Search results

Roberts and Ullom (1989) theorized that leadership programs should consist of training, education, and development programs. Their model has gained widespread acceptance since its inception, but has not evolved to reflect contemporary conceptualizations of leadership. This paper demonstrates a new conceptualization of the model updated for modern process-oriented leadership, the student leadership programming matrix. The new model casts program styles against individual and group functions, thereby creating a more holistic perspective of the leadership phenomenon. The model is also explored in relation to assessment, campus culture, and sample programs.

This application brief describes the exploratory assessment of a mentoring program between current students and alumni of a leadership studies minor program. We connect leadership education research and practice in two ways: first, we describe a process of qualitative program evaluation to inform program best practices and improvement. In doing so, we also highlight the value of an alumni mentoring program as a strategic component of leadership education. Our findings demonstrate the mentoring program supported students’ leadership development in the areas of career transition, personal growth, and application to “real-life.” Recommendations are offered for creating formal and informal mentoring opportunities.

Research examining the multicultural competence of leadership educators across a variety of institutions demonstrated variance based on leadership program structure, program elements, and the ways in which diversity was addressed in the program. The Multicultural Competence in Student Affairs–Preliminary 2 (MCSA-P2) scale was used to measure multicultural competence among student affairs professionals responsible for leadership education and an analysis of results suggests that multicultural competence may be reflected in practice, more specifically the design and structure, of leadership programs.

If your community is looking for more committed and competent leaders, what type of educational intervention will get the best results? U-Lead, the University of Minnesota Extension’s community leadership program, engages with organizations and communities to strengthen leadership. As the educational provider of U-Lead, Extension has a responsibility to provide quality programs as well as honor time and resource constraints. The primary question of this study is: what impact, if any, does the program duration have on participant outcomes? Key Observations include (a) the longest duration programs consistently had the most improvements in skills and knowledge, (b) after completing programs, more people are committing to leadership positions. This does not appear to correlate to program duration, (c) using evaluation data for modifying programs and starting additional programs leads to more significant participant change, and (d) community leadership theory and measurement can lead to better programs with greater results.

Agricultural leadership programs have been widely supported by both the public and private sector and have been praised for the “networking” they provide. However, is there any community benefit? Could these programs be doing more? This paper provides some insight into these issues by looking at contributions of the related research. First, a connection is made between social capital theory and the value of networking. Then, agricultural leadership programs are discussed in terms of benefits they provide to participants and the communities that they serve. Finally, an application component is proposed for use in agricultural leadership programs as a way of improving the effectiveness for the communities that support them.

This study compared characterizations of successful leaders held by students enrolled in a college level leadership education program to those of students who did not participate in the program. Participants consisted of students from the following groups: graduating seniors who completed the leadership program, students enrolled in the first course of the program, and students who never enrolled in leadership courses. Each participant rated a “successful leader” on descriptors from Duehr & Bono’s (2006) Revised Descriptive Index. Scoring of these descriptors resulted in five leadership dimensions: agentic, communal, task-oriented, relationship-oriented, and transformational. Analyses compared these dimension ratings across the three groups of participants. Results revealed that non-leadership students ascribed significantly higher levels of agentic and task-oriented characteristics to successful leaders than both beginning and graduating leadership students. Non-leadership students also ascribed significantly lower levels of communal characteristics to successful leaders than graduating leadership students. Results showed no significant differences between the three groups of students in relationship-oriented or transformational characteristics ascribed to successful leaders. These finding have implications for leadership education.

The Engineering Leaders of Tomorrow Program (LOT) is a comprehensive curricular, co-curricular, extra-curricular leadership development initiative for engineering students. LOT envisions: “an engineering education that is a life-long foundation for transformational leaders and outstanding citizens.” Academic courses, co-curricular certificate programs, departmental programs, and stand alone workshops emphasize four domains of leadership: Self, Relational, Organizational, and Societal Leadership. This article introduces the 14 week summer leadership initiative for research students in the Department of Chemical Engineering and Applied Chemistry. Students gather on Friday afternoons from early May to late August to learn and practice leadership. Based on student assessment data, the program is having positive impact.

This article highlights the Chancellor’s Leadership Class, a highly selective, four-year program for undergraduate students at the University of Colorado at Colorado Springs. The four primary components of the program are coursework, community service, skill building, and mentoring. Although the program has a uniform structure for all students, it is tailored to meet the unique needs and goals of each student through a concept called prescriptive leadership development.

This research sought to determine if there existed a common set of courses amongst undergraduate leadership degree programs, provide guidance for new program development and program revision, promote discussion about future leadership curriculum development and provide a starting point for developing common leadership curriculum expectations nationally.

Content analysis was performed.

Program course similarities appear to represent the organic development of unofficial common core requirements within undergraduate leadership programs. Further, there appeared to be no significant trend as to which academic department leadership programs were placed.

This study identifies commonly occurring classes in traditional leadership degrees, offering insights for the development of new programs and assessment of current leadership degrees.

In this chapter we used a content analysis process (Sanzo, 2012) on select 2010 and 2013 funded grant projects that focus specifically on leadership preparation and development in small and mid-sized urban school districts. The purpose of this analysis was to better understand how School Leadership Program (SLP) grant projects approach leadership preparation and development in small to medium-sized districts. Specifically, we explored how and in what ways did these grant-funded partnerships propose to recruit, structure partnerships, and mentor/coach participants. We discovered that SLP projects in this analysis utilize innovative means of recruiting and selecting program participants in a variety of ways, do not utilize a “one-size-fits” all model in their approach to preparing and developing school leaders, and employ authentic partnerships utilize a variety of collaborative mechanisms.