Search results

Undergraduate peer mentorship has the potential to transform mentor and mentee alike. In an effort to understand the potential positive effects of a peer mentorship program on honors peer mentors, paired sample t-tests of data from a pre-test / post-test of at least 69 honors first-year seminar facilitators shows that respondents grew in their leadership efficacy and teaching efficacy. Mentors also show modest gains in their sense of belonging to the honors program. Qualitative analysis of assessment discursive data further indicates that the yearlong facilitation experience is a mechanism for mentors’ growth. Results indicate that being a peer mentor is a powerful means of fostering student development across multiple dimensions, including leadership efficacy, while meeting the goals outlined by a transformative honors educational experience.

Inclusive leadership education espouses a generalized set of values that it hopes to impart to students, what Foucault (1978) would call discourse. However, students may choose to embrace, resist, alter, or challenge particular aspects of a class’s discourse. Qualitative analysis compared multicultural leadership course students’ pre-test and post-test responses to a question that asked them to define inclusion. Four changes in narratives emerged: some students 1) exhibited heightened awareness of difference, 2) transitioned away from egocentrism in leadership thinking, 3) expressed more comfort with thinking about inclusion as an abstract concept, and 4) challenged the charge to define inclusion.

Multicultural leadership education may be enhanced through the use of social construction literature as a theoretical frame. Here, I present a brief overview of social construction theory and demonstrate how its tenets overlap with the goal of encouraging students’ intercultural competence. I then provide two classroom activities that illustrate how I have used social construction to explain and examine interaction across diverse groups, as well as student feedback regarding the activities’ efficacy.

To better meet the learning objectives in a multicultural leadership class, I developed an assignment that uses action research and community-based research as frameworks for the course’s culminating assignment. Called the Community-Based Action Research (CBAR) assignment, the experience invites students to develop research questions related to inclusion, connect with community partners to find the answers to these questions, then share their results through interactive dialogue with colleagues. Here, I discuss the structure and implementation of the CBAR. I then reflect on student interviews and completed CBARs to illustrate the assignment’s potential to support course learning outcomes, as well as its limitations.

Contemporary trends in leadership education emphasize paradigms of learning and educational practices associated with developing responsible citizens, furthering higher education’s civic mission. Yet, few introductory leadership courses include an explicit civic component (Johnson & Woodard, 2014). Service-learning is a high-impact practice designed to link the classroom and community in meaningful ways (Kuh, 2008). This application brief illustrates how Kansas State University faculty, students, and community partners engaged in a semester-long service-learning experience for the purpose of exercising leadership to make progress on the social issue of food insecurity. We describe how service-learning can be a catalyst to explore and engage the learning nexus of social challenges, leadership, and civic engagement in an introductory leadership course.

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.

The JOLE Editorial Advisory Board provides an introduction to the 20th anniversary issue of The Journal of Leadership Education.

A contributor to the Financial Times recently observed that the rise of the package has temporarily outstripped the rise of the “ profession or calling ” of packaging. It was for this reason that the Institute of Packaging organised the very interesting exhibition held at Olympia during the third week of January. The packaging of foodstuffs was necessarily one of the most important sections of the Exhibition—for reasons which are not hard to grasp. Not only has the consumption of bottled beer outstripped draught sales from barrels, but a whole host of foods have moved and continue to move into the domain of packed merchandise. For the moment it will suffice to mention sugar, flour, confectionery, bread, butter, cheese, bacon, vegetables, fruit, and even (occasionally) meat and fish. It has been estimated that the grocery trade sells nearly 80 per cent of its goods in packages. For the consumer, the packaging of food promises quality, purity and freshness, and, within certain limits, full weight and measure. In self‐service retailing, of course, the package is all‐important. Not only does the appearance of the package and its label take the place of the salesman in the retail shop, but the wrapping must also be a barrier which will be a safeguard against excessive evaporation, without inducing mould growth, and against decomposition and stateness. Conditions of moisture, humidity, temperature and pressure may be critical for the preservation of foods in the best possible state. There are dangers arising not only from the effect of the packaging material on the food but also from the reverse influence of the food on the container.