Uncovering the Factors Affecting the Engagement of and Changes in Participants in a Blended Academic Leadership Development Program

Abstract

This study explores what factors influence academics’ engagement, and enhances the comprehension of engagement and the application of leadership skills among young academics within blended learning settings. Through mixed-method research, analyzing quantitative data derived from engagement scores and qualitative insights from 20 participants’ self-feedback reports, the study reveals a shift towards leadership models characterized by collaborative and digital proficiency underpinned by strategic thinking and problem-solving skills. The findings reveal that program design, intra-group interaction, communication, and collaborative environment were the key factors that enhanced academics’ engagement. Meanwhile, multiple regression analysis revealed the effects of variables such as gender, position type, educational level, and age on engagement. Among them, academic level, especially Doctoral degree, was significantly associated with higher engagement. Based on these findings, this study provides empirical support for optimizing the design of academic leadership development programs and suggests ways to further improve scholarly engagement.

1. Introduction

Higher education is facing the trend of globalization and marketization, and universities are entering the global knowledge capitalist system through the integration of transnational educational research and services (Kauppinen, 2015; Cheng et al., 2024b; Cheng & Zhu, 2021). Academic leadership in a global knowledge capitalist system needs to be optimized for cross-cultural collaboration with limited resources. In recent years, higher-education institutions around the world have expanded their academic influence through transnational cooperation projects, such as the Erasmus+ program. Higher education leadership needs constant adjustment and innovation in the context of globalization and marketization to meet the requirements of modern higher education institutions for innovation and skills (Cheng & Zhu, 2023, 2024; Macfarlane et al., 2024; Cheng et al., 2024a), Universities around the world are beginning to shift towards a paradigm shift in blended programs (Harvey & Kosman, 2014). The blended learning model provides flexible learning pathways by combining the platforms and face-to-face interactions (Graham, 2013; Garrison & Kanuka, 2004). This learning model can help academic leaders improve their cross-cultural communication skills and teamwork effectiveness. However, there is insufficient research on cross-cultural communication skills in blended training programs (Gleason, 2020; Cheng et al., 2023). The COVID-19 pandemic has disrupted education systems around the world, prompting countries to take urgent distance-learning measures to ensure the continuity of education. It also accelerated the development of blended learning models for academic leadership training in colleges and universities to meet the unexpected challenges of instructional management. This statement shows that the successful use of digital tools and platforms is extremely important to equip academic administrators to overcome the difficulties of the 21st-century educational environment. Role models should have a range of different roles to effectively address the challenges that arise at different leadership levels. The academic role models with interdisciplinary expertise are not only the transmitters of theoretical knowledge but also the shares of practical experience. This diversity of roles enhances participants’ sense of leadership efficacy (Carayannis et al., 2000). Therefore, it is worth exploring how to combine modern technology to improve the feasibility of leadership development programs and increase the engagement of participants.

Research has shown that leadership skills can be greatly improved through experiential learning (Day et al., 2014). In the leadership training programs, case analysis and discussions provide participants with experiential learning opportunities, enabling them to transform theoretical knowledge into practical skills. According to Dwyer (2019) and Bandura (1986), leadership training programs can significantly improve participants’ sense of leadership self-efficacy (LSE), which leads to behavioral change. These programs provide a blended learning model that enhances the flexibility and interactivity of education.

2. Literature Review

2.1. Blended Learning in Academic Leadership Development Program

The blended learning model, with its flexibility and personalized characteristics (Friend et al., 2017), provides a new path for academic leadership development, especially in the cultivation of critical thinking and social responsibility (Dugan & Humbles, 2018). Mezirow’s (1991) theory of transformational learning suggests that adult learners, through critical reflection and dialogue, can change the underlying frame of mind of their learners. In the context of academic leadership development, this theory can explain how participants adapt to new leadership roles and responsibilities through deep cognitive reframing that causes behavioral changes.

However, while course design and technical support are critical, participants’ difficulties in the blended learning mode affect their engagement in online groups. These problems may be caused by personality factors, a sense of distance in an online environment, low self-confidence, and limited communication cues (Zhao & Song, 2021). Therefore, to increase engagement, blended leadership programs should not only focus on designing efficient online learning modules but also enhance participants’ interactive experience through effective mentor support and community building. Future research should further explore how these elements can be optimized in a blended leadership program to ensure that participants are able to maximize their growth and development in this mode of learning.

2.2. The Application of Leadership Theory in Academic Contexts

Bass’s (1990) study introduces transactional and transformational leadership, highlighting that a shift from traditional transactional leadership to more innovative and motivational transformational leadership can help an organization to succeed in a competitive context. Bass and Avolio’s (1994) study states that transformational leadership can also contribute to the success of an organization by stimulating intrinsic motivation and creativity in team members. In addition, Bryman (2007) emphasizes that although there is a large amount of empirical research on leadership in non-academic organizations, there is a lack of research on the effectiveness of university leadership.

One of the main goals of the Blended Academic Leadership Development Program (BALDP) is to improve leadership skills. Leadership training and development programs should take into account the complexity and changing nature of communication rather than focusing solely on communicating the message. These ideas are consistent with Halverson and Graham (2019), who argue that blended learning models provide more opportunities for interaction and flexibility, which improves participants’ thinking and emotional engagement.

Dugan and Humbles (2018) conducted a study that provides evidence for the claim that peer mentoring has substantial positive effects on participants’ self-confidence, leadership effectiveness, and leadership skills. Tay (2016) conducted a mixed-method study to thoroughly assess participants’ engagement in blended learning courses. The research of Dugan and Humbles (2018) recognized the importance of peer mentoring in the facilitation of improved trainee self-confidence and leadership skills. Studies on the impact of engagement have been instrumental in designing courses capable of massively transforming student engagement and, therefore, learning outcomes significantly (Ashraf et al., 2022; Byrne et al., 2022; Kinzie, 2009; Tay, 2016; Tuiloma et al., 2022).

By systematically analyzing participants’ feedback and engagement, data-driven decisions could be made to continuously optimize course design and teaching methods. The rapid growth of Blended Academic Leadership Development Programs also shows certain shortcomings and limitations in current research exploring engagement and leadership development in such programs (BALDPs). Tay’s (2016) study mainly evaluates participants’ engagement in blended learning courses based on questionnaires (self-report surveys) and in-depth interviews. However, this self-reporting method can be influenced by social skills and may distort the true reflection of participants’ original feelings and behaviors. In this case, further research using more objective measures, such as behavioral observation and learning analysis data, can provide a more complete picture of engagement.

This study aims to extend the knowledge of the impact of academic leadership skills development, particularly in the context of Blended Academic Leadership Development Programs (BALDPs), by conducting a mixed method to analyze and explore participants’ engagement, leadership skills enhancement, and perceived effect.

2.3. Research Questions

To address the issues mentioned above, three research questions have been raised:

• How is the engagement of academics reflected in the Blended Academic Leadership Development Program?
• Which specific leadership skills are enhanced among participants of the Blended Academic Leadership Development Program, according to their self-reported experiences?
• How do participants perceive the perceived effects of enhanced leadership skills on their self-evaluated leadership practices within the Blended Academic Leadership Development Program?

2.4. Hypothesis

Hypothesis for Research Question 1:

Hypothesis 1. 

There is a significant positive effect of education level on engagement, with the highest level of engagement among participants with a PhD degree.

Hypothesis 2. 

Interactivity of the program design is positively related to the overall engagement of the participants.

Hypothesis for Research Question 2:

Hypothesis 3. 

Participants are expected to describe how their critical thinking skills were enhanced through in-depth case analysis and be able to provide examples of how this enhancement has manifested itself in their academic practice.

Hypothesis 4. 

Participants are expected to report that the intercultural exchange experience enhanced their global leadership.

Hypothesis for Research Question 3:

Hypothesis 5. 

Participants are expected to report that their leadership skills have been enhanced and to be able to describe specifically how these enhancements have impacted their daily leadership practice.

Hypothesis 6. 

Participants are expected to describe changes in thinking styles and behavioral patterns that may be related to their willingness to apply their new skills in practice.

In the contemporary field of higher education, academic researchers generally agree that there is a strong relationship between education level and learning engagement. Learners at different levels of education exhibit different patterns of engagement and learning needs in leadership development programs. Soria et al. (2020)’ study indicated that undergraduate students’ leadership development needs are more basic, focusing on hands-on opportunities, diverse programs, and comprehensive competencies to enhance basic leadership skills. Lapinta’s (2017) study indicated that Doctoral students, on the other hand, need to enhance academic leadership to address complex leadership challenges through interdisciplinary knowledge acquisition, global and community perspective expansion, and flexible learning environments to enhance academic leadership to address complex leadership challenges. Participants with Doctoral degrees are likely to exhibit higher levels of engagement, possibly due to their greater academic internal drive and self-directed learning. In blended learning programs, one of the key factors in increasing engagement is participant interactivity. Kintu et al. (2017) and Buchan & Precey (2023) showed that the interactive nature of the learning design significantly affects learner engagement and learning outcomes in a blended learning environment. The research questions in this program, by testing these hypotheses, will provide an important basis for designing more effective academic leadership development programs, particularly in terms of considering participant context and program interactivity.

3. Methodology

3.1. Research Context

This study was conducted associated with a leadership training program under an Erasmus+ capacity building project for academics. In order to better explore the research questions of this paper, this paper intends to use a combination of qualitative and quantitative analysis methods. By integrating quantitative and qualitative data, blended approach research can leverage the strengths of both research methods to generate stronger evidence for a better understanding of the complexity of educational phenomena (Brannen & Moss, 2012; Corr et al., 2021).

3.2. Participants

This study’s research sample was 110 academics who participated in the academic leadership training program. These participants signed up through email and academic announcements. The following are the participants’ demographic features (

Table 1. The Demographic Characteristics of the Participants.

Variables	f (Participants)	% (Percentage)
Gender
Male	53	48.10
Female	57	51.80
University
U1	1	0.91
U2	2	1.82
U3	22	20.00
U4	1	0.91
U5	2	1.82
U6	1	0.91
U7	1	0.91
U8	2	1.82
U9	43	39.09
U10	1	0.91
U11	1	0.91
U12	14	12.73
U13	1	0.91
U14	2	1.82
U15	16	14.55
Total	110	100.00

): 53 males and 57 females; the age range was 23–46 years old; the education level covered undergraduate, Master’s, and Doctoral degrees. The participants in the study were distributed in different universities in China and different academic departments, including liberal arts, science, engineering, etc.

3.3. Data Collection Methods

Primary data will include self-feedback reports from 20 participants and a summary table of engagement scores for the academic leadership training program. The self-feedback reports from 20 participants provided first-hand accounts of participants’ experiences, learning outcomes, and perceptions of the effects of the training program. The facilitators of the training program collected and scored the engagement of 110 participants in the training program. The aspects of grading involved include attendance, speaking in class, speaking in the class chatroom chat-box, speaking in the Canvas free discussion forum, whether to serve as a group leader, whether to serve as a recorder, and whether to serve as a group spokesperson.

Regarding the summary table of engagement scores, the analysis of engagement indicators was meticulously developed through a combination of qualitative and quantitative measures to comprehensively assess participants’ involvement. These indicators were derived by observing and recording various aspects of participants’ interactions and activities. Specifically:

• Regular attendance was tracked to evaluate the consistency of participation. This served as a foundational metric to understand baseline engagement levels.
• The quality and frequency of contributions during group discussions were observed. Researchers categorized contributions based on their depth (e.g., critical thinking, problem-solving) and relevance to the discussion topic.
• For online discussions, metrics such as the number of posts, responses, and follow-up questions were recorded. This included examining the timestamps to understand patterns of engagement over the study period.
• Participants’ roles within groups were monitored. Roles such as group leader, group recorder, and group spokesperson were identified to measure leadership tendencies and their impact on overall group dynamics. The frequency and distribution of these roles across participants were also noted to ensure a fair assessment.
• Researchers recorded qualitative observations during sessions, focusing on non-verbal cues such as attentiveness, collaboration willingness, and initiative-taking. Feedback from participants and facilitators further validated these indicators.

3.3.1. Data Preparation and Preprocessing

Firstly, the authors collected participant score data from the academic leadership training program. These data were recorded in an Excel form to record the participants’ activity and frequency of engagement throughout the training period. These data included the number of participants attendance, the learning modules completed, the frequency of engagement in online discussions, the role they played in the group, etc.

3.3.2. Data Cleaning

Check for missing values and outliers in the data set and perform appropriate data interpolation or exclude outlier data points if necessary; missing data are represented by NA. Convert all categorical variables (such as gender, position type, and highest education level) into numerical codes suitable for regression analysis. For example, gender was coded as 0 (female) and 1 (male), and education was coded according to degree level (Bachelor’s degree: 1, Master’s degree: 2, Doctorate: 3).

3.4. Data Analysis

In this study, a mixed method was used to conduct a qualitative content analysis of 20 participant self-feedback reports after the training and a quantitative analysis of the participant score data from the academic leadership training program. The qualitative content analysis was conducted through systematic coding and thematic analysis, aiming to gain insight into participants’ leadership development experiences. The quantitative analysis used one-way ANOVA and multiple-regression analysis to explore differences in participants’ engagement by educational level and position category, respectively, as well as the effects of multiple independent variables such as gender, position type, education level, and age on engagement.

3.4.1. Qualitative Data Analysis

The qualitative content analysis was used for the data from self-feedback reports about the leadership training program. Through systematic coding and thematic analysis, the aim was to gain insight into participants’ leadership development experiences. The analysis process not only included traditional data analysis techniques but also integrated data analysis methods from qualitative research to comprehensively capture participants’ perspectives and experiences of BALDP. Documentation covered topics such as leadership development, engagement, and the perceived impact of BALDP. The analysis followed a systematic process, commencing with initial data encoding and then progressing to developing and refining the topic in accordance with the research question. This approach drew upon Saldaña (2021), who emphasized that in qualitative data analysis, researchers can choose appropriate coding methods based on the research questions and methods, including attribute coding, emotion coding, process coding, etc., to ensure that the process is rigorous, and the method is reasonable.

3.4.2. Quantitative Data Analysis

For the quantitative analyses in this study, one-way analyses of variance (ANOVA) and multiple-regression analysis were used to explore the effects of different education levels and position categories on engagement. Data were obtained from a summary table of engagement scores for the leadership training, and regression analyses were conducted via SPSS to calculate coefficients, standard errors, t-values, and p-values for each variable.

One-Way ANOVA

According to the research design, one-way ANOVA was conducted to test whether there was a significant difference between participant engagement across education levels and position categories. This analysis helps to identify differences in means between groups and further explore the implications of these differences for the design and implementation of academic leadership training programs.

Multiple-Regression Analysis

According to the research design, multiple-regression analysis was used to explore the impact of multiple independent variables on engagement (dependent variable). Construct a regression model with engagement as the dependent variable and gender, position type, education level, and age as independent variables. The selection of these independent variables was based on existing literature that suggests these factors have a significant impact on engagement in academic leadership programs. A study by Eddy and Rao (2009) analyzed leadership development in higher-education programs and found that course design at different levels of education (e.g., Ed.D and Ph.D) had different impacts on the development of leadership competencies. This study suggests that education level has a significant impact on engagement. A study by Kintu et al. (2017) explored the relationship between student characteristics (e.g., age and gender) and design features on the effectiveness of blended learning, noting that these factors significantly influence student engagement and learning outcomes in a blended learning environment. Their study provided theoretical support for the selection of age and gender as independent variables in this study. The sources of data for the variables in this study, like gender, position type, education level, and age, were obtained from a summary table of engagement scores for the leadership training. Then, SPSS will be used to conduct regression analysis, calculate the coefficients, standard errors of respective variables, and corresponding t-values and p-values, and evaluate the influence and statistical significance of each factor on engagement.

3.5. Ethical Code

All the participants were informed about the confidentiality of their information, responses, the research purpose, its application, and the study design, as well as the voluntary nature of their participation. Informed consent was obtained from all participants for the use of their data.

4. Results

4.1. How Is the Engagement of Academic Reflected in the Blended Academic Leadership Development Program? (RQ1)

Through qualitative and quantitative analyses, an in-depth exploration of the role of these factors in the Blended Academic Leadership Development Program (BALDP) was conducted.

4.1.1. Qualitative Analysis of Participant Engagement (RQ1)

Through a qualitative approach to systematically content-analyze the 20 participants’ self-feedback reports, the study was able to provide insights into the engagement of academics in the Blended Academic Leadership Development Program and the factors influencing it.

Table 2. Qualitative Analysis of Participant Engagement (RQ1).

Themes	Categories Emerged	Frequencies	%	Most Frequent Codes
Active engagement in the form of participants in program design and training implementation	Active engagement in program design	38	43.68	1. Well-designed by the organizers (8);
				2. Engagement through observing leadership demonstration (3);
				3. Utilization of academic resources (10);
				4. Engagement through integrating theory and practice (12);
				5. Active engagement in exchange platforms (5).
	Forms of participant engagement in program implementation	17	19.54	1. Engagement in group role assignments (7);
				2. Engagement through simulated application scenarios (2);
				3. Engagement in breakout group discussions (8).
Direct Engagement Activities	Active interaction within group members	22	25.29	1. Positive influence among group members (15);
				2. Engagement across diverse group members (3);
				3. Engagement through full engagement opportunities (4);
	Engagement through communication and collaboration	9	10.34	1. Active engagement in a positive communication environment (8);
				2. Engagement in spokesperson appointment system (1);
	Individual engagement	1	1.15	1. Individual interests driving engagement (1).

summarizes the main categories and frequencies of participant engagement.

Table 2 statistics the frequency of different types of coding, aggregates according to different categories, and calculates the percentage of the total frequency according to the category frequency. Active engagement in program design plays a significant role in the level of engagement, with a total frequency of 38, accounting for 43.68% of the total feedback, reflecting its key role in promoting academic engagement. The direct engagement activities among participants play a significant role in engagement, with a total frequency of 22, accounting for 25.29% of the total feedback. This indicates that program structure and opportunities for interaction have a significant impact on participation.

This study found that program design, intra-group interaction, and communication setting were key factors influencing academic staff engagement. Program design showed the most significant impact on engagement, followed by direct participation in positive influence among group members. These findings provide important insights for understanding academics’ engagement in blended learning programs and emphasize the importance of creating meaningful engagement opportunities in blended learning environments. The following quotes, sourced from two participants, exemplify the key characteristics of the program and its influences:

“In addition, the training program creates a learning collaboration and networking platform for potential and young university academic leaders to share their experiences and enhance their academic skills. The training program is designed by a team of educational experts and renowned academic leaders in the field and is also lectured by young and professional lecturers.”

(31 years old, male, PhD candidate)

This participant’s elaboration highlights the role of the program in promoting academic collaboration and professional development, emphasizing the importance of the professionalism of the program’s design and the diversity of the participants’ fields, thus greatly supporting the training of higher-education academics and leaders. In addition, another participant commented on the effectiveness of ‘combining theory and practice’, which was a significant factor in participant engagement, demonstrating the benefits of blended learning models in academic leadership development:

“Through a series of learning and exchanges, I have learned the relevant theoretical knowledge and practical experience of academic leadership.”

(27 years old, male, administrative staff)

It can be seen that program design, interaction among participants, and good communication and collaboration environment are the key factors to promote academics to actively participate in the development of blended academic leadership programs. Program design had the most significant impact on engagement (43.68%), followed by active interaction within group members (25.29%). These findings provide an empirical basis for optimizing Blended Academic Leadership Development Programs and highlight the importance of creating an environment for active participation. Additionally, this study highlights the unique advantages of the blended learning model in facilitating the integration of theoretical learning and practical application and provides referable insights for the design of future blended academic leadership training programs.

4.1.2. Quantitative Analyses of Participants’ Engagement (RQ1)

To further explore the extent to which different characteristics of participants influenced their engagement, this study conducted a multiple-regression analysis and revealed the combined effects of different independent variables (such as gender, position type, education level, and age) on dependent variables (such as total attendance of Blended Academic Leadership Development Programs). Gender was included in the model because Kintu et al. (2017) found that gender had a significant effect on student engagement in a blended learning environment. Eddy and Rao (2009) studied that there may be differences in the needs and engagement of leaders in leadership training across position types. The level of education (Bachelor’s, Master’s, Doctoral) was used as the dependent variable based on Kintu et al.’s (2017) finding that level of education had a significant effect on student engagement in a blended learning environment. Age was included in the analysis because age may influence participants’ attitudes towards learning and engagement. Research has shown that older participants may exhibit higher levels of engagement and greater motivation in educational programs (Kintu et al., 2017). The table is as follows:

As can be seen in

Table 3. Quantitative Analysis of Engagement Scores (RQ1).

Variable	Coefficient	t-Value	p-Value	Description
Age	0.683	1.769	0.079 *	There is a positive correlation between age and total attendance, which approaches significance.
Gender	−2.035	0.540	0.590	The relationship between gender and overall attendance rate is not statistically significant.
Position Type	Not significant	-	0.476	The relationship between position type and overall attendance rate is not significant.
Academic Level (Ph.D.)	Significant positive impact	-	0.022 **	Individuals with higher levels of education (especially those with a Doctoral degree) are more likely to identify and benefit from leadership development.

* p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01.

, the regression results showed a significant positive effect of academic level (especially Doctoral degree) on engagement (p = 0.022). The p-value of age is 0.079, indicating that age is positively correlated with the total number of attendance but close to the level of significance. Gender (p = 0.590) and position type (p = 0.476) were found to have no significant effect on participation. This supports the discussion in Research Question 1 regarding the engagement of academics in a Blended Academic Leadership Development Program.

As can be seen from Figure 1, the data points are concentrated on the left side of the chart, indicating that most observations have low predicted attendance times. There are points far away from the clusters in the graph, indicating that several learners have much higher attendance times than others. The model has limited skill to predict the total number of attendances, and the model may not capture all factors that affect attendance times.

As can be seen in Figure 2, the residuals for most of the data points are distributed around zero, indicating that for most participants, the model’s predictions are fairly close to the actual values. However, there are a few points with large positive and negative residuals, indicating that the predicted values for individual cases differ greatly from the actual values.

In this study, a regression analysis model was used to predict academics’ engagement and actual engagement data were compared with model predictions (see Figure 1) to assess the predictive accuracy of the model and to explore potential engagement. The results of the analyses showed that most academics had lower actual attendance than predicted, demonstrating a consistent trend in engagement. However, there were a few significant outliers that indicated higher levels of engagement for certain participants or activities. This may be due to individual differences in participants’ backgrounds, academic interests, or the relevance of course content. It suggests that future research should consider more individualized factors to improve model prediction accuracy.

4.1.3. Further Quantitative Analysis

Table 4. Means and Standard Deviations Among Levels of Engagement by Groups of Academic Degrees.

Academic Degree	Mean Attendance	Standardized Deviation	Sample Size	Standardized Score	F
Bachelor’s	5.60	8.17	5.00	−1.15	0.415
Master’s	13.17	21.20	35.00	0.55
Ph.D	13.38	17.59	73.00	0.60

describes the attendance data from different academic degrees, revealing their level of engagement and characteristics in the program. Based on the analysis of academic degrees, the following results can be derived:

Participants with Doctoral degrees have the highest level of engagement (13.38, n = 73), followed by Master’s (13.17, n = 35), and participants with Bachelor’s degrees have the lowest attendance (5.60, n = 5). However, from the results, there is no significant difference (F = 0.415, Sig. = 0.661 > 0.05) in the engagement of individuals with different academic degrees in the BALDP program among academics at the three levels.

Table 5. Means and Standard Deviations Among Levels of Engagement by Groups of Position Type.

Position Type	Mean_Attendance	Std_Dev_Attendance	Sample_Size	F
Academic	12.36	17.834	65.00	0.991
Dual academic and administrative staff	35.00	0.000	2.00
Administrator	14.14	24.093	37.00
Student	12.37	9.258	16.00

presents data on the level of participation of different position types in the BALDP. Dual academic and administrative staff had the highest average participation (35.00 times, n = 2), followed by administrator (14.14 times, n = 37), student (12.37 times, n = 16) and academic staff (12.36 times, n = 65).

The results of the one-way ANOVA analysis of variance showed that the difference was relatively small, with an F value of 0.991. In other words, results show that the difference in attendance rates between different position types is not statistically significant.

4.2. Which Specific Leadership Skills Are Enhanced Among Participants of the Blended Academic Leadership Development Program, According to Their Self-Reported Experiences? (RQ2)

Table 6. Enhanced Leadership Skills.

Themes	Categories Emerged	Frequencies	%
Content of the skills improved by Blended program learning	Theoretical Knowledge of Academic Leadership	10	27.03
	Practical Leadership Application Skills	7	18.92
	Advanced Scientific Knowledge and Academic Innovation Skills	7	18.92
	Governance and Management Skills	6	16.21
	Global Academic Research Skills	4	10.81
	Practical Academic Leadership Skills	3	8.11

summarizes the leadership skills mentioned by participants as learned in the program by qualitative analysis of 20 participants’ self-feedback reports.

From Table 6, participants improved six major skill areas in BALDP, specifically theoretical knowledge of academic leadership and practical leadership application skills. In the self-feedback reports, the theoretical knowledge of academic leadership was frequently mentioned ten times, accounting for 27.03%, which is the highest proportion and reflects the importance of academic leadership theory in the program. Next, practical leadership application skills, advanced scientific knowledge, and academic innovation skills were mentioned seven times each, accounting for 18.92% of the total, respectively. Additionally, governance and management skills were mentioned six times, accounting for 16.21% of the total responses. Global academic research skills were mentioned four times, accounting for 10.81%, and practical academic leadership skills were mentioned three times, accounting for 8.11%.

4.2.1. Theoretical Knowledge of Academic Leadership

“The training program reveals the core essence of leadership through systematic theoretical presentations”.

(40 years old, female, lecturer)

“I have gained a systematic understanding of the basic concepts of university governance and academic leadership.”

(31 years old, male, PhD candidate)

Participants noted that they not only acquired theoretical knowledge but also greatly benefited from practical applications, particularly in role positioning and optimization in Sino-European cooperation. Participants reported that they not only learned about the theory of leadership but were also able to apply this knowledge to specific leadership scenarios, such as optimizing teamwork in academic work and better role positioning in university supervision. The program is led by domestic and foreign experts as well as participants with high-level professionalism, offering valuable learning opportunities and networking prospects for participants. Overall, this training has significantly enhanced the participants’ academic leadership skills and assisted them in better addressing challenges in leadership.

4.2.2. Practical Leadership Application Skills

Based on the feedback from two participants, the training program provides participants with a profound practical experience through systematic case analysis and discussion. A 40-year-old male researcher mentioned,

“In addition, the analysis and discussion of cases gave me an immersive practical experience.”

(40 years old, male, researcher)

It indicates that sharing cases not only helps participants understand theoretical knowledge but also enhances their skills to apply it in practice. Through the discussion of cases, participants can gain valuable practical experience, which helps them apply the theories and skills they have learned in real-world implementation. In addition, a 26-year-old female administrative staff member stated,

“During the training program, different lecturers and professors shared the growth of academic leaders and ‘well-known scholars’ and the development of young academic leaders based on empirical research of individual cases and samples.”

(26, female, administrative staff)

This indicates that the training program showcases the experiences of academic leaders from diverse backgrounds and growth paths through rich empirical research and case sharing, enabling participants to draw on diverse leadership development strategies to enhance their own academic leadership.

4.2.3. Advanced Scientific Knowledge and Academic Innovation Skills

The following is feedback from an academic leadership training program by two participants, particularly focusing on leadership traits and styles in a university environment, teamwork and empowerment, challenges, and innovative strategies for young academic leaders. One participant (42 years old, female, administrative staff) pointed out,

“Leadership traits and leadership styles in the university context, teamwork and empowerment of others, challenges and innovative strategies for young academic leadership, and listened to a number of young academic leaders share their personal growth experiences.”

(42 years old, female, administrative staff)

She mentioned that by listening to several academic leaders share their personal growth experiences, the participants were able to better understand and apply these leadership concepts. Another participant (30 years old, male, administrative staff) commented that

“This training was a collection of famous scholars and based on the frontier of the academic leadership development.”

(30 years old, male, administrative staff)

This high-level training provides participants with cutting-edge knowledge and skills to help them effectively tackle challenges and drive innovation in their future academic and administrative work.

Through this training, the participants not only gained theoretical knowledge about leadership and management but also enhanced their understanding of leadership practices through sharing practical cases and personal experiences. This combination of theory and practice not only improved the participants’ level of leadership but also laid a solid foundation for their future career development. Modern organizations are facing increasingly complex and dynamic environments.

4.2.4. Governance and Management Skills

In the training program, participants systematically studied the relationship between academic leadership and university governance in a modern environment. A 40-year-old male researcher pointed out,

“First of all, we’ve learned systematically understanding of the relationship between academic leadership and university governance in today’s environment.”

(40 years old, male, researcher)

In addition, a 25-year-old female administrative staff mentioned,

“We learned the governance characteristics of higher-education institutions.”

(25 years old, female, administrative staff)

It further emphasizes the in-depth exploration of university governance characteristics in the training program.

Based on the feedback above, through systematic course design, the training program has helped participants gain a deep understanding of the relationship between academic leadership and university governance, especially in today’s complex educational environment.

4.2.5. Global Academic Research Skills

A 26-year-old female Doctoral student pointed out that the training program has had a substantial effect in various domains.

“This program turned out to be very impactful in many ways, allowing me to understand for the first time the differences between the academic research models in China and Europe.”

(26 years old, female, PhD candidate)

This indicates that the training program not only provides basic theories and practical guidance for academic leadership but also promotes a deep understanding of academic research models in different countries and regions. In addition, a 31-year-old PhD participant mentioned,

“Thirdly, I have gained the sharing of national and international experiences on youth academic leadership, which has provided me with valuable references for my next practice.”

(academic staff, 31, female, PhD)

This further emphasizes the importance of international experience exchange in the development of academic leadership. Through exchanges with participants from different backgrounds, students not only enrich their knowledge system but also gain valuable experience and guidance for future academic practices.

4.2.6. Practical Academic Leadership Skills

Based on the feedback from participants, it is concluded that the enhancement of academic leadership requires systematic practice and training. A 26-year-old female administrative staff pointed out that

“In addition, the improvement of leadership requires practice and training. During the training program, different lecturers and professors shared the growth of academic leaders and ‘well-known scholars’ and the development of young academic leaders based on empirical research of individual cases and samples.”

(26 years old, female, administrative staff)

This indicates that through empirical research and case analysis, students can gain a deep understanding of the diverse paths of academic leadership and its practical application. In addition, a 31-year-old male Doctoral student mentioned,

“I have gained the pathways, challenges and strategies for young scholars to enhance academic leadership.”

(31 years old, male, PhD candidate)

According to the feedback from the above trainees, the training program provides trainees with rich and profound practical experience through systematic case analysis and discussion, such as practical leadership application skills, advanced scientific knowledge, academic innovation skills, governance and management skills, etc. Through this kind of systematic training and practical experience, participants could enhance their knowledge acquisition and skills application, particularly in the areas of leadership training and professional development.

4.3. How Do Participants Perceive the Perceived Effect of Enhanced Leadership Skills on Their Self-Evaluated Leadership Practices Within the Blended Academic Leadership Development Program? (RQ3)

To address Research Question 3, this study used thematic analysis to analyze the 20 participants’ self-feedback reports of 20 participants to explore participants’ perceived leadership skills enhancement during a Blended Academic Leadership Development Program and its impact on self-assessed leadership practice.

Table 7. Summary of Participants’ Thinking and Behavioral Changes (RQ3).

Change Category	Sub-Categories	Frequencies	%	Representative Codes (Frequency)
Changes in Thinking	Encouragement Motivation	7	46.67	In-depth ontological knowledge (7)
Changes in Behavior	Encouragement Motivation	8	53.33	Decisive decision-making (2); Open-minded communication (2); Improvement in presentation and organizational skills (1); Sustainable development of academic research (1); Developing a Leadership Vision (1); Having an international perspective (1).

showed that participants experienced significant changes in thinking (46.67%) and behavior (53.33%) in the Academic Leadership Development Program. This indicates that the program had a substantial impact at both the cognitive and behavioral levels.

In terms of thinking changes, participants demonstrated a deep understanding of ontological knowledge, with a frequency of 7, accounting for 46.67% of the total changes. This finding echoes Mezirow’s (1991) transformational learning theory, which states that adult learners can change their underlying frame of mind through critical reflection and dialogue. The findings of this study suggest that the program successfully facilitated deep cognitive reframing among the participants, which may have been a key driver of their changes at the behavioral level.

Regarding behavioral changes, similarly to thinking changes, encouragement and motivation were the dominant categories, with a frequency of 8, representing 53.33% of the total changes. These feedbacks indicate that the program significantly enhanced participants’ presentation and organizational skills, interdisciplinary research skills, formation of leadership vision formation, decision-making, and communication skills. Through the training, participants’ understanding of leadership has shifted from management and control to a more comprehensive one, including organizational culture, vision, and planning. This indicates that the training program not only has theoretical depth but also practical guidance. Additionally, the program promotes self-reflection for individuals and organizations, incorporating mechanisms to support planning, summarizing, feedback, and continuous learning.

These findings highlight the effectiveness of the Youth Leadership Program in enhancing participants’ thinking and behavioral aspects while demonstrating an overall improvement in their academic and practical talents upon completion of the program.

4.3.1. Changes in Thinking

Participants reported the following changes in their thinking after completing the Youth Leadership Program.

The third research question focuses on analyzing the participants’ thinking changes in the in-depth ontology knowledge. Participants reported significant changes in their thinking after completing the Youth Leadership Training. Their feedback vividly demonstrates the integration of theory and practice, the enhancement of interdisciplinary collaborative thinking, and the expansion of international perspectives. These changes reflect a more professional and formal approach to their overall expression. From the content extracted from the self-feedback reports, the following information can be drawn:

Firstly, the program significantly enhanced the participants organizational and public speaking skill. “I have learned a lot from all team members. I was also inspired by the project coordinator that academic research can be combined with teaching and training practices. The participants’ discussions are good materials for further understanding and constructing theories. I believe that the training program has inspired me a lot in terms of the program implementation process, training members’ engagement, and the form of training program outcomes, and I shared these testimonials with others at my research team meetings (meetings with my promoter and group members).”

(26 years old, female, PhD candidate)

“As it concerns the academic linking section, my understanding of academic leadership and how to improve it was enriched by the knowledge shared by professors and scholars from Chinese and foreign universities.”

(26 years old, female, PhD candidate)

This shows that the participants have significantly improved their understanding of educational management, academic leadership, and higher education by exploring how participants in leadership programs perceived the impact of enhanced leadership skills on their leadership practices in a Blended Academic Leadership Development Program. Participants generally reported a positive impact of the leadership program on the academic leadership practices of academics. For example:

“University governance that is not connected to social needs cannot last for a long time, and at the same time, it cannot blindly pursue internationalization.”

(40 years old, male, researcher)

This insight shows the participants’ high level of social responsibility. Among the roles played by the education field, there is an emphasis on social responsibility, high-quality governance, and a sense of responsibility as a social citizen. Participants gained a more comprehensive understanding of the practical implications of university governance and leadership.

Based on participants’ self-feedback reports, we can tentatively conclude that the Youth Leadership Program significantly improved participants’ leadership skills and had a positive impact on their leadership practices in the Blended Academic Leadership Development Program.

4.3.2. Changes in Behavior

In this category, the leadership program had eight specific behavioral positive impacts on participants. These behaviors included increased self-confidence, increased awareness of strengths and weaknesses, improved communication and collaboration skills, increased sense of responsibility, improved problem-solving skills, improved decision-making skills, and increased self-efficacy (Bandura, 1986).

Firstly, the training program significantly enhanced the participants organizational and public speaking skill. For example:

“Through the training program, I’ve Improved my self-communication skills. Group communication and reporting is a good opportunity to learn and practice. In the group communication and reporting, I was worried that what I reported was not good enough and maybe not accurate enough, but after each reporting session, I feel that I have improved a lot in content organization, expressing logic and communication confidence.”

(26 years old, female, administrative staff)

This feedback indicates that the training program has played a positive role in improving participants’ content organization, logical expression, and communication confidence.

In addition, the training program has helped participants cultivate a leadership vision.

“After clearly defining such a problem, I have a full understanding of the core growth points and necessary qualities of self-growth, and my future growth and development will be more targeted. This has also raised a level in my thinking. I used to be busy with specific development goals at the scientific research and teaching level, and the goal of “academic leader” gave me the opportunity to jump out of the perspective of ordinary young instructors and let me I took it to a higher level to think about my entire career path.”

(33 years old, female, lecturer)

This indicates that the training program has helped participants broaden their perspectives in the field of youth leadership. The training program also enhanced the decision-making skills of the participants. A 40-year-old male researcher emphasized the importance of making decisive decisions within a team.

“...grasp the correct direction, which is not only personal development, but also related to the interests of all members. When there are many people to lead, it is difficult to form a completely unified opinion and direction. At this time, a decisive decision is required.”

(40 years old, male, researcher)

From the above excerpt from the self-feedback form, the following information can be drawn: The changes in these behaviors demonstrate the positive impact of the Youth Leadership Training program on participants in various aspects. This not only contributes to the enhancement of individual skills but also lays a solid foundation for future career development.

5. Discussion

This study explored in depth the changes in participant engagement in the Blended Academic Leadership Development Program (BALDP), what specific leadership skills were gained, and the transformation paths in practice through a blended learning approach.

The main investigation found that participant engagement was significantly influenced by program design, implementation, participant interaction, and the communication environment. By examining the data from Table 3 and Figure 1 and Figure 2, it becomes apparent that age, gender, position type, and education level exert different influences on engagement. Table 4 clearly demonstrates that participants with higher educational qualifications, particularly those with PhD degrees, exhibited higher levels of engagement.is consistent with the conclusions of Eddy and Rao (2009), especially that Doctoral participants showed higher participation.

The article gathered reports from 20 participants to record their individual experiences, thoughts, and benefits gained from completing the program. For instance, the program greatly enhanced the participants’ skills in academic leadership theory, university governance, and distinctions in international academic research. Participants experience significant skill enhancements in their comprehension of academic leadership and university governance, as well as the development of practical leadership skills, such as leadership characteristics and approaches, collaboration, problem-solving, and imaginative strategies. Participants feel that they play an essential part in improving their leadership skills through the analysis of case studies and theoretical explanations.

The blended leadership learning program enables participants to acquire theoretical knowledge through transformative changes in their thinking and behavior, including improved self-confidence, higher communication skills, and enhanced decision-making skills. This aligns with the characteristics of effective shared leadership development as described by Bolden et al. (2015), shared leadership is the distribution of authority and responsibility within a team or organization through collaboration and collective participation, thereby enhancing collective decision-making. The program has greatly enhanced the leadership development of academics by strengthening their leadership vision, decision-making skills, and interpersonal relationships. It has also promoted personal skill improvement and knowledge sharing within the academic community.

5.1. Engagement in Leadership Development Programs (RQ1)

Research question 1 has a theoretical and a numerical part. The findings in Table 2 are for the major qualitative analysis, which is majorly analyzed through self-feedback reports from 20 participants. This information illustrates experiences and opinions on the program as well as on development in leadership. According to the findings of Kintu et al. (2017) and Batdi et al. (2018), the role of effective communication and peer-mentoring channels has been established to be conducive to engagement in blended learning. Analyzing self-reports from 20 participants, this study found that effective communication channels, such as regular teacher-student meetings and instant messaging platforms, along with peer guidance mechanisms like peer group tutoring and online discussion forums, significantly improved attendance and engagement in activities.

Feedback from participants indicated that the program significantly improved their administrative skills, particularly in areas such as theoretical knowledge of academic leadership, university governance, and global academic research.

The results in Figure 1 and Figure 2, Table 3 show that there is a positive correlation between age and total attendance, but it does not reach statistical significance. Age alone is not enough to determine whether a participant will actively participate in Blended Academic Leadership Development Programs (BALDPs). Likewise, there was no significant relationship between gender and attendance, indicating similar levels of engagement among male and female participants. However, regarding the relationship between participants’ education and engagement, the data showed that PhD holders had the highest average, showed attendance. It may be suggested that highly educated individuals are more likely to identify with and benefit from leadership development. Eddy and Rao (2009) found in their research that the data showed that as educational level increases, individuals’ engagement in leadership education also increases accordingly. Participants with Doctoral degrees demonstrated higher levels of engagement and motivation in participating in leadership development programs, consistent with the results of this study.

In summary, this study highlights that personalization factors should be considered in future program design to improve engagement.

5.2. Enhancing Leadership Skills in Blended Academic Leadership Development Programs (RQ2)

The second research question (RQ2) of this study collected data through 20 self-feedback reports of participants in the Blended Academic Leadership Development Programs (BALDPs). As can be seen from Table 6, these reports were coded and thematically analyzed through qualitative analysis methods to identify the skills acquired by participants. According to the participants of the training program, they believe that participating in global communication, which involves discussing theories and cases, can enhance their skill to effectively handle the complex problems associated with different styles of leadership in both professional and personal contexts.

This study validated the importance of global communication in improving participant’s leadership skills. Future research can further explore the effectiveness of academic leadership training in different cultural contexts.

In the second research query, it was found that systematic leadership theory explanation helps to improve academics’ decision-making skills and analytical reasoning by combining theory, case reports and practice. This is consistent with the research of Kessler (2021), Deshwal and Ali (2020), and Schyns et al. (2011); systematic theoretical explanations can also help participants analyze problems from a systematic perspective and understand the relevant relationships between academic leadership and relevant stakeholders. By analyzing current cases, participants need to organize and conduct an in-depth analysis of information, which can not only improve their critical thinking but also enhance their analysis and decision-making skills and improve their overall quality to better face future career challenges. This is consistent with the view of Loureiro et al. (2022), who argue that higher education plays a role in promoting sustainable leadership and the development of soft skills in participants’ career preparation. In the context of globalization, academic leadership enhances the influence of universities in the global academic community by establishing international partnerships and attracting top academics. The feedback from the participants emphasized that through this blended academic leadership program, participants acquired cutting-edge leadership knowledge from multiple levels and dimensions, from the comparison of global academic research models to the dynamics of cutting-edge academic leadership development, forming a comprehensive and in-depth learning and understanding system.

5.3. The Perceived Effect of Enhanced Leadership Skills on Participants Leadership Practices (RQ3)

Regarding the third research question, this study found that by discussing the participants’ feedback, the specific perceived effects and changes in the participants’ thinking and behavior in academic leadership were revealed, resulting in changes in academic leadership practices, especially shown in that they became more systematic in analyzing complex issues and began to pay attention to the coordination of multiple stakeholders.

5.3.1. Changes in Thinking

The academic leadership training, which connects theory and practice, enhances participants’ comprehension of in-depth ontological knowledge. Wang and Sedivy-Benton (2016) and Black (2015) proposed that effective leadership requires understanding and appreciating the gap between leadership theory and practice and taking steps to apply theory to practical operations. As Oplatka (2004) argued in his study, academic leadership theory and practice should be adjusted according to the characteristics and needs of different career stages.

5.3.2. Changes in Behavior

Through the Blended Academic Leadership Training Program, participants realized that high-quality university governance is connected to social needs and that they need to be aware of the importance of international leadership training in the development of the modern environment, but they cannot blindly pursue internationalization. The data suggests that through this Blended Academic Leadership Training Program, participants have enhanced their sense of social responsibility and social citizenship. Oplatka (2004) emphasized the new requirements that globalization and rapid social change have placed on college students, including global vision, multicultural concepts, humanitarianism, and ethical responsibility. Research results show that participants recognized that leadership is not limited to the academic field but also includes coordination and cooperation between government departments and enterprises, which reveals the participant’s deep understanding of the importance of coordination and cooperation between different stakeholders in society.

5.4. Implications

This study reveals the importance of personalization factors in increasing engagement in a Blended Academic Leadership Development Program. First, this study found the effectiveness of highly interactive activities in increasing engagement. As Fredricks et al. (2004) discussed multiple factors that influence student engagement, consistent with the present study, factors such as program design and participants’ academic qualifications had a significant impact in terms of engagement. This finding supports the consideration of personalization factors in future program design to improve engagement.

Finally, the results of this study mentioned the importance of academic leadership in the context of globalization. Participant feedback indicated that participants were better able to address diverse leadership challenges through intercultural communication training. Future research should further explore the effectiveness of academic leadership training in different cultural contexts by expanding multiple data collection methods through direct surveys and interviews. The study also acknowledges its limitations, such as the relatively small sample size of self-reports and the reliance on engagement scores and participant reports. Through direct surveys and interviews, future research should expand the multiple data collection methods for better academic scope.

6. Conclusions

The study uses a mixed method and integrates quantitative and qualitative methods to provide a comprehensive picture of the complexity of the leadership training program. Quantitative analysis of engagement scores from 110 academics revealed influences on engagement, while qualitative insights from 20 self-feedback reports provided depth and context to these findings. Results showed that the potential impact of gender on engagement was not statistically significant in this study. It may still have an impact in specific contexts. Therefore, there is a need for future research to further explore the role of gender in academic leadership development to better optimize program design. Studies have also shown that it effectively improves a variety of leadership skills. From experienced academics, participants gain theoretical knowledge and practical skills, including leadership theory, case sharing, organizational and public speaking skills, interdisciplinary and international collaboration skills, and social citizenship.

Participants reported that the program had a positive impact on their professional and personal lives as a result of improved leadership skills, promoted the application of interdisciplinary and cross-industry leadership practices, and demonstrated the practical benefits of combining theoretical knowledge with practical implementation.

Blended learning is important in academic leadership training because it provides a flexible and diverse offline and online learning environment that enhances participant engagement and the development of key leadership skills.

In summary, this paper contributes to the body of knowledge for academic leadership development by providing empirical evidence on the benefits of blended learning models. It provides practical advice for designing effective leadership programs that enable academic leaders to navigate and thrive in the dynamic and complex environment of modern higher education.