This publication presents a complete publishing framework for a peer-reviewed journal dedicated to leadership practice within colleges and universities. The document specifies editorial scope, submission requirements, theoretical expectations, research design standards, peer review procedures, ethical policies, and open access provisions. The framework defines leadership as exercised responsibility within formal academic governance structures. It requires authors to identify institutional type, governance configuration, leadership role, and decision procedures examined in each submission. Areas addressed include presidential leadership, provost oversight of academic affairs, faculty participation in governance, governing board fiduciary responsibility, accreditation review, enrollment management, academic program approval, tenure and promotion review, and institutional finance. The document establishes explicit expectations for empirical, conceptual, and policy-focused submissions. Quantitative studies must specify sampling criteria, data sources, model specifications, statistical techniques, and reliability indicators. Qualitative studies must define site selection, participant recruitment, data collection protocols, coding procedures, and analytic consistency procedures. Conceptual manuscripts must identify the theoretical tradition employed, define key terms precisely, and engage established research in higher education administration. Editorial governance standards include double-blind peer review, defined reviewer criteria, conflict-of-interest disclosure, plagiarism screening, and research transparency requirements. The journal operates under an open access model to ensure broad availability to institutional leaders, researchers, and policy officials. This document is issued as a permission-based model. Universities, scholarly associations, research institutes, or independent editorial teams may adopt or adapt the framework with formal authorization from the author while preserving the integrity of the original design.
Mopelola Fatile (Thu,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: