Daniel Jenkins

Little is known about the leadership educators who work in more than 2,000 leadership programs worldwide. This phenomenological study of 13 experienced leadership educators from four states and 11 universities explored the lived experiences of becoming and being a leadership educator in higher education. Four sub themes emerged from participants’ understanding of becoming a leadership educator: (a) Impact; (b) Serendipity; (c) Fake it till you make it; and (d) Developing others. And, six sub themes emerged from participants’ understanding of being a leadership educator: (a) Being a helper; (b) Being experimental; (c) Being an advocate; (d) Being a role model; (e) Being passionate; and (f ) Being an agitator.

This perspective piece addresses specifically future lines of inquiry and practice that advance the goals of the agenda through an interdisciplinary approach to leadership studies. Here, the authors explain in-depth the contexts of an interdisciplinary approach to the agenda and address specific challenges therein. In order to provide clarity to this approach, considerations are made with respect to the language, contextual reference points, and tensions regarding measurement of learning. The authors provide impetus for inclusion of particular, salient priorities from the agenda, and address opportunities for practice and future research. Suggestions reveal unique opportunities within an interdisciplinary perspective such as the integration of diverse content and perspectives as well as collaboration across disciplines.

The authors compare the results from two studies regarding the use of instructional strategies in two disciplines: Leadership Studies (LS) and Information Systems (IS); both studies employed similar original web-based instrument that were tailored to each disciplines. The first study was a national study (n = 303) surveying U.S.-based undergraduate leadership studies instructors that were either personally members or departmental members of the International Leadership Association, NASPA, or the National Clearinghouse for Leadership Programs.  The second study was a large-scale national study (n = 695) surveying U.S.-based IS faculty members who were a member of the Association of Information Systems. The authors compared the 17 instructional strategies that were described similarly in both studies. The results of independent t-test confirmed that the two disciplines used 16 out of 17 instructional strategies differently in each discipline. The authors also discussed which instructional strategies were used more often in one of the two disciplines.

The author explored 24 commonly used  instructional strategies in student leadership development programming recently  profiled  in the  leadership education literature. Through a national web-based survey,  this study  asked  leadership educators teaching classroom-based academic credit-bearing undergraduate  leadership studies  courses  how  often  they  used  certain  instructional  strategies. Leadership  educators showed a preference for discussion-based pedagogies as well as instructional strategies that  promoted conceptual understanding and  personal growth. Although the  infrequent use of tests  and  quizzes  in leadership education was anticipated, the sparse  use of highly experiential skill-building activities such as simulation, role play, and  games" "was surprising."

Global critical leadership competency means espousing critical thinking skills in all aspects of leadership decision making in the global context. This paper reviews the actions of critical thinking, argues that global leaders too must lead critically, and draws attention to the deficiency of critical thinking curricula in higher education and subsequent lack of recent graduates with critical thinking competencies. Leading critically is defined as applying critical thinking skills to decisions about leadership actions in different situations and is a challenge for leaders, followers, and educators. Nevertheless, global leaders, stakeholders, and educators in global leadership programs must embrace this challenge in order to make informed decisions in global contexts.

This research explores the learning goals that instructors teaching undergraduate leadership studies courses emphasize most through a national survey.  The findings suggest that instructors emphasized learning goals that focused more on application, integration, and the human dimension than on foundational knowledge, caring, and learning how to learn.

This research explores the instructional strategies used by instructors teaching academic credit‐bearing undergraduate leadership studies courses through a national survey. The findings suggest an emphasis in discussion‐based and inclusive pedagogies and a milder use of highly interactive skill‐building pedagogies than once thought.

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.""

"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."

Leadership education has been integral to the undergraduate curriculum since the early 1990’s.  Today, more than 1,000 colleges and universities in the United States offer undergraduate courses in leadership studies and many offer academic credit in the form of a bachelor's degree, academic minor, or certificate.  Yet, little is known about those who teach leadership studies courses to undergraduates, the instructional strategies they employ, or the learning goals they set.  The purpose of this study was to identify the instructional strategies that are most frequently used by instructors when they teach academic credit-bearing undergraduate leadership studies courses, identify signature pedagogies within the leadership discipline, and assess the learning goals instructors believe are of the greatest importance in their courses.  Schulman’s framework of Signature Pedagogies provided the framework for the portion of this study which identified the instructional strategies used most frequently.  An exploratory factor analysis was performed to identify patterns of instructional strategies most often used.  Fink’s Model of Significant Learning and Integrated Course Design provided the framework for the portion of this study that assessed the learning goals instructors believe are of the greatest importance in their courses. 
Results of a unique web-based survey of 303 instructors that taught academic credit-bearing undergraduate leaderships studies courses between 2008 and 2010 were analyzed using quantitative methods to identify the instructional strategies used most frequently by instructors within the leadership discipline and assess the learning goals instructors believe are of the greatest importance.  Participants were solicited through the membership of the International leadership Association, National Clearinghouse for Leadership Programs, and NASPA Student Affairs Professionals in Higher Education.  Data from 303 survey participants were analyzed and results indicated that instructors teaching undergraduate leadership studies courses prefer discussion-based pedagogies (such as class discussion) and instructional strategies that prioritize conceptual understanding and personal growth far more than traditional teaching and learning strategies like quizzes, exams, and lecture or skill-building activities such as role play, simulation, or games.  Findings from this study suggest that class discussion—whether in the form of true class discussion or a variation 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.  Survey results also indicated that instructors place the greatest importance on learning goals that emphasize application, integration, and the human dimensions of significant learning more so than the learning goals of promoting foundational knowledge, caring, and metacognition (learning how to learn).  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.