participate in the study for a five percent response rate. The qualitative survey consisted of 10

questions that were sent to 33% of the respondents randomly selected who completed the entire

quantitative survey, ten percent of those participants responded to this part of the study.

Throughout the study, every effort was made to maintain the ethical integrity of the


study. Since the researcher is, a longtime resident of the community and minor students could

have been identified from their parents identifying information. With this in mind, the researcher

hid all identifiable information when downloading the survey data into an Excel spreadsheet.

This information remains hidden from the researcher until completion of the study when all data

collected will be deleted, and all printouts will be shredded. Some participants did ask for a copy

of the study when it is completed and accepted. Personal information will be used to send the

study results to those respondents.

This study started our very slow and received a very little response until an incentive of

two $50 gift cards to local restaurants was offed, this resulted in a little more than a 20% increase

in responses. Of the 73 respondents to the quantitative survey, only 42% or 31 had students

attending the high school; this researcher finds this somewhat troubling. It has been suggested

that parents have a little time on their hands in today’s world, and that may be the reason for such

a low response rate. Conversely, could it be that parents just do not care about their children’s

education and believe the primary duty of education is the responsibility of the school and its

staff?

First, it tried to prove the program had a positive effect on the student body. With only

21.15% of the respondents believing the ILP program does have a positive effect on the rest of

the students h0 was unproven. Disciplinary data provided by the program advisor does show an

improvement of disciplinary referrals from 2009 – 2014 does show a decline from 206 to 98, a

decline of 210% over the first five years of the program. In the same period, the number of

students referred for disciplinary actions decreased from 72 to 63. While the number of students

examined declined by nine students and the and the number of referrals declining by 108 this

data does indicate a slightly positive influence of the ILP on the student body. Second, the study


sought to prove the ILP improved GPA and test scores of students. Eleven of the 52 or 21.15%

of the respondents to the quantitative survey believes the ILP does improve test scores.

Respondents data concerning GPAs were unable to prove h1 or disprove it. Results had a mean

of 21.8, median of 21.00, a standard deviation of 21.876, and sample variance of 23.485. The

school did provide data for the 16 student mentors, ten females, and six males. Mean scores

were 3.855 for males and 3.427 for females with females having a maximum GPA of 4.163

males 4.191 and a minimum of 2.667 for females and 3.419 for the males.

While it would be nice to attribute the ILP to these GPA scores, the program does

require students to have; the school did note that for a student be a mentor they must have a

“good” GPA so there is no significant data supporting this hypothesis. Finally, data was also

inconclusive for h2 that the ILP increasing in college readiness, retention, and graduation rates

while dropout rates decreased, and h3 that students, faculty, parents and community leader’s

perceptions of the ILP are positive. Conducting research study as this can be very stressful, but

one just need to reference Psalms 27:5-6 for inspiration 5 “For he will hide me in his shelter in

the day of trouble; he will conceal me under cover of his tent; he will lift me high upon a rock.” 6

“And not my head shall be lifted up above my enemies and all round me, and I will offer in his

tent sacrifices with shouts of joy; I will sing and make melody to the Lord.” (ESV)

Limitations

Though this study did have the opportunity of receiving 1,132 responses, the low

response rate, especially from the parents of the high school students, limited the number of

respondents who had first-hand knowledge and insights to the ILP. Another limitation of the

study was not utilizing students in the study. It was decided early on in the study proposal that

using minor students in the study would have taken more time than the study allowed. Another


limitation of the study was the length of time researchers had to conduct the study. Surely had

there been more time allotted for the study a greater number of respondents could have

responded. A major limitation placed on the study was the inability to use secondary participants

for the study. The original idea of the study intended to survey students, faculty/staff, parents,

and community leaders such as ministers, civic leaders, and business leaders. Had these

secondary participants been included in the study the data they may have provided could have

led to proving or disproving the study hypotheses.

Recommendations for Future Research

By examining the aggregation scores of individual, groups participants and the ILP as a

whole, it is the expectation this study will lead to further study of the GLHS ILP program with

more comprehensive and qualitative studies providing the host organization quality data to make

well-informed changes to the ILP.

The purpose of this research study was to evaluate the effectiveness of the ILP at GLHS

by examining the aggregation scores of Grass Lake Community School parent’s perceptions of

the ILP. Four hypotheses were developed and reviewed, in an attempt to answer several

questions concerning the ILP program. First, how effective is the ILP in developing student

leaders that serve as for other students, improving test scores, positive social behaviors, GPA’s

academics of student who participate in the ILP as student mentors? Second, does the ILP

prepare students for life after high school specifically college readiness, do parents see their

child’s overall attitude? Finally, is the ILP an effective and efficient use of school funds?

While this is the first attempt of a limited study of the ILP in developing productive

future leaders of our society, there were several limitations to the study that reinforces the need

for further comprehensive research. The premise of the ILP is to pair incoming freshman with


select junior and senior students who volunteer to serve as mentors after receiving basic

leadership training from the program advisors. This model of leadership best described as

servant leadership with the mentors helping the incoming freshman working together to

accomplish various academic objectives by encouraging individual development, empowerment

and commitment to long-term collective team work, (Yukl, 2013. P. 348). Servant leadership is

arguably a highly ethical leadership style putting the needs of followers ahead of the leaders own

needs. Therefore, developing a leadership program that emphasizes servant leadership styles can

only enhance the ILP objectives.

Evaluating Leadership Programs

Though this study was not able to draw conclusive evidence proving the four stated

hypotheses, it does provide a starting point for future research. Future researchers may wish to

conduct a larger comprehensive in examining the effectiveness of the ILP in improving GPA

scores, college readiness, and social behaviors. This study was limited by not utilizing student in

the research. Future researchers may want to include students in their study gaining a

comprehensive first-hand impression of the ILP. Recommendations for further research include a

wider range of participants, this study only surveyed parents of students, and the response rate

was slow and rather small. Including faculty, staff, and community leaders may lead to a greater

understanding and insights to the ILP program effectiveness. One point that was not studied is

why does the GLCS employ The Leader in Me leadership program developed by the late Dr.

Stephen Covey in the elementary and middle schools then change to an entirely different

program at the high school level?

Pedersen, Yager, and Yager (2012) argue there are three themes schools need to align themselves

with to prepare students for the workforce better, those themes are:




3. Leadership effectiveness is determined by how well the school and community

collaborates

Examining these three themes in future research studies will provide GLCS leadership

with a better understanding of the efficiency of the ILP. Should the research find, the school

does not align themselves and the community with these three themes it will provide them with

objectives.

School District Sponsored Research

The school district may very well benefit from a more comprehensive longer study

examining the purpose of using one leadership program in the elementary and middle schools

and a totally different program at the high school. This additional research should also include

teachers and faculty, students, and community leaders for a more comprehensive view of the ILP

effectiveness

Conclusions

This study evaluated the effectiveness of ILP in developing student leaders and preparing

them for leadership roles after high school, what affect it has on GPAs. Additionally, it sought to

discover the perception of parents of the ILP in their students over attitudes outside of school.

This study attempted to establish the legitimacy of leadership programs at a local high school in

a small town. Pedersen, Yager, and Yager (2012) argue to prepare students for the schools

should align themselves with three themes being:




3. Leadership effectiveness is determined by how well the school community

collaborates and trust one another to all stakeholders, including students, to have a

voice.

The results do show that the ILP has accomplished these themes to some extent but the

low response rate this study was not able to prove the hypothesis’s it posed conclusively.

Researchers all believe providing students with leadership training does benefit the student,

school, and community. The school district is providing students from Kindergarten to Twelfth

grades with leadership training and should continue with the programs. The GPA data provided

by the program advisor indicates that for students to be a student mentor they must have a

satisfactory GPA. This resulted in an additional question of the possibility of a student who may

be a good candidate to be a student mentor but is not eligible due to their GPA. Phan et al.

(2015). Pose that positive experience encouragement of the individual greatly benefits the

community, understanding and incorporating these theories in research projects assist researchers

in the development of various research instruments, such as measurement, analysis, and data

collection from interviews and surveys. Allowing this type of student to be a mentor may, in fact,

be a diamond in the ruff and help the student raise their GPA.

Recommendations for Host Organization

It is recommended Lakeview Community Schools consider the following

recommendations, 1) Conduct further research on the ILP, student mentors. 2) Additional

research should be expanded to include students and the faculty and staff. 3) Evaluate the

utilization of two separate leadership programs in the school system, contemplate implementing

one leadership program throughout the school district. Finally, establish a monitoring and

evaluation program


Further Research

Lakeview Community Schools should continue with a longer more comprehensive study

of the effectiveness of the ILP. Currently, students must have a “good” GPA to qualify as a

student mentor. While this is understandable, this made it hard for the study to determine the

effect of the ILP on student GPAs. Redeveloping the criteria for students with borderline GPAs

to be mentors, the program may find students who would be good leaders yet do not have a

qualifying GPA. Allowing these students to be mentors could raise their GPA. The only data

collected that indicated any effectiveness of the ILP is the decline in disciplinary referrals,

though no conclusive data could establish this decline was due to the ILP.

Expanding Research

This study requested 1,253 VCS parents to participate in the study. With only 77 parents

responding to the quantitative survey this did not provide a good pool of respondents do draw

any conclusive conclusions. The first two weeks of the study resulted in only 17 respondents; it

was then decided to offer an incentive of two $50 gift cards, only then did the study gain more

participants. Of the 77 respondents, only 31 participants had students attending the high school,

and they were particularly familiar with the ILP.

Two Separate Leadership Programs

The response rate of participants slightly indicates that the ILP is not well known among

the participants due to the majority of respondents having students in the elementary and middle

schools that utilize a different leadership program, or it could be that parents are not that

concerned with their students receiving leadership training. The first hypothesis is the majority

of respondents do not know about the separate program in the high school. With this in mind,

one question plagued the researcher throughout the study, why use one leadership program in the


elementary, and middle schools then use a completely different program at the high school? The

school district may find beneficial socially, academically, and financially to explore other

leadership programs tailored to each grade level. Another suggestion is to evaluate the two

existing leadership programs to determine if one could be refined and utilized at all the schools.

Also recommended is, this expansion would include community civic and business leaders

providing input to the program and guidance to students through seminars and/or internships.

Monitoring and Evaluation

Utilizing the results from this study as a benchmark (recommended low end) establish

benchmarks for all leadership programs to determine their efficiency and effectiveness

employing student evaluations of the programs including faculty and staff. Obtaining valid

information is critical to this process, this type of evaluation performed at a high level of the

organization determines those aspects of the ILP be performing as expected or underperforming.

This evaluation will allow corrective actions to be taken ensuring the effectiveness of the

program, (Rohm, Wilsey, Perry , & Montgomery, 2013, p. 262).

The qualitative portion of the study also had a very low response rate with only two of

the twenty requested participants responding. The responses from these two parents centered

around two themes: 1) there is a lack of guidance to the students, and 2) the students to not buy-

in to the program, it has no value to them. Continuous monitoring and evaluation of the program

may very well get the students to buy-in to the program. As for the need of more guidance, the

school district should evaluate using current staff that have several other responsibilities and find

a little time for proper guidance of leadership programs. Continuous monitoring of the programs

against established benchmarks will aid in identifying those actions that are underperforming.

Developing an action plan addressing those actions that are underperforming will assist in


implementing initiatives taking corrective actions, ( (Rohm, Wilsey, Perry , & Montgomery,

2013, p. 275).

Personal Reflection

Living Case Study Process

The LCS process can best describe as confused and taxing. With that said this researcher

gained a greater understanding of the purpose of the process and gratitude to the IRB Board and

instructor for guiding students through the confusion.

Lessons Learned

Having done a great deal of research in the past on projects this researcher was involved

with that did not include any human subjects, he gained a greater insight into research involving

human subjects and the various standards. Research that involves simply collecting existing data

and simple surveys of clients and customers are much easier to conduct. When conducting

research involving human subjects a researcher must consistently be conscious of ethical issues

that may arise and ensure every process of the study does not cause any harm to the participants

if possible or, limit the harm to be as minimal as possible and ensure the participants understand

what hazards exist in participating in the study.

Organizational Change and Improvement

The previously mentioned research this researcher was involved with did involve

organizational change. The difference being that research was conducted with organizational

change already to be determined. The research was conducted to determine what changes would

make. This LCS research project consisted of data collection for the purpose of convincing the

Host Organization change is needed and what steps need to be taken to ensure this change is

effective.


Living Case Study Experience

This researcher found this LCS project to be very educational and exciting conducting a

study of interest and involvement for more than 30 years, leadership. Although responses were

not as high as expected and no conclusive evidence was derived accepting or disproving the

hypotheses, the entire experience was found to be very exciting and rewarding.

Growth as an Organizational Researcher

This project has allowed the researcher to grow as a researcher with a better

understanding of the research process, importance of well-informed participants, maintain the

highest ethical standard throughout the entire study, even when the results are not as expected. It

has also shown this researcher how to help better an organization realize their potential or short-

comings. Convincing an organization that change is needed is much easier when there is sound

scientific data to back up the hypothesis.

Ethical Leader, and Business Consultant

This project has also given the researcher the tools he will need to efficiently be a

business consultant which is something he has been considering for some time now. As a

researcher or business consultant, one’s integrity is vital to their success. Maintaining the

highest ethical standards is and should be the primary concern for anyone. Reporting true

conclusions of the research findings is the only way a research can ensure they are providing

relevant data to the organization. When acting as a consultant or researcher, one can be privy to

a great deal of sensitive or even classified information. Protecting that information is paramount

to any researcher or consultant, should that information be breached there are unseen

consequences that could occur from individuals’ personal information being made public to

information that could bring an end to the organization that has employed the individual.


References

Bowman, R. F. (2014). Learning leadership skills in high school. Clearing House, 87(2), 59-63.

doi:10.1080/00098655.2013.842533

Chen, G., Gully, S. M., & Eden, D. (2001). Validation of a new general self-efficacy scale.

Organizational Research Methods, 4(1), 62-83. Retrieved from

http://ezproxy.arbor.edu:80/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/195078889?

accountid=13998

Chesnut, R., & Tran-Johnson, J. (2013). Impact of a student leadership development program.

American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, 77(10), 1-9 9p.

Covy, S. (2008). The leader in me: how schools and parents around the world are inspiring

greatness, one child at a time. New York: Free Press.

Cummings, T. G., & Worley, C. G. (2015). Organizational development & change. (8th, Ed.)

Mason, Ohio: Thomson South-Western.

Emelo, R. (2011). Strategic foresight: See and seize emerging opportunities. Leadership

Excellence, 28(3), 8. Retrieved from

http://ezproxy.arbor.edu:80/login?url=http://search.proquest.com.ezproxy.arbor.edu/

docview/884228228?accountid=13998

Lakeview Community Schools. (2015, July 5). Retrieved from Lakeview Community Schools:

http://www.grasslakeschools.com/

McKechnie, L. E. F. (2008) Unstructured observation. In L. M. Givens (Ed.), The Sage

encyclopedia of qualitative research methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Pedersen, J., Yager, S., & Yager, R. (2012). Student leadership distribution: Effects of a student-

led leadership program on school climate and community. International Journal of


Educational Leadership Preparation, 7(2).

Phan, H. P., & Ngu, B. H. (2015). Validating personal well-being experiences at school: A

quantitative examination of secondary school students. Education, 136(1), 34-52.

Rana, Sowath, Ardichvili, Alexandre, Tkachenko, Oleksandr. (2014). A theoretical model of the

antecedents and outcomes of employee engagement: Dubin’s method. Journal of

Workplace Learning 26(3/4), p. 249-266.

Rohm, H., Wilsey, D., Perry , G. S., & Montgomery, D. (2013). The Institute Way. Cary, NC,

United States : The Institute Press.

Survey Monkey. (2016, February 20). Retrieved from Survey Monkey: www.surveymonkey.com

The Holy Bible (English Standard Version ed.). (2013). Wheaton, Illinois: Good News

Publishers.

U.S. News & world report education. (nd). Retrieved May 23, 2015, from Lakeview:

http://www.usnews.com/education/best-high-schools/michigan/districts/lakeviewe-

community-schools/lakeview-high-school-9985/test-scores

Vollmer, J. R. (2010). Schools cannot do it alone: Building public support for America's public

schools / Jamie Vollmer. Fairfield, IA: Enlightenment Press, c2010.

Wolven, W. R. (2015). A qualitative case study of social technology's influence on student

writing.

Yukl, Gary A. (2013). Leadership in organizations. Boston, Ma: Pearson Education, Inc.

Zare, P., & Mukundan, J. (2015). The use of Socratic method as a teaching/learning tool to

develop students’ critical thinking: a review of the literature. Language in India, 15 (6),

256-265

Zikmund, W. G., Babin, B. J., Carr, J. C., & Griffin, M. (2013). Business research methods (9th


ed.). Mason, Ohio: South-Western.


Appendix A Complete Demographics

What is your gender?Answer Options Response Percentage Response CountFemale 83.6% 61Male 16.4% 12What is your age? 25 to 34 19.2% 1435 to 44 53.4% 3945 to 54 24.7% 1855 to 64 2.7% 2What is your ethnicity? (Please select all that apply.)American Indian or Alaskan Native 2.8% 2Asian or Pacific Islander 1.4% 1Hispanic or Latino 2.8% 2White / Caucasian 94.4% 68Prefer not to answer 4.2% 3I am a Graduate of Lakeview Grass assYes 12.3% 9No 87.7% 64I have lived in the Community forLess than five years 23.3% 175 - 10 years 28.8% 2111 - 15 years 27.4% 2016 - 20 years 6.8% 5More than 20 years 9.6% 7All my life 4.1% 3What is the highest level of school that you have completed?Some college, but no degree 30.1% 222-year college degree 16.4% 124-year college degree 27.4% 20Graduate-level degree 17.8% 13None of the above 1.4% 1How many students do you have attending Lakeview Community Schools?1 - 3 93.2% 684 - 6 5.5% 4Not Applicable 1.4% 1I have __ students attending Lakeview Preschool1 - 3 17.8% 134 - 6 1.4% 1Not Applicable 80.8% 59I have ___ students attending Lakeview Elementary1 - 3 60.3% 44

Appendix A Complete Demographics cont.


Not Applicable 39.7% 29Appendix C cont.I have ___ students attending Lakeview Middle School1 - 3 30.1% 22Not Applicable 69.9% 51I have ___ students attending Lakeview 1 - 3 42.5% 31Not Applicable 57.5% 42Do your student(s) participate in the Ignition Leadership Program as Leader/Mentor?Yes 19.2% 14No 80.8% 59My student(s) graduated from Lakeview.Yes 15.1% 11No 84.9% 62After high school my student(s).Went to work 4.1% 3Attended technical school 1.4% 1Attended a 2-year college 5.5% 4Attended a 4-year college 9.6% 7Other (please specify) 79.5% 58


Appendix B Qualitative Survey Questions and Responses

Explain how you believe the Ignition Leadership Program is or is not effective in developing student leaders:

It could be, but kids are not naturally leaders, and it lacks the guidance needed. The students learn to be confident in front of their peers.

Explain how you believe the Ignition Leadership Program does or does not improve student academic performance:

If the leadership program had a reward system, something types of acknowledgment. If they are more confident in themselves, then that should transfer positively to their studies.

Explain how you believe the Ignition Leadership Program does or does not improve student social behaviors:

Students need continuous guidance.It improves their ability to communicate face to face without a phone.

Explain how you believe the Ignition Leadership Program has or has not inspired underclassmen academically:

We do not work with it enough, and the kids do not value it. It did not inspire my son, but I cannot speak for any of his peers.

Explain how you believe the Ignition Leadership Program has or has not inspired underclassmen scholastically:

The underclassmen need to see value in it; we lack the needed buy-in from students. I have no idea.

Explain how you believe the Ignition Leadership Program has or has not inspired underclassmen better socially:

We need to take the time to put effort into the program weekly.They probably recognize the older kids and feel free to communicate with them later.

Explain how you believe the Ignition Leadership Program does or does not prepare students for college:

If everyone in the ignition program was going to college, it might help. Confidence, public speaking and being looked up can't hurt in college.

Explain how you believe the Ignition Leadership Program is or is not a positive tool to develop student leaders:

We need more; it is not enough. It might open doors for someone who has been struggling to find their way.

Explain how you believe the Ignition Leadership Program does or does not make a difference in the overall attitude of students’:

The students are trained and then left to be leaders. You need to guide and train theses students continuously. It makes the all realize that they are in school to become better.

Explain how you believe the Ignition Leadership Program is or is not effective in developing community leaders for the future:

Needs more guidance and value. Not sure.


Appendix C Concept Map


Appendix D Institutional Review Board Approval Form

Spring Arbor UniversityInstitutional Review Board

Decision SheetProject Category:

_X___ New Assigned IRB#: 324058_04.03.16

____ Renewal Funding Agency, (if applicable):

Project Timeline: Start Date: April 04, 2016End Date:

Committee Decision:

_X__ Approved as an exempted review, no further review needed unless protocol changes.

___ Approved as an expedited review, no further review needed unless protocol changes.

___ Approved as a full review, no further review needed unless protocol changes.

___ Denied due to:

Recommendations and Comments: Please proofread ALL of your papers for clarity and grammatical accuracy prior to submission. Find the corrections in the Informed Consent and in the survey subtitle.

This study has been approved as an exempt review, category # 2 and #4, as requested.

As a reminder, every effort must be made to maintain the confidentiality of all participants, such as no data or information collected can be identified to an individual. All data should be coded for confidentiality, whether stored in paper or digital file. At the end of the study all data and identifying information on the study’s participants held or stored by the researcher need to be destroyed.

This approval is for a period of one year from the date of approval and will need to be renewed, if not completed by that time. Should the study’s protocol change in any way, a resubmission for a new approval is required.

Please contact the SAU IRB when the study is completed, so the study of record can be closed.

Date of Decision: 04.03.16

Signature of IRB Designate: Inna Molitoris, SAU IRB Co-Chair


Appendix E Institutional Review Board Exempt Form

Spring Arbor UniversityInstitutional Review Board

Exempt Review Form

Submit this form by email attachment to SAU’s IRB chair: [email protected]

Please provide all information and answers on the form in the boxes and area, as provided below.

All supportive documents (i.e., NIH Certificate, informed consent, questionnaires, surveys or a thorough description of data collection processes and/or instruments, and Host Organization Approval Form, (as needed for a project such as MBA) MUST be attached to this application form and submitted as ONE Word document.

All student IRB applications must be vetted by and submitted by the SAU faculty sponsor and will be returned to the student for resubmission if not sent by the SAU faculty sponsor.

Research Project Title: Effectiveness of the Grass Lake High School Ignition Leadership Programing Developing Student/Community LeadersPrinciple Investigator:Gerald W. Havens

SAU ID Number: Telephone: (517) 414-0825 E-mail: [email protected](s): Not Applicable

This line is only for student research. Professor’s Name:Dr. James Loughran

Department and Course Number:Gainey School of Business MBA 600

Course Title:MBA Research Project Proposal and Fieldwork

Provide a brief description of your research by thoroughly answering each of the following questions:

1. Describe the problem and the significance of the research.

Grass Lake High School Ignition Leadership Program trains selected juniors and seniors as student mentors/leaders. At the beginning of the year, mentors are paired with an incoming freshman who mentors and helps adjust to high school life throughout their first year. There are no measurements, feedback or benchmarks to evaluate the effectiveness of this program.

This research will also determine the effectiveness of the Ignition Leadership Program in developing student leaders, not only in school but in the community, also the effect of the Ignition Leadership Program on grade point averages, and will examine if the

mailto:[email protected]


program aids in preparing students for college and becoming future leaders in their communities.

Since this program has been active for six years now without any measurable benchmarks, the researcher will attempt to establish baseline benchmarks based on collected data after this research is completed.

2. What is the research question being posed?

Overarching research question:How effective is the Grass Lake High School Ignition Leadership Program in developing student leaders?

Sub-questions:Do student leaders serve as role models for other students?Does involvement in this program improve student test scores and GPAs?Does this program improve student academic, scholastic and social behaviors?

3. What are the purpose and/or benefit of study?

The purpose of this research project is to examine if the Ignition Leadership Program has a positive effect on developing student leaders who and are better prepared for life after high school. The benefit is the research will also examine the practices of the Ignition Leadership Program provided by the school administration and staff as facilitators for teaching leadership traits required to being a student leader creating positive change in the community and school to ensure the program improving student test scores, GPAs, academic, scholastic and social behaviors.

4. Describe the proposed procedures and research design. (Be thorough. Include a brief description of all procedures to be conducted. Attach any instruments (surveys, etc.) that will be used. If quantitative procedures are proposed, include statistical analysis to be conducted.)

The research design will utilize a mixed research methodology applying both qualitative and quantitative methods using systematic, methodological, and integrative reviews for analyzing data. The research will collect (1) existing organizational quantitative data, (2) quantitative data through surveys of parents/guardians, and (3) qualitative data through interviews with parents/guardians

The researcher will use structured surveys and also utilize semi-structured interviews, which will allow the researcher to compare the actual behavior and accounts of individual respondents.


Subjects

1. What is the population being studied? (If an organization, describe the organization and number of individuals included in that organization that fits the profile of the population being studied.)

Grass Lake Community School District operates three separate schools with a combined student body of more than 1,200 with a full-time faculty and staff of 150. The high school has a current total enrollment of 406 students, 104 students in 9th grades, 107 in 10th graders, 101 in 11th graders and 94 in 12th graders. The ethnic makeup of the school is 97 percent Caucasian, 2 percent Hispanic, 0.5 percent Asian, and 0.5 percent American Indian/Alaskan Native, 47 percent male and 53 percent female. This study will use this information for demographic information only and will not associate it with any students.

2. Description of subjects (include the desired number of participants in the sample). What are the specific characteristics of the subjects you are choosing? Offer some justification for selecting subjects with these characteristics.

Participants for this study will be parents or guardians of the high school students. These participants will be selected due to their intimate interaction with the students who do or do not participate in the Grass Lake High School Ignition Leadership Program and will provide an adequate cross-section of the community that has close interactions with students away from school.

3. Methods of selecting subjects. (Sample of convenience, random sampling, stratified random sample, etc. and why?)

The method of selecting subjects is a self-selection method. Parents/guardians will decide to participate or not in this study. The Grass Lake High School has a current enrollment of approximately 376 students, if each parent or guardian chooses to participate in the study the 752 surveys will be received. Statistics provided by Survey Monkey, previous surveys conducted utilizing this media the Grass Lake community has a 53% response rate. Based on that statistic that statistic it is estimated that approximately 398.56 surveys will be received.

With this amount of respondents, ten percent or 39.86 percent of the respondents will be randomly selected and asked to complete an additional qualitative questionnaire. It is believed that random selection of participants for the qualitative study will be most beneficial and eliminate any possible bias by the researcher.

4. Describe how participant confidentiality will be maintained. (Be specific: Will names be attached to the data in any form? How will the data with names be stored?)

In order to maintain the maximum participation, respondents’ identities will be maintained in the strictest confidentiality. Personal information collected from


participants will consist of: age, ethnic, educational backgrounds and their child’s grade and participation level in the Ignition Leadership Program, and email address to be selected for a qualitative part of the study. In respect to this information, no reasonable foreseeable risk, stress, discomfort or invasion of privacy is predicted. Participants confidentially will be maintained by the researcher in the strictest secure method possible by in a locked personal file cabinet in his home and will not be disclosed to any other sources. Informed consent forms will be distributed with the initial survey and will require an electronic signature. It will be explained that without the informed consent form for each questionnaire received that response will be excluded from the study.

5. Describe the risks and benefits this research has for research subjects (include physical, psychological, social, legal and economic risks). If there appear to be no risks, write “no known risks.” Explain how the risks are reasonable relative to the benefits.

The benefit of this study will be a better understanding if the Ignition Leadership Programs is an effective tool for developing student and future community leaders, enhancing grade point averages, and preparing students for college. The study will pose no risk to any students or participants and is only designed to examine the effects of Ignition Leadership Program.

6. Will deception be used? No

7. Will subjects be compensated? NoUnder what category are you requesting an exemption? Please specify category 1-6, from pages 4 and 5 of the SAU IRB procedures document, and explain your rationale for the category you choose.

Exemption for this SAU IRB project is requested under categories 2 and 4 for the following reasons. No protected persons will be included in the study, it will be conducted in established or commonly accepted educational settings, and involving normal educational practices, such as:

Category 2

The study will involve the use of survey procedures, interview procedures or observation of public behavior, subject’s personal information such as first or last names will not be used to identify participants for follow-up questions and interviews. This information will not be disclosed and respondents will not be subject to the risk of criminal or civil liability or be damaging to the subjects’ financial standing, employability or reputation.


Category 4

The research study will involve the collection of existing data, records, and documents that are publically available and the information is recorded by the investigator in such a manner that subjects cannot be identified directly or through identifiers linked to the subjects.

All federal, state statutes including school policy regarding confidentiality or other personally identifiable information will be maintained throughout the research study and kept by the researcher in a private locked file cabinet in the researcher’s home. All information collected will be destroyed upon completion of the research study.Study’s timeline dates. Anticipated start: April 1, 2016, Anticipated end: August 31, 2016

The site of research with address, if off-campus. 11500 Warrior Trail Grass Lake, MI 49240

Under what category are you requesting an exemption? Please specify category 1-6, from pages 4 and 5 of the SAU IRB procedures document, and explain your rationale for the category you choose.Exemption for this SAU IRB project is requested under categories 2 and 4 for the following reasons. No protected persons will be included in the study, it will be conducted in established or commonly accepted educational settings, and involving normal educational practices, such as:Category 2The study will involve the use of survey procedures, interview procedures or observation of public behavior, subject’s personal information such as first or last names will not be used to identify participants for follow-up questions and interviews. This information will not be disclosed and respondents will not be subject to the risk of criminal or civil liability or be damaging to the subjects’ financial standing, employability or reputation.Category 4The research study will involve the collection of existing data, records, and documents that are publically available and the information is recorded by the investigator in such a manner that subjects cannot be identified directly or through identifiers linked to the subjects.All federal, state statutes including school policy regarding confidentiality or other personally identifiable information will be maintained throughout the research study and kept by the researcher in a private locked file cabinet in the researcher’s home. All information collected will be destroyed upon completion of the research study.

Study’s timeline dates. Anticipated start: April 1, 2016, Anticipated end: August 31, 2016

The site of research with address, if off-campus. 11500 Warrior Trail Grass Lake, MI 49240


Signature Page

Please carefully read before typing your name, indicating your signature, and include the date of submission to the IRB below.

By submitting this exempted review form, you believe your study meets one of the six categories for an expedited review and there is no apparent reason the review should be elevated to an expedited or full review based on the “Criteria for Review” decision chart and SAU’s IRB review guidelines.

As the principal investigator submitting this proposed research and signing below, I agree to conduct the research involving human subjects as presented in the protocol or modifications as approved the Institutional Review Board (IRB) at Spring Arbor University. I also agree to require all co-investigators or others involved in the study to do likewise. I also agree to obtain and document informed consent and provide a copy of the consent form to each subject, unless this is waived by the IRB; to present any proposed modifications in the research to the IRB for review and approval prior to implementation; and to report to the IRB any problems or injuries to subjects.

As the principal investigator responsible for this study, I agree too, as soon as the study is completed, destroy (shred and/or delete) all data or records that could in any way be used to identify individuals involved in the study.

If this is an application for a student project the student’s signature below, as principle investigator of the study, is affirming the application has been reviewed by and approved by the faculty member sponsoring the research. To attest to such and not do so is a violation of the Spring Arbor University academic integrity policy. The document should be free of grammatical, spelling, or typing errors and follow acceptable procedures for the research design, data analysis, and all related processes.

PI Typed Signature: Gerald W. Havens Date: 3/24/16


Appendix F Informed Consent

Spring Arbor UniversityInformed Consent

Title of Study: Effectiveness of the Grass Lake High School Ignition Leadership Program in Developing Student/Community Leaders

Principal Investigator: Gerald W. Havens

Co-Investigator(s): Not Applicable

1. The purpose of the Research: The purpose of this LCS project will be to evaluate aspects of the Ignition Leadership Program (ILP) at Grass Lake High School (GLHS) that was implemented in 2008. Is the program effective in developing student leaders and preparing them for leadership roles after high school? How are Grade Point Averages (GPA) affected by the ILP? Additional objectives of the project are determining if the ILP is an effective use of resources especially in the current economy when schools are experiencing shrinking budgets and more demand for resources. Another objective is to determine if the ILP provides a culture of teamwork and respect for students, faculty, staff, and others.

2. Risks or Discomforts: In order to maintain the maximum participation, respondent’s identities will be maintained in the strictest confidentiality. All data regarding identifiers of participants will not be collected. Personal information collected from participants will consist of: age, ethnic, educational backgrounds and their child’s grade and participation level in the Ignition Leadership Program, the email address will be used to contact participants who are randomly selected to participate in the qualitative part of the study. Email addresses will also be used for providing results of the study to those participants who request them. In respect to this information no reasonable foreseeable risk, stress, discomfort or invasion of privacy is predicted.

3. Benefits to the Research Participants or Others: This research project will examine if the ILP has a positive effect on the culture of the school and community by developing student leaders who and are better prepared for life after high school. It will also examine the practices of the ILP provided by the school administration and staff as facilitators for teaching leadership traits required to being a student leader creating positive change in the community and school. Pedersen, Yager, and Yager (2012) found that to better prepare students for the workforce there are three themes that schools should align themselves with. Those three themes are:

4. Confidentiality Maintained: Participants confidentially will be maintained by the researcher in the strictest secure method possible by in a locked personal file cabinet in his home and will not be disclosed to any other sources.

5. Greater than Minimal Risk: This study does not involve any risk to participants. No minor children will be used for the study and the anticipated probability and magnitude of


discomfort or harm proposed in the study to the participants is no greater than they ordinarily encounter in their daily lives. For example, all data collected will be nothing more than that information that is already public information or otherwise know to the community in general.

6. Contact Person: The principle and only researcher for this project are Gerald W. Havens and can be contacted via email at [email protected] or by phone at (517) 414-0825.

7. Voluntary Participation: Participation in this research study will be completely voluntary and greatly appreciated participants will be free to discontinue participation in the study for any reason at any time by notifying the Principal Investigator. Should participants choose to withdraw from the study a request for the purpose of withdrawing will be made for tracking purposes. Questionnaires received without this informed consent form will be excluded from the study.

Printed Name of Participant: ____________________________________

Signature of Participant: _______________________________________

Date: ___________________________________

mailto:[email protected]


Appendix G Host Approval Form


Appendix H NIH Certification

Certificate of Completion

The National Institutes of Health (NIH) Office of Extramural Research certifies that Gerald Havens successfully completed the NIH Web-based training course "Protecting Human Research Participants".

Date of completion: 11/07/2015.

Certification Number: 1912770.

effectiveness of the ignition leadership program

Documents