Course Design for Leadership Learning in an Experiential Program
Saved in:
| Title: | Course Design for Leadership Learning in an Experiential Program |
|---|---|
| Language: | English |
| Authors: | Tara Penry (ORCID |
| Source: | Journal of Experiential Education. 2024 47(4):667-684. |
| Availability: | SAGE Publications. 2455 Teller Road, Thousand Oaks, CA 91320. Tel: 800-818-7243; Tel: 805-499-9774; Fax: 800-583-2665; e-mail: journals@sagepub.com; Web site: https://sagepub.com |
| Peer Reviewed: | Y |
| Page Count: | 18 |
| Publication Date: | 2024 |
| Document Type: | Journal Articles Reports - Research |
| Education Level: | Higher Education Postsecondary Education |
| Descriptors: | Leadership Training, Experiential Learning, Instructional Design, Student Attitudes, Interdisciplinary Approach, Teacher Attitudes, Faculty, College Students, Course Descriptions, Content Analysis, Leadership Styles, Cooperative Learning, Concept Teaching, State Universities, Urban Areas, Vertical Organization, Curriculum Design, Program Descriptions, Student Needs, Direct Instruction |
| DOI: | 10.1177/10538259241226972 |
| ISSN: | 1053-8259 2169-009X |
| Abstract: | Background: Leadership development is commonly named as an outcome for experiential learning (EL) programs. Some programs have shown success at inculcating individual leadership traits. However, it is not clear whether there is a relationship between certain kinds of experiential pedagogy and specific leadership concepts or styles, such as industrial and postindustrial leadership and other concepts. Purpose: The researchers identify course-design factors associated with leadership-learning outcomes in an interdisciplinary EL program called Vertically Integrated Projects. Method: From five courses across disciplines, faculty were interviewed and syllabi and student reflections were analyzed for concepts of leadership and course designs. Findings: Students showed the most evidence of leadership learning when at least two of the three factors were present: (i) flexible and cooperative course structures; (ii) conceptual instruction; and (iii) faculty coaching. Leadership practice is distinguished from leadership learning. Implications: Leadership educators recommend conceptual instruction prior to experiential learning; the findings support supplementing that instruction with a flexible, cooperative course design to encourage leadership learning. More research is needed on the relationship between "vertical" experiences, in which advanced students mentor junior students in courses of any size, and leadership development. |
| Abstractor: | As Provided |
| Entry Date: | 2024 |
| Accession Number: | EJ1449962 |
| Database: | ERIC |
|
Full text is not displayed to guests.
Login for full access.
|
|
| FullText | Links: – Type: pdflink Url: https://content.ebscohost.com/cds/retrieve?content=AQICAHj0k_4E0hTGH8RJwT4gCJyBsGNe_WN95AvKlDbXJGqwxwEbiVCRWvtVfGHfQ4PN-SbtAAAA4zCB4AYJKoZIhvcNAQcGoIHSMIHPAgEAMIHJBgkqhkiG9w0BBwEwHgYJYIZIAWUDBAEuMBEEDGEQhASqNBCFfUtVEgIBEICBm-kE0-bROGds9Fp4U8rg_jF24_WIp4GknalozD_UC2dDnuNhS0yT8jIHYXGPiJF4MIt31-wNXci7e6RfwBaqVs_MpN29SdoLq1SbYITAvLhG54paxTfLN-BW-xbvrwq7uizMbsNT2pKLIvyTkCL5Myf4tFBZ8gNp1Am9E3FyW3WV4Ep4oZ6S_Ao6wqhrxflZmOytm33k6G-iJnBI Text: Availability: 1 Value: <anid>AN0180988071;8l501dec.24;2024Nov22.02:17;v2.2.500</anid> <title id="AN0180988071-1">Course Design for Leadership Learning in an Experiential Program </title> <p>Background: Leadership development is commonly named as an outcome for experiential learning (EL) programs. Some programs have shown success at inculcating individual leadership traits. However, it is not clear whether there is a relationship between certain kinds of experiential pedagogy and specific leadership concepts or styles, such as industrial and postindustrial leadership and other concepts. Purpose: The researchers identify course-design factors associated with leadership-learning outcomes in an interdisciplinary EL program called Vertically Integrated Projects. Method: From five courses across disciplines, faculty were interviewed and syllabi and student reflections were analyzed for concepts of leadership and course designs. Findings: Students showed the most evidence of leadership learning when at least two of the three factors were present: (i) flexible and cooperative course structures; (ii) conceptual instruction; and (iii) faculty coaching. Leadership practice is distinguished from leadership learning. Implications: Leadership educators recommend conceptual instruction prior to experiential learning; the findings support supplementing that instruction with a flexible, cooperative course design to encourage leadership learning. More research is needed on the relationship between "vertical" experiences, in which advanced students mentor junior students in courses of any size, and leadership development.</p> <p>Keywords: experiential education; leadership learning; Vertically Integrated Projects (VIP); postindustrial leadership; industrial leadership; course design; higher education</p> <p>Leadership development is commonly named as an outcome for experiential learning (EL) programs. But programs vary widely, as does the relative importance of leadership among other course outcomes. As [<reflink idref="bib8" id="ref1">8</reflink>] point out, "[E]xperiential learning ... aids the development of both domain-specific knowledge and skills, as well as generic learning outcomes" (p. 2). Much research on student leadership comes from contexts that might be called "domain-specific" (e.g., Leadership Studies programs), so there is room for more scholarship about what faculty and students mean by leadership when it appears as a "generic learning outcome."</p> <p>To researchers who know the literature, "leadership" has undergone great changes in meaning in the past 20 years, so that a recent book titled <emph>After Leadership</emph> ([<reflink idref="bib5" id="ref2">5</reflink>]) finds "ontological, epistemological and methodological polyphony" where nonspecialists might hope for a plain definition. Most perplexing to instructors for whom leadership is a generic outcome, "many scholars now view leadership as a property of the collective, not the individual" ([<reflink idref="bib7" id="ref3">7</reflink>], p. 174), so that leadership instruction may look more like instruction in teamwork or group dynamics today, rather than the development of attributes in individuals. However, in broad experiential programs in which leadership appears as a "generic learning outcome," meanings vary widely. The definition offered by [<reflink idref="bib6" id="ref4">6</reflink>] would suffice for many an experiential program: "Leadership is a process of social influence in which one person is able to enlist the aid and support of others in the accomplishment of a common task" (p. 1).</p> <p>Within academic Leadership Studies programs, there has been a call for more experiential "practice field[s] where students can apply leadership learning, receive feedback, and reflect" ([<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref5">2</reflink>], p. 44). As co-instructors in an EL program naming student leadership as an outcome for all courses, the researchers became curious about whether a broad, interdisciplinary program like theirs could provide the "practice field" that Allen &amp; Shehane and others have called for. They teach a Vertically Integrated Project (VIP), part of a global network of research-based university courses founded at Georgia Tech University more than 20 years ago ([<reflink idref="bib30" id="ref6">30</reflink>]). In a VIP, students work alongside faculty mentors on research projects with real-world applications. Leadership is one of a cluster of learning outcomes expected of individual courses, though it is up to faculty to define what leadership means in their course context. The questions apply not only to VIPs but also to other interdisciplinary experiential programs with leadership as a generic outcome: What do teachers teach and students learn about leadership in these generic-outcome environments? Do differently structured experiential settings produce different leadership learning outcomes?</p> <p>A VIP is an experiential setting that seems to imply a specific paradigm of leadership. As indicated by the name VIP, the default structure of all these projects would seem to be hierarchical and expertise-based. As the international VIP Consortium website spells it out, "[F]aculty and graduate students mentor teams, experienced students mentor new members, and students move into leadership positions as others graduate" (VIP Consortium, n.d., "The VIP Consortium [Overview]"). Within leadership studies, this structure is called "industrial" ([<reflink idref="bib25" id="ref7">25</reflink>]; Rost &amp; Smith, 1992). Leadership of the industrial era created structures to advance the function of the organization, with leadership defined as "good management" ([<reflink idref="bib25" id="ref8">25</reflink>], pp. 94, 180). Like industrial corporations, VIP courses are designed to be "scalable," with the number of participants at the bottom of the hierarchy limited only by the number of people available to supervise them. By contrast, "postindustrial leadership" is "an influence relationship among leaders and followers who intend real changes that reflect the purposes mutually held by both leaders and followers" ([<reflink idref="bib25" id="ref9">25</reflink>], p. 102). In other words, in a postindustrial context, the <emph>relationship</emph> between "leader" and "followers" takes precedence over the organizational <emph>function</emph>, and "purposes" are negotiated between all members of the organization, without any specific structure or hierarchy. In theory, a VIP course requires the "good management" of an industrial organization, where people with more expertise ("faculty and graduate students") have the ability to "mentor new members," and people at lower levels of experience move up over time (VIP Consortium, n.d.). However, in practice, as in any EL environment, VIP faculty members can design courses based on any concept of leadership.</p> <p>On the campus where this study occurred, most VIP courses were quite small at the time of the study (10 students or fewer in a course), and many had only undergraduates. With smaller courses, hierarchical leadership was not mandatory. The researchers wondered: How much did leadership concepts and practices vary from EL course to EL course in this single program? For the benefit of other experiential educators outside the VIP universe, what could be learned from this interdisciplinary program about the relationship between experiential course designs and leadership outcomes?</p> <p>In this article, the researchers discuss faculty and student perceptions of leadership in a multidisciplinary sample of VIPs. From qualitative data, they created a framework for understanding and naming various leadership outcomes. Based on faculty and student keywords and their analysis of course designs, they apply this framework to sort leadership outcomes in the course sample. Whether leadership lessons were explicit or implied, the study found consistency between student and faculty conceptual language about leadership and a possible relationship between experiential course design and student practices of leadership.</p> <p>This study's conclusions are relevant both to <emph>leadership educators</emph> who call for more experiential "practice fields" for students, and to <emph>experiential educators</emph> who have analyzed the leadership traits of individual learners but not the leadership concepts of entire courses or programs. The goal is to understand how variable course designs in a postsecondary experiential program may lead to the acquisition of different leadership concepts.</p> <hd id="AN0180988071-2">Literature Review</hd> <p>There is widespread agreement in the journals and textbooks of the field of leadership studies and related scholarship that experiential methods are valuable for teaching leadership ([<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref10">3</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib11" id="ref11">11</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib24" id="ref12">24</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib32" id="ref13">32</reflink>]). The inaugural issue of the <emph>Journal of Leadership Education</emph> more than 20 years ago asserted that "leadership learning is applied learning" ([<reflink idref="bib15" id="ref14">15</reflink>], p. 29). Many studies also testify to the value of experiential learning for the cultivation of complex leadership attributes (e.g., [<reflink idref="bib22" id="ref15">22</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib23" id="ref16">23</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib24" id="ref17">24</reflink>]).</p> <p>Yet despite the perceived value of experiential pedagogies to leadership educators, [<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref18">2</reflink>] note a dearth of "practice fields" where students can apply their leadership learning, receive feedback, and reflect (p. 44). As recently as 2020, Watkins agreed: "Pervading recent scholarship is the notion that the best way to cultivate leadership skills is through a combination of meaningful experience and purposeful reflection" (p. 100); however, "Inside the leadership classroom, ... conceptualization and reflection dominate, while direct experience and purposeful experimentation prove difficult to come by" (p. 101). These recent observations bear out the findings of a pair of studies conducted a decade ago that the "signature methods" of instruction in leadership studies were "discussion-based pedagogies" such as interactive lecture, class discussion, and small group discussion (Jenkins, 2012, 2013, [<reflink idref="bib19" id="ref19">19</reflink>]). Prevailing methods notwithstanding, when students were asked how they would like to learn about leadership and given a list of options, they identified experiential methods as their preferences: service learning, role-playing, and games/simulations ([<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref20">1</reflink>]).</p> <p>[<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref21">3</reflink>] has proposed that experiential methods may be especially useful for teaching "postindustrial" models of leadership. Since [<reflink idref="bib25" id="ref22">25</reflink>] defined postindustrial leadership as a style based on "an influence relationship among leaders and their collaborators" to effect "mutual purposes" (p. 99), leadership theorists have marked a "paradigm shift," so that "many scholars now view leadership as a property of the collective, not the individual" ([<reflink idref="bib7" id="ref23">7</reflink>], p. 174). [<reflink idref="bib20" id="ref24">20</reflink>] note that "Although this paradigm shift is still evolving, it is clear that the collective is becoming a more prominent dimension of leadership" (p. 191). The shift toward postindustrial leadership is well-suited to experiential instruction, [<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref25">3</reflink>] suggests, because the uncertainties and discomforts of experiential education provide a laboratory for the discomforts and negotiations of new leadership practices.</p> <p>However, unless they are also experts in the scholarly literature on leadership, experiential educators may not have any idea that they are part of a paradigm shift in leadership training—nor any investment in this responsibility. As in any field, the word "leadership" means many things to experts who study it, and fewer things to nonexperts. Scholars who follow leadership research have written hopefully about the potential of experiential education to teach what [<reflink idref="bib9" id="ref26">9</reflink>] calls the "vanguard" of leadership theory: currently postindustrial, collective models of multicentered or distributed authority. However, outside the field of leadership studies, the word leadership may carry only simpler meanings such as "running things" or "managing people." Thus, research to date into the leadership outcomes of experiential programs provides information about the acquisition of leadership traits among individuals ([<reflink idref="bib10" id="ref27">10</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib14" id="ref28">14</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib29" id="ref29">29</reflink>]), but does not attempt to distinguish between the various <emph>concepts</emph> of leadership, such as industrial management and postindustrial negotiation, discussed at length in leadership studies journals and textbooks.</p> <p>Specialists and scholars in leadership studies recommend the intentional pairing of conceptual instruction about leadership with experiences relevant to those conceptual models. [<reflink idref="bib16" id="ref30">16</reflink>] recommend "preparatory lessons" before students practice particular leadership models (p. 48). [<reflink idref="bib12" id="ref31">12</reflink>] agree that "the planned learning needs to be built into the experience" (p. 426). [<reflink idref="bib32" id="ref32">32</reflink>] suggests that in the scholarly literature, the integration of instruction with experience remains elusive and not well documented. There is a need for further research to find out whether the instructor's "preparatory lessons" or "planned learning" about leadership does transfer—or to what extent—to students in experiential settings. There is also a need for research about the transfer of <emph>implicit</emph> leadership lessons, when the instructor has not taken the recommendations of [<reflink idref="bib16" id="ref33">16</reflink>] and [<reflink idref="bib12" id="ref34">12</reflink>] to provide leadership concepts prior to activity.</p> <p>The researchers seek to address one segment of this gap by investigating what students learn and instructors teach about leadership in an experiential learning program in which disciplinary and interdisciplinary outcomes are primary, leadership outcomes secondary. When a program is not centering attention on "preparatory lessons" or "the planned learning needs" in leadership, what implicit concepts about leadership pass from teacher to student in the experiential environment? [<reflink idref="bib11" id="ref35">11</reflink>] have asserted that "mere participation by itself [in student activities] does not take full advantage of what students can learn about leadership" (p. 53). While it is reasonable to expect that students might learn <emph>more</emph> with explicit instruction, this study asks what students are <emph>currently</emph> learning in an experiential setting, with or without explicit instruction in leadership concepts. The researchers look for keywords shared between faculty and students that express their understanding of what leadership means and how it is practiced; they plot courses on a matrix to observe relationships between experiential course designs and the leadership concepts invoked by teachers and students.</p> <hd id="AN0180988071-3">Method</hd> <p>The researchers conducted this study over a two-semester period in 2019–2020 at an urban state university in the U.S. Intermountain West. The study was approved by the IRB at the same institution. Informed consent was obtained from all participants included in the study. This university participates in the international consortium of VIP. In a VIP, students of all class years and majors work alongside faculty on a research or service project. Students can enroll for multiple semesters or years, growing their expertise on a single project and "experienc[ing] different roles on large, multi-disciplinary teams" (VIP Consortium, n.d., <emph>The VIP Model</emph>). Projects are "vertically integrated" because they channel the work of every academic rank (first-year student to faculty) into solving a common problem.</p> <p>From a total of 23 VIPs offered on this campus at the time of the study, the researchers examined five courses representing a range of disciplines. One of the five courses was their own. Two courses involved engineering, one in a virtual environment, the other in an environment of designing products to solve problems and manufacturing them. Two courses addressed themselves to social problems, one in literacy education, the other inviting students to choose problems they could address with the disciplinary methods of design, anthropology, and community health. A fifth course collected oral histories. The five courses in our sample were taught by faculty from four colleges, each project interdisciplinary and focused on practical outcomes (such as designing and manufacturing the prototype for a device, marketing a technology to an intended audience, or assessing the experience of people in relation to community institutions). Unlike traditional classrooms, all of the participating VIPs were light on conceptual instruction, heavy on applied learning. Students brought conceptual knowledge from other classes and made different contributions to projects based on skills and knowledge acquired elsewhere, with the addition of on-the-spot instruction from faculty or senior students.</p> <p>All courses had a different history. One was being offered for the first time during our study. Three courses had been offered for 1 year prior to our study. One course had been offered more than 2 years. Except for one course, all were team-taught by two or three faculty "coaches." At the time of our study, there were four to eight students, including undergraduates and graduates, registered in each class. The similarity of size was important to our study because, as noted above, the hierarchical leadership model of the VIP program allows courses to scale up in size. By comparing courses of similar size, the researchers ensured that they would not be comparing the leadership structure necessitated by course size with structures based on other course factors. All courses in the study were small enough to define leadership in the way best suited to instructors, discipline, project, and materials.</p> <hd id="AN0180988071-4">Participants</hd> <p>The researchers selected courses for the study to represent a range of disciplines in the VIP program at the institution. They emailed faculty to invite participation in the study. Faculty from five courses returned a signed Faculty Consent Form. The researchers visited classes in person or emailed students in four of those classes to obtain Student Consent Forms. For their own class, a staff member with IRB training obtained consent from students while the researchers were not present and kept the consent forms until after all students completed course activities and grades were turned in. Thirty (<reflink idref="bib30" id="ref36">30</reflink>) students from these five courses returned a Student Consent Form. All students were undergraduates.</p> <hd id="AN0180988071-5">Data Collection</hd> <p>The researchers collected syllabi from five courses, conducted interviews with eight faculty coaches, and examined 30 written reflections from students. The faculty interviews were semistructured and lasted for approximately 30 min. During the first semester of the study, participating faculty were interviewed twice, around midterm and during the final weeks of class. In the second semester, faculty interviews were conducted near the end of the semester. One researcher took detailed notes while the other led and audio-recorded interviews. Both asked follow-up questions when needed.</p> <hd id="AN0180988071-6">Data Analysis</hd> <p> <emph>Round 1: Initial analysis.</emph> Both researchers read 10 students' reflection papers of a total pool of 30. Broad initial categories were established to code the data, such as general VIP (for remarks that seemed distinctive to the VIP model of EL), Humanities VIP, leadership and teamwork and other preliminary categories of interest. The researchers color coded all 10 papers together and then divided the remaining 20 reflection papers into two groups. Each took one group and used the four broad coding categories to color code the rest of the data. The same four coding categories were used for the faculty interview notes. When the researchers needed more information or contexts of certain words or phrases, they went back to the interview audio files and listened to them to understand and capture the ideas.</p> <p> <emph>Round 2: Focused analysis.</emph> For the second round of the analysis, the researchers reviewed the language of course syllabi and the coded data of leadership and teamwork in student reflections and faculty interviews. Data with the same color code were clustered into new documents, one for syllabi, the other for participant comments in reflections and interviews.</p> <p>From syllabi, occurrences of the words "leadership," "teamwork," and "collaboration" (or other grammatical forms of these words) were counted. Each syllabus had between two and five references to "teamwork" or "collaboration"; however, references to "leadership" were rare.</p> <p>After counting the occurrences of keywords on syllabi (finding few references to "leadership" or related words), the researchers collected the leadership-and-teamwork-coded data from students' reflection papers and faculty interviews into a single document, maintaining breaks between courses. This document was read multiple times, with researchers separately observing and writing down recurring patterns, then sharing and discussing their thoughts and initial themes. The constant comparative method was employed throughout the process of data analysis in order to identify and refine the emerging themes ([<reflink idref="bib27" id="ref37">27</reflink>]). For each theme that both agreed was important, they returned to the interviews and student reflections to find the language of participants and any recurrences of that theme. In addition, once a theme emerged in one course, the researchers looked for it in others.</p> <p>In this manner, emerging themes were modified, extended, and confirmed from class to class. Data from student reflections, faculty interviews, and syllabi were triangulated to explore relationships between course designs, faculty perceptions, and student perceptions of leadership and teamwork experiences.</p> <p> <emph>Round 3: Applying the data to the Course Design Matrix.</emph> In the early stage of analysis, data were sorted and coded to find out whether Humanities VIPs showed marked differences from STEM VIPs in the teaching and learning of leadership and teamwork. However, this framework proved too limiting. During the focused analysis using the constant comparative method, a better explanatory framework emerged, namely, the course design matrix created previously by the researchers to analyze different types of project-based learning environments ([<reflink idref="bib28" id="ref38">28</reflink>]).</p> <p>On the course design matrix, the five courses were plotted on two axes representing "the degree of teacher or learner decision-making about the course, and the degree of individual or collaborative work required by the project" ([<reflink idref="bib28" id="ref39">28</reflink>]). Reviewing the data coded for Leadership and Teamwork in relation to this matrix, notable differences were identified in the way faculty and students understood "leadership" as courses moved through the matrix, as well as differences in the way they reported leadership learning at the end of their course.</p> <p>To reduce biases at every stage of analysis, the researchers reviewed data separately and discussed them together using peer debriefing. Use of the course design matrix helped them to develop a vocabulary for treating course designs equally, without foregone conclusions favoring some designs over others.</p> <hd id="AN0180988071-7">Findings and Discussion</hd> <p>The findings fell into two major categories. First, the researchers noted the recurrence of the same keywords in faculty and student language about leadership when they compared course syllabi, faculty interview data, and student reflections. From these recurrences, they drew the conclusion that students were learning the specific principles and concepts of leadership that faculty modeled or taught, even as these concepts varied from course to course, and even when syllabi had no explicit definition of leadership. Second, by plotting courses on the course design matrix and examining data in the context of the matrix, it was found that course designs seemed to influence student learning about leadership, as did other factors. Specifically, moderately Flexible course designs (e.g., students were empowered to make some decisions about the course, but not <emph>all</emph> decisions) produced the greatest evidence of student learning about leadership. Courses with relatively Fixed course designs resembled moderately Flexible courses when faculty added coaching and reflection in support of leadership learning. Given the small size of the sample, these findings need to be tested in additional settings, but they offer a prospective way to begin talking about variations in leadership learning in the context of experiential education.</p> <hd id="AN0180988071-8">Students and Faculty Shared Common Concepts—Even in the Absence of Explicit Instruction</hd> <p>Triangulation of syllabus content with faculty interviews and student reflections revealed that students and faculty used similar or identical language to explain what they meant by leadership, and that distinct vocabularies of leadership emerged from separate courses. What made this an interesting finding was the way it seemed to challenge the conventional wisdom in leadership studies, which advises explicit instruction in leadership before students engage in planned experiences ([<reflink idref="bib12" id="ref40">12</reflink>]; [<reflink idref="bib16" id="ref41">16</reflink>]). The findings pointed instead to the importance of mentorship and modeling in experiential learning. Students may be watching and listening and learning regardless of what they are explicitly taught.</p> <p>In course I, for example, faculty and student data showed common conceptions of leadership as "accountability," "responsibility," and "being in charge" of getting tasks done. One student wrote, "The main leadership I had was <emph>being in charge</emph> of finalizing and submitting the grant application" (emphasis added). Another observed, "We are supportive of others['] work and supporting their <emph>responsibility</emph>" (emphasis added). The word "responsibility" and related words ("accountable" and "ownership") also emerged from faculty interviewed for this course. As one faculty member explained, a challenge with student teamwork and leadership was "keeping them organized on what they agree to, helping them to take ownership."</p> <p>In this course, faculty and students understood leadership as a role for an "individual"—especially an individual with expertise. (By contrast, we will see that leadership concepts in some other courses were more reciprocal or shared and emphasized the community or team, not individuals.) One student was identified by a peer as a leader because of his technical expertise. When this student wrote about leadership, he explained, "Sometimes it is just easiest to build something on you[r] own, ... which is what I am often doing ... In big teams (such as a nation or company) still there is much power in the individual, but an individual who can encompass the team and purpose within themselves." This student provided the most extensive discussion of the relation between the "individual" and leadership in our data. From the same class, a faculty member also took some trouble to explain to us what he meant by saying that "Teamwork is individual," meaning that some students are better than others at meeting their responsibilities to the team. These "accountable" students who <emph>completed tasks reliably on their own</emph> were understood by both faculty and students as "leaders." Even though course I did not define or describe leadership on the syllabus, faculty and students applied their common vocabulary through usage rather than explicit conceptual instruction.</p> <p>To cite another example of convergence between student and faculty concepts of leadership, course II participants emphasized that they were replacing one model of leadership—which faculty called "traditional," students called "stereotypical," and both faculty and students referred to as "extroverted"—with another model of leadership that allowed for wider student participation. Faculty members called this "feminist" leadership but did not pass that theoretical name to students; one student referred to the new practice as "little leader[ship]." The words that both faculty and students used to describe their leadership model were "contribution" and "influence." Faculty members said, "One quieter student is thinking things through. An outsider might not think she's a leader, but people pay attention when she speaks." Thinking about the kind of leadership exercised by their "quieter student," faculty described leadership as "contribution, as influence." Students got the message. In the same course, Ginger (pseud) wrote, "I used to think that I couldn't be a leader, because I was new ... I thought that I was going to have to catch up to my peers. However I was wrong ... I ended up being a little leader ... This [Ginger's work] also <emph>contributed</emph> to the project's mission..." (emphasis added). And Inez (pseud) gained new insight into leadership when a faculty member told her that she valued Inez's "calming influence." With this comment, Inez began to question what makes a leader. The "stereotypical vision" of an "extroverted" person "who has a very public presence" was not the only kind of leader; "I was glad to see [faculty] appreciate my more deliberate, slower manner that is attuned to details and nuance."</p> <p>Both students and faculty in course II were aware that they were supplementing or replacing one idea of leadership ("extroverted") with another, at least for students with "quieter" temperaments. The class encouraged students to practice the "little" leadership of "contribution" and "influence" if they did not see themselves as "extroverted" leaders.</p> <p>To cite one more course in which student and faculty language converged around course-specific concepts of leadership, course IV found both faculty and students using words like "team," "relationship," "collaborate," "share," and "support" to describe leadership as relational and reciprocal.</p> <p>Of all courses in the study, course IV included the most extensive description of student leadership expectations on the syllabus. Faculty in this course encouraged every student to take a leadership role over some aspect of the project because leadership underscored the "importance" of every class member. According to the syllabus, "[The class] recognizes the importance of every one of us by giving every team member the opportunity to assume a lead role in at least one Mission." Faculty added that leadership meant to them "collaboration and sharing," as well as "communication" and "reciprocity." The chief responsibility of each student in their leadership role was "to let others know what you need and when you need it"—essentially a role of communication embedded in the team network.</p> <p>Students understood that they were part of an ecosystem, "puzzle," or "full picture" in which each person had an important and "equal" part to play. As one student explained, "every person work[ed] equally on their puzzle piece so that when we [came] together, the pieces show[ed] the full picture." Based on "the shared passion" for the class project, another student "develop[ed] a stronger relationship with my teammates, which allowed me to ask for and contribute help when needed." This student learned that "The best way for a team to succeed is for its members to be invested not just in the end goal, but in each other."</p> <p>In course IV, the recurring concept of a whole ecosystem or team appeared in the syllabus, faculty statements, and student reflections, using multiple related words. The most important characteristic of leadership for both faculty and students seemed to be its embeddedness in an interpersonal system in which every person was "important" or "equal," every person "shared" the "passion" and the labor. To be a "leader" in this course was not an individual identity but a temporary elevation of the importance of each person as a contact point and communicator in connection with other team members. Faculty acknowledged that the small size of the course enabled them to encourage every student to participate in this way.</p> <p>While leadership instruction varied among the courses in our sample, from the syllabi of courses I and III making no reference to leadership, to the syllabus of course IV providing a description of leadership expectations, the mirroring of language and concepts between faculty and students was consistent in most courses, regardless of the presence of explicit conceptual instruction.</p> <hd id="AN0180988071-9">An Optimal Course Design for Leadership Learning? The Benefits of Moderately Flexible-Coopera...</hd> <p>In addition to the keyword analysis that showed students mirroring faculty concepts of leadership both with and without explicit instruction, when the researchers plotted the courses on the foursquare matrix described above in the Method (round 3) section, they noted that students were able to <emph>practice</emph> leadership in every type of experiential course, but the students gave evidence of <emph>learning new concepts</emph> of leadership and new ideas of themselves as leaders in cooperative courses where students had a moderate amount of choice about the course design. Although the courses exhibiting the most leadership learning also had the most leadership instruction, as evidenced by syllabi, student responses suggest that the course structure had as much to do with leadership outcomes as explicit instruction.</p> <p>The course design matrix is a tool the researchers introduced in another paper to distinguish between various styles of experiential learning ([<reflink idref="bib28" id="ref42">28</reflink>]). While scholars of project-based learning have promoted student choice and teamwork, among other qualities, as ingredients in "high-quality" educational projects ([<reflink idref="bib13" id="ref43">13</reflink>]), the course design matrix is a judgment-neutral tool for recognizing variations in teaching styles, disciplinary norms, cultural contexts, and more. Quadrant 1 represents courses in which the teacher makes the decisions (Fixed) and students complete tasks on their own (Individualistic). In Q2, the teacher makes decisions (Fixed) and students work in teams (Cooperative). In Q3, students are empowered to make course decisions (Flexible) and they work alone (Individualistic). In Q4, as noted, students make decisions (Flexible) and work in teams (Cooperative).</p> <p>While the course-design matrix was designed to be judgment-neutral in the analysis of project-based course designs, the leadership data showed the researchers that a zone from the lower-middle of quadrant two (Q2) to the middle of quadrant four (Q4) appeared to be optimal for leadership learning (see shaded area, Figure 1). Specifically, teamwork ("Cooperative") was most predictive of leadership learning, followed by student ability to make at least some course decisions (slightly "Fixed" to "Flexible"). Notably, it was possible for a course to offer <emph>too much</emph> student choice to support leadership learning, a point that will be discussed below.</p> <p>Graph: Figure 1. Participating courses plotted on the course design matrix. In the circled area, students reported new leadership concepts and new identities of themselves as leaders.</p> <p>In these findings, <emph>leadership learning</emph> refers to student self-reports of new leadership concepts and/or new senses of themselves as leaders. Leadership learning was evident in statements matching some version of the following structure: <emph>Before this course I held the view of leadership (or myself as a leader) [x]; and since this course, my view has changed to [y].</emph></p> <p>The course that showed the most evidence of leadership learning was course IV. On the basis of the course design, the researchers plotted this course roughly in the middle of Q4, the Flexible-Cooperative quadrant: students contributed to course decisions, and they worked in teams. According to the syllabus, "To meet the goals of the course, each of you as Lead will encounter unforeseen obstacles [a Flexible characteristic] and will need to call upon teammates for support at any time [a Cooperative characteristic]." Course IV was the closest in our sample to the recommendations of [<reflink idref="bib21" id="ref44">21</reflink>] on the development of leadership skills through service learning. The course gave each student a leadership role, let them choose activities they were passionate about, and put them directly in contact with community liaisons ([<reflink idref="bib21" id="ref45">21</reflink>]).</p> <p>Student reflections from course IV provided direct evidence that for some participants this course's Flexible structure and its culture of reciprocity based around the word "support" led to new leadership concepts and/or self-concepts. One student remarked at length,</p> <p>Prior to this project I held the view that any successful team will have a single leader who directs the group and will also have a defined hierarchy. Being a part of this team has taught me that not all groups should be established this way. By observing everyone in the group take on a different leadership role I learned that teams can be incredibly effective without one central leader. This method allows each member to focus their attention as a leader on the individual components that make up the project, and eases the burden that would otherwise be placed on a single person. The result of this form of collaboration, I believe, is a stronger sense of ownership from each team member and a stronger sense of involvement.</p> <p>Similarly, another student said, "I have often fallen into an individualistic mindset when working in teams with the attitude that I will do my part and my teammates will do their part." But with each team member recognizing "the shared passion" of the others, this student "develop[ed] a stronger relationship with my teammates, which allowed me to ask for and contribute help when needed." Replacing an "individualistic mindset" of leadership and teamwork that called for each person to meet predetermined responsibilities, this student identified "ask[ing] for help" as the most important new characteristic of leadership, and "contribut[ing] help" as the new characteristic of followership. For this student, too, concepts of teamwork and leadership changed together. In the new concept, "The best way for a team to succeed is for its members to be invested not just in the end goal, but in each other."</p> <p>Student comments from course IV provided evidence of postindustrial leadership practices in a small VIP with syllabus language of "shared" leadership and mutual "support." The "transformative" leadership style that [<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref46">3</reflink>] includes in the classification of "postindustrial" leadership is evident "when one or more persons engage with others in such a way that leaders and followers raise one another to higher levels of motivation and morality" ([<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref47">4</reflink>], p. 20, as cited in [<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref48">3</reflink>], p. 602).</p> <p>Further up the y-axis, course II also showed evidence of leadership learning using the same grammar of Before-and-Now. As noted earlier, one student in course II wrote, "I used to think that I couldn't be a leader, because I was new. I didn't know how the class fully worked. I thought that I was going to have to catch up to my peers... I ended up being a little leader ... " Another student also quoted above received an email from faculty expressing appreciation for her "calming influence" in the group. Whereas this student had previously associated leadership with "extroverted" personalities, now it was possible to think of a "calming" manner as a characteristic of leadership. In this Fixed-Cooperative course, the students who showed evidence of leadership learning indicated that faculty members had helped them to their insights about leadership through individual coaching and reflective writing. With faculty intervention, these students saw their contributions as leadership.</p> <p>Another student in course II provided insight into why a Cooperative course structure might increase the chance for some students of leadership learning. One might theorize that cooperative courses allow for the development of leadership in relation to followership, but this student offered a perspective rooted instead in the messy process of collective problem-solving. The student wrote,</p> <p>I've learned that when things aren't going the way you planned, having a team with similar goals made finding the next step way easier. Constantly, in the project and real-life, plans change and [things] must be redirected, and the best way for that to happen is when there's a pool of minds with similar goals but different perspectives.</p> <p>This quotation suggests that a Cooperative course structure does not necessarily teach students hierarchical leader-and-follower roles, but allows them to brainstorm and negotiate to "redirect" their energies in "real-life" situations. For this student, problem-solving with a team created opportunities to "find ... the next step" without faculty instructions or guidance. Although this course was more Fixed than Flexible in our schema, the team structure emboldened this student to brainstorm with peers and shift some leadership responsibility from faculty to students.</p> <p>At the <emph>more</emph> Flexible and <emph>more</emph> Fixed vertical points of courses I and V, and at the Individualistic side of the matrix with course III, students <emph>practiced</emph> leadership but did not report the before-and-after structure of leadership learning, at least as we were able to witness in student and faculty data.</p> <p>The data from course V, the most Flexible course in our study, suggested the existence of a limit to the usefulness of course Flexibility in leadership learning. (This is not a critique of the class, as leadership learning was not a stated outcome.) While students were identifying projects and selecting community partners in the first half of this class, one student exercised leadership by organizing a social gathering for peers, but most had trouble finding something to lead while course activities were still being decided. A faculty member pointed out that the long period of uncertainty called upon students to <emph>practice</emph> skills (such as leadership) they had honed in other classes. The faculty member knew one student from a prior class. This student showed "initiative" in course V and "in every setting." In the absence of evidence of new leadership concepts or identities, the researchers theorize that the very high Flexibility of course V, which resulted in students still seeking projects at the time of the first faculty interviews in October, caused students and faculty to give so much time to fundamental course decisions that leadership learning was not a prominent factor in the course. The fact that course V was in its first semester, a three-way faculty collaboration across two colleges, also meant that faculty gave themselves and students much leeway for Flexibility. Refinement of the course concept and method was a higher priority than leadership learning. With a more established course and a larger study, it would be worth investigating further whether there is a limit to the course Flexibility that promotes leadership learning.</p> <p>Course I (Q2, Fixed—Cooperative), like course V (Q4, Flexible—Cooperative), lies outside the shaded area of the matrix. Course I was more Fixed in design and course V more Flexible than the moderately Flexible middle area where we noted evidence of leadership learning. In course I, multiple students indicated that they brought a concept of leadership based on expertise and "voice" or "direction" to the course, and they had the same concept at the end of the course. The students with more expertise practiced leadership during the course; those who lacked expertise saw themselves as needing to acquire it in order to have more decision-making authority. For example, one student with less technical expertise claimed to "play more of a supporting role on the engineering team under Alex (pseudonym)," and, "I mostly depend on Alex and his directions on how to make changes to the ... design iterations." Asked about leadership and support roles, this student identified relationships of technical knowledge and giving or following "directions" to describe a leader-follower dyad. Another student in this class associated leadership with "bold[ness]" and "voice," allowing, "I could be bolder at times with expressing my opinion on things—I feel as though I sometimes hold back unnecessarily, so being more bold and willing to say what I'm thinking would make me more successful." This student did not acknowledge any change in leadership views. Nor did the student who admitted, "I find it is a bit hard for me to work with people on a team... Sometimes it is just easiest to build something on you[r] own." This course did not alter the do-it-yourself practice the student "often" relied upon.</p> <p>In course III (Q3, Flexible—Individualistic), the faculty member articulated in an interview that leadership meant "a student brings a class or friend into the [technological] space and teaches it [the use of the space or a tool] to others." Leadership represented the pinnacle of this instructor's hierarchy of student engagement. The instructor envisioned that the most "engaged" students in class would also "lead" others by sharing what they learned. This happened when another class came to use the technological space, and students from this study voluntarily assisted the newcomers, showing them how to use available tools. Although this course was Individualistic (students designed their own projects and completed them at their own pace; there was not even a common class meeting time), the syllabus language envisioned the class as a "team." This was manifest in student activity when one student expressed concern for another's mental health and referred the student to the professor. Students understood that they could practice leadership as the application of expertise and care, but if any leadership concepts or identities <emph>changed</emph> during the course, we were not able to witness that.</p> <p>While Cooperative and moderately Flexible course designs seemed to promote leadership learning in our sample, other factors also played a role. As we noted above in the discussion of course II, explicit faculty coaching in the form of emails and affirmations had an impact on both the leadership concept and identity of students. Also noted earlier, courses II and IV, the courses where students reflected on their leadership with a grammar of Before-and-Now, were also the two cases in which the syllabus provided guidance on how students should understand leadership in the course. The findings of this study suggest that experiential settings can provide "practice fields" for student leadership without explicit instruction, but if the goal is to teach students new concepts of leadership or new concepts of themselves as leaders, explicit instruction is most effective.</p> <hd id="AN0180988071-10">Limitations</hd> <p>This study provides a framework for varying course designs to allow for the intentional delivery of different kinds of leadership instruction. The study is limited by its small size and qualitative nature. The same results may not be found with a different sample. Additionally, the newness of one course and the lack of regular meetings in another might limit generalizability of data from those courses. The study involved undergraduate university students at one institution, so results may differ at a different educational level or if the study were reproduced at multiple sites. It is recommended that further research expand the sample size, continue to include courses from a range of humanities and science disciplines, and include students at different educational levels.</p> <hd id="AN0180988071-11">Conclusion</hd> <p>Leadership educators have been recommending experiential "practice fields" for high-quality leadership learning for some time. This study suggests that experiential environments alone do not lead to uniform or predictable leadership learning outcomes. Faculty concepts of leadership and experiential course designs vary, and both factors seem to impact <emph>what</emph> students learn about leadership.</p> <p>Because students in this study did seem to learn faculty concepts and practices of leadership even when they were not explicitly taught or stated, the suggested pairing in the leadership literature of conceptual instruction with practice may not always be necessary; more important than explicit conceptual instruction for students may be faculty training in the leadership concepts intended by a program (industrial, postindustrial, shared, etc.) <emph>and</emph> a course design chosen to help students practice leadership in one way (e.g., hierarchical, individual, and expertise-based) or another (e.g., cooperative and relationship-based).</p> <p>This study also has practical implications and points to further research questions for campuses participating or joining in the VIP Consortium. Since all of the courses in the study were small—none of them scaled up to the sizes made possible by the "vertical" leadership structure—the researchers were unable to observe leadership outcomes and concepts in an ideal VIP course, layered with multiple levels of expertise. It was found that even in small VIPs in our study, some students were practicing leadership using the hierarchical model (courses I and III); in other courses, faculty coached and students practiced shared leadership (courses II and IV). Administrative pressure to meet larger course caps would change the leadership learning environment for the courses in our sample. Notably, research from [<reflink idref="bib24" id="ref49">24</reflink>] has found that leadership learning can occur in experiential classes up to 130 students, with the help of pedagogical practices such as coaching and reflection. Research on leadership outcomes and leadership styles (e.g., shared, transformative, etc.) in large VIPs would be a valuable addition to EL literature.</p> <p>For experiential learning programs that do not rely on a multi-tiered hierarchy of expertise, this study raises the question: Will a Cooperative–Flexible course design support leadership learning in the absence of explicit instruction? To put this another way, when faculty or a program have no particular training in leadership studies, can the course design on its own support transformational leadership learning? Further research on the relation between experiential course design and leadership outcomes may illuminate more of these questions.</p> <ref id="AN0180988071-12"> <title> References </title> <blist> <bibl id="bib1" idref="ref20" type="bt">1</bibl> <bibtext> Allen S. J., Hartman N. S. (2009). Sources of learning in student leadership development programming. Journal of Leadership Studies, 3(3), 6–16. https://doi.org/10.1002/jls.20119</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib2" idref="ref5" type="bt">2</bibl> <bibtext> Allen S. J., Shehane M. R. (2016). Exploring the language of leadership learning and education. New Directions for Student Leadership, 2016(151), 35–49. https://doi.org/10.1002/yd.20199</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib3" idref="ref10" type="bt">3</bibl> <bibtext> Buchanan J. L. (2017). Leadership development and experiential methodology: The impact on learning leadership. International Journal of Arts &amp; Sciences, 10(2), 601–608. https://<ulink href="http://www.proquest.com/scholarly-journals/leadership-development-experiential-methodology/docview/2057337906/se-2">www.proquest.com/scholarly-journals/leadership-development-experiential-methodology/docview/2057337906/se-2</ulink>.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib4" idref="ref47" type="bt">4</bibl> <bibtext> Burns J. M. (1978). Leadership. New York, NY: Harper and Row.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib5" idref="ref2" type="bt">5</bibl> <bibtext> Carroll B., Firth J., Wilson S. (Eds.). (2018). After leadership. Routledge.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib6" idref="ref4" type="bt">6</bibl> <bibtext> Chemers M. (2014). An integrated theory of leadership. Psychology Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib7" idref="ref3" type="bt">7</bibl> <bibtext> Cullen-Lester K. L., Yammarino F. J. (2016). Collective and network approaches to leadership: Special issue introduction. The Leadership Quarterly, 27(2), 173–180. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2016.02.001</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib8" idref="ref1" type="bt">8</bibl> <bibtext> Duchatelet D., Cornelissen L. J. F., Volman M. L. L. (2023). Features of experiential learning environments in relation to generic learning outcomes in higher education. Journal of Experiential Education, 1–24. https://doi.org/10.1177/10538259231211537</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib9" idref="ref26" type="bt">9</bibl> <bibtext> Dugan J. P. (2017). Leadership theory: Cultivating critical perspectives. John Wiley &amp; Sons.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Ewert A., Overholt J. (2010). Fostering leadership through a three-week experience: Does outdoor education make a difference? Research in Outdoor Education, 10, 38–47. https://doi.org/10.1353/roe.2010.0005</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Guthrie K. L., Jones T. B. (2012). Teaching and learning: Using experiential learning and reflection for leadership education. New Directions for Student Services, 2012(140), 53–63. https://doi.org/10.1002/ss.20031</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Hartman N. S., Allen S. J., Miguel R. F. (2015). An exploration of teaching methods used to develop leaders. Leadership Organization and Development Journal, 36(5), 454–472. https://doi.org/10.1108/LODJ-07-2013-0097</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> High Quality Project Based Learning (n. d.). A framework for high-quality project based learning. https://hqpbl.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/FrameworkforHQPBL.pdf.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Hobbs E., Spencer S. (2002). Perceived change in leadership skills as a result of the Wilderness Education Association Wilderness Stewardship Course, Wilderness Education Association National Conference, Bradford Woods, IN, February 7-9, 2002.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Huber N. (2002). Approaching leadership education in the new millennium. Journal of Leadership Education, 1(1), 25–34. https://journalofleadershiped.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/1%5f1%5fHuber.pdf https://doi.org/10.12806/V1/I1/C3</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Jackson R. J., Lindsay D. R. (2010). Lessons for experience: Why wait? Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 3(1), 48–51. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1754-9434.2009.01197.x</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Jenkins D. M. (2012). Exploring signature pedagogies in undergraduate leadership education. Journal of Leadership Education, 11(1), 1–27. https://doi.org/10.12806/V11/I1/RF1</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Jenkins D. M. (2013). Exploring instructional strategies in student leadership development programming. Journal of Leadership Studies, 6(4), 48–62. https://doi.org/10.1002/jls.21266</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Jenkins D. M. (2018). Comparing instructional and assessment strategy use in graduate- and undergraduate-level leadership studies: A global study. Journal of Leadership Studies, 17(1), 73–92. https://doi.org/10.12806/V17/I1/R2</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Kniffin L. E., Patterson R. M. (2019). Re-Imagining community leadership development in the post-industrial era. Journal of Leadership Education, 18(4). https://doi.org/10.12806/V18/I4/T1</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Lester S. W. (2015). Melding service learning and leadership skills development. Journal of Experiential Education, 38(3), 280–295. https://doi.org/10.1177/1053825915576196</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Li S. X., Pinto-Powell R. (2017). Revisiting the merits of a mandatory large group classroom learning format: An MD-MBA perspective. Medical Education Online, 22(1), Article 1396174. https://doi.org/10.1080/10872981.2017.1396174</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Lucas N., Goodman F. R. (2015). Well-being, leadership, and positive organizational scholarship: A case study of project-based learning in higher education. Journal of Leadership Education, 14(4), 138–152. https://doi.org/10.12806/V14/I4/T2</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Page N. C., Nimon-Peters A. J., Urquhart A. (2021). Big need not be bad: A case study of experiential leadership development in different-sized classes. Journal of Management Education, 45(3), 360–386. https://doi.org/10.1177/1052562920948921</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Rost J. C. (1991). Leadership for the twenty-first century. Praeger.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Rost J. C., Smith A. (1992). Leadership: A postindustrial approach. European Management Journal, 10(2), 193–201. https://doi.org/10.1016/0263-2373(92)90069-G</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Schwandt T. A. (1997). Qualitative inquiry: A dictionary of terms. Sage Publications, Inc.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Son E. H., Penry T. (2022). Variations in project-based course design. Journal of Problem Based Learning in Higher Education, 10(1), 58–73. https://doi.org/10.54337/ojs.jpblhe.v10i1.6821</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Stoltz P. G. (1992). An examination of leadership development in the great outdoors. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 3(4), 357–372.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> VIP Consortium (n.d.). The VIP Consortium [Overview]. Retrieved October 25, 2022, from https://<ulink href="http://www.vip-consortium.org/content/vip-consortium">www.vip-consortium.org/content/vip-consortium</ulink>.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> VIP Consortium (n.d.). The VIP Model. Retrieved September 13, 2023, from https://vip.gatech.edu/vip-vertically-integrated-projects-program.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Watkins A. (2020). The leadership laboratory: A leadership practice field involving peer mentors in a first-year, project-based class. Journal of Leadership Education, 19(4), 99–115. https://doi.org/10.12806/V19/I4/R8</bibtext> </blist> </ref> <ref id="AN0180988071-13"> <title> Footnotes </title> <blist> <bibtext> The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> The authors received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Tara Penry https://orcid.org/0009-0003-8045-6592 Eun Hye Son https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2115-686X</bibtext> </blist> </ref> <aug> <p>By Tara Penry and Eun Hye Son</p> <p>Reported by Author; Author</p> <p></p> <p>Tara Penry is a professor of English Literature at Boise State University. Much of her research and teaching is grounded in reading nineteenth-century American writers through original publication contexts. She frequently merges research, project-based teaching, and public scholarship to make the study of American literature relevant to students.</p> <p>Eun Hye Son is an associate professor in the Department of Literacy, Language, and Culture at Boise State University. Her research interests include critical analysis of multicultural children's literature and its use for literacy instruction.</p> </aug> <nolink nlid="nl1" bibid="bib30" firstref="ref6"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl2" bibid="bib25" firstref="ref7"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl3" bibid="bib11" firstref="ref11"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl4" bibid="bib24" firstref="ref12"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl5" bibid="bib32" firstref="ref13"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl6" bibid="bib15" firstref="ref14"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl7" bibid="bib22" firstref="ref15"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl8" bibid="bib23" firstref="ref16"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl9" bibid="bib19" firstref="ref19"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl10" bibid="bib20" firstref="ref24"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl11" bibid="bib10" firstref="ref27"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl12" bibid="bib14" firstref="ref28"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl13" bibid="bib29" firstref="ref29"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl14" bibid="bib16" firstref="ref30"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl15" bibid="bib12" firstref="ref31"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl16" bibid="bib27" firstref="ref37"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl17" bibid="bib28" firstref="ref38"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl18" bibid="bib13" firstref="ref43"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl19" bibid="bib21" firstref="ref44"></nolink> |
|---|---|
| Header | DbId: eric DbLabel: ERIC An: EJ1449962 AccessLevel: 3 PubType: Academic Journal PubTypeId: academicJournal PreciseRelevancyScore: 0 |
| IllustrationInfo | |
| Items | – Name: Title Label: Title Group: Ti Data: Course Design for Leadership Learning in an Experiential Program – Name: Language Label: Language Group: Lang Data: English – Name: Author Label: Authors Group: Au Data: <searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Tara+Penry%22">Tara Penry</searchLink> (ORCID <externalLink term="https://orcid.org/0009-0003-8045-6592">0009-0003-8045-6592</externalLink>)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Eun+Hye+Son%22">Eun Hye Son</searchLink> (ORCID <externalLink term="https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2115-686X">0000-0002-2115-686X</externalLink>) – Name: TitleSource Label: Source Group: Src Data: <searchLink fieldCode="SO" term="%22Journal+of+Experiential+Education%22"><i>Journal of Experiential Education</i></searchLink>. 2024 47(4):667-684. – Name: Avail Label: Availability Group: Avail Data: SAGE Publications. 2455 Teller Road, Thousand Oaks, CA 91320. Tel: 800-818-7243; Tel: 805-499-9774; Fax: 800-583-2665; e-mail: journals@sagepub.com; Web site: https://sagepub.com – Name: PeerReviewed Label: Peer Reviewed Group: SrcInfo Data: Y – Name: Pages Label: Page Count Group: Src Data: 18 – Name: DatePubCY Label: Publication Date Group: Date Data: 2024 – Name: TypeDocument Label: Document Type Group: TypDoc Data: Journal Articles<br />Reports - Research – Name: Audience Label: Education Level Group: Audnce Data: <searchLink fieldCode="EL" term="%22Higher+Education%22">Higher Education</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="EL" term="%22Postsecondary+Education%22">Postsecondary Education</searchLink> – Name: Subject Label: Descriptors Group: Su Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Leadership+Training%22">Leadership Training</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Experiential+Learning%22">Experiential Learning</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Instructional+Design%22">Instructional Design</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Student+Attitudes%22">Student Attitudes</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Interdisciplinary+Approach%22">Interdisciplinary Approach</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Teacher+Attitudes%22">Teacher Attitudes</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Faculty%22">Faculty</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22College+Students%22">College Students</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Course+Descriptions%22">Course Descriptions</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Content+Analysis%22">Content Analysis</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Leadership+Styles%22">Leadership Styles</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Cooperative+Learning%22">Cooperative Learning</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Concept+Teaching%22">Concept Teaching</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22State+Universities%22">State Universities</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Urban+Areas%22">Urban Areas</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Vertical+Organization%22">Vertical Organization</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Curriculum+Design%22">Curriculum Design</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Program+Descriptions%22">Program Descriptions</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Student+Needs%22">Student Needs</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Direct+Instruction%22">Direct Instruction</searchLink> – Name: DOI Label: DOI Group: ID Data: 10.1177/10538259241226972 – Name: ISSN Label: ISSN Group: ISSN Data: 1053-8259<br />2169-009X – Name: Abstract Label: Abstract Group: Ab Data: Background: Leadership development is commonly named as an outcome for experiential learning (EL) programs. Some programs have shown success at inculcating individual leadership traits. However, it is not clear whether there is a relationship between certain kinds of experiential pedagogy and specific leadership concepts or styles, such as industrial and postindustrial leadership and other concepts. Purpose: The researchers identify course-design factors associated with leadership-learning outcomes in an interdisciplinary EL program called Vertically Integrated Projects. Method: From five courses across disciplines, faculty were interviewed and syllabi and student reflections were analyzed for concepts of leadership and course designs. Findings: Students showed the most evidence of leadership learning when at least two of the three factors were present: (i) flexible and cooperative course structures; (ii) conceptual instruction; and (iii) faculty coaching. Leadership practice is distinguished from leadership learning. Implications: Leadership educators recommend conceptual instruction prior to experiential learning; the findings support supplementing that instruction with a flexible, cooperative course design to encourage leadership learning. More research is needed on the relationship between "vertical" experiences, in which advanced students mentor junior students in courses of any size, and leadership development. – Name: AbstractInfo Label: Abstractor Group: Ab Data: As Provided – Name: DateEntry Label: Entry Date Group: Date Data: 2024 – Name: AN Label: Accession Number Group: ID Data: EJ1449962 |
| PLink | https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=eric&AN=EJ1449962 |
| RecordInfo | BibRecord: BibEntity: Identifiers: – Type: doi Value: 10.1177/10538259241226972 Languages: – Text: English PhysicalDescription: Pagination: PageCount: 18 StartPage: 667 Subjects: – SubjectFull: Leadership Training Type: general – SubjectFull: Experiential Learning Type: general – SubjectFull: Instructional Design Type: general – SubjectFull: Student Attitudes Type: general – SubjectFull: Interdisciplinary Approach Type: general – SubjectFull: Teacher Attitudes Type: general – SubjectFull: Faculty Type: general – SubjectFull: College Students Type: general – SubjectFull: Course Descriptions Type: general – SubjectFull: Content Analysis Type: general – SubjectFull: Leadership Styles Type: general – SubjectFull: Cooperative Learning Type: general – SubjectFull: Concept Teaching Type: general – SubjectFull: State Universities Type: general – SubjectFull: Urban Areas Type: general – SubjectFull: Vertical Organization Type: general – SubjectFull: Curriculum Design Type: general – SubjectFull: Program Descriptions Type: general – SubjectFull: Student Needs Type: general – SubjectFull: Direct Instruction Type: general Titles: – TitleFull: Course Design for Leadership Learning in an Experiential Program Type: main BibRelationships: HasContributorRelationships: – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: Tara Penry – PersonEntity: Name: NameFull: Eun Hye Son IsPartOfRelationships: – BibEntity: Dates: – D: 01 M: 12 Type: published Y: 2024 Identifiers: – Type: issn-print Value: 1053-8259 – Type: issn-electronic Value: 2169-009X Numbering: – Type: volume Value: 47 – Type: issue Value: 4 Titles: – TitleFull: Journal of Experiential Education Type: main |
| ResultId | 1 |
