Search results

This research explores the instructional strategies most frequently used by leadership educators who teach academic credit-bearing undergraduate leadership studies courses through a national survey and identifies signature pedagogies within the leadership discipline. Findings from this study suggest that class discussion—whether in the form of true class discussion or a hybrid of interactive lecture and discussion—is the signature pedagogy for undergraduate leadership education. While group and individual projects and presentations, self-assessments and instruments, and reflective journaling were also used frequently, overall, discussion-based pedagogies were used most frequently. These findings offer attributes that a variety of leadership educators have shared as effective for teaching and learning within the discipline and may facilitate the development of new leadership programming policies, provide direction for future research, and contribute to the existing body of literature.

It is becoming increasingly important for leaders to recognize and develop the skills needed to interact with diverse others (Karim, 2003). To this end, several leadership programs in American colleges and universities offer courses that explore the practice of multicultural leadership (Brungardt, Greenleaf, Brungardt, & Arensdorf, 2006); our institution’s leadership program is no different in its goals of preparing culturally competent leaders. The multicultural leadership course in the Staley School of Leadership Studies at Kansas State University has two learning outcomes: “Understand the impact of cultural identity (Note that this manuscript uses the terms social identity and cultural identity interchangeably, which is common practice (Wren, 2002), life experiences, and world views on leadership relationships as it relates to privilege and inclusion,” and, “Practice inclusive leadership through advocacy for social change.” Such goals are desirable, but also lofty – how can we know if our course has had any effect on student learning toward these objectives?

Theory-informed assessment of the effects of multicultural leadership courses can meet many pedagogical needs while answering the demands of multiple stakeholders (Fink, 2006; Wholey, Hatry, & Newcomer, 2004). Knowing what changes occur in students’ attitudes or behaviors during a multicultural leadership course would permit faculty, staff, and other practitioners to evaluate whether the experience may be able to meet desired learning goals. Future courses could be recalibrated to address deficiencies or strengthen successes. Assessment data also facilitates the sharing of the course’s effects to administrators, prospective students, parents, or donors in efforts to communicate the value of intentional, curricular student leadership development.

Beyond these larger-scale needs for assessment, we have an interest in knowing to what degree the course contributes to our students’ engagement and leadership development. Assessment can help us to identify what students are learning as a result of the course. Further, we hope that sharing our assessment structure, analysis, and results can help other leadership educators strengthen a culture of assessment in their own programs, particularly concerning multicultural leadership development.

To determine if we are making progress in meeting our learning outcomes, we developed an assessment tool to determine students’ change over the course of the term across two theoretical constructs: diversity attitudes, which encapsulates the first learning goal of recognizing linkages between worldview and leadership (Bennett, 2004; Karim, 2003; Komives, Longerbeam, Owen, Mainella, & Osteen, 2006); and changes in leadership behaviors and attitudes, which speaks to the second learning goal of catalyzing social change-based leadership (Komives, Wagner, & Associates, 2009).

We use a pre-test / post-test design to compare students’ reported values at the beginning of the semester to their values upon completion of the class (Fink, 2006). By comparing pre-test and post-test responses to questions from the assessment instrument, we demonstrate in what ways our course might influence student leadership development and multicultural competence, as well as areas we might wish to consider fortifying in future iterations of the course to better meet learning objectives. We then reflect on the effect the results will have on learning outcomes, curricular development, and the instrument itself, illustrating the cyclical relationship between theory, practice, and assessment in multicultural leadership education.

We have two aims here. Our first is to articulate what gains may be made by students who engage in our course to determine what exactly is gained by students who participate in such experiences. We believe such courses have educational value, but needed to find a way to articulate our course’s success in helping students meet our stated learning objectives. Our second aim is to illustrate both the necessity, rewards, and limitations of engaging in critical engagement with the assessment-practice cycle (Maki, 2002). Here, we reflect on what changes we or others could make to our course to better achieve our desired goals, as well as how we might continue to strengthen our assessment efforts. We hope that our analysis here provides some starting points to assess multicultural leadership programs’ efficacy in meeting student learning outcomes.

This global, quantitative study explores the instructional and assessment strategy use of leadership educators who teach online, academic credit-bearing leadership studies courses at graduate- and undergraduate-levels. Participants include 81 graduate-level and 37 undergraduate- level instructors who taught an online leadership studies course within two years of completing the web-based survey used in this study. Findings suggest that discussion-based pedagogies, most commonly facilitated in online discussion boards, were the most widely used strategies. And, while reflection, case studies, and group or individual projects were also used frequently, instructors teaching graduate-level courses used ungraded formative quizzes significantly more often than undergraduate instructors. Findings also suggest that instructors attached the most weight to their students’ overall course grades to discussion boards, major writing projects or term papers, and participation.

The purpose of this study was to understand if selected leadership pedagogy (hands on activities) utilized in an organizational behavior classroom contributed to the development of workplace readiness skills. Since successful organizational behavior classes and hands on learning can lead to successful graduates, the importance of leadership pedagogy emerges. In the case here, the participants in one organizational behavior class were followed through a single semester providing feedback to the instructors on the perceived effectiveness of the participatory activities. The researchers found that, in this case, the students shared mixed reactions to the activities, but were able to share positive impacts and gains they felt they received from participating in those activities. Readiness skills were developed, however recommendations for further research and practice are included.

This study describes the development of a grounded theory of applied critical thinking in leadership studies and examines how student-centered experiential learning in leadership education bridged critical thinking with action. Over three semester undergraduate students in an upper level leadership studies course at a large four-year public institution in the southeastern United States completed a written assignment in which they were asked to define the concept of “leading critically.” A grounded theory of critical leadership – utilizing critical thinking skills to make decisions about leadership actions in different situations – emerged after completing a qualitative document analysis of these papers and incorporating the researchers’ existing knowledge of leadership and student development theory. The hope is that this research will create dialogue concerning new approaches to leadership education and encourage practices that apply critical thinking skills to leadership.