Home | Business News | Browse by Publication | A | Academic Exchange Quarterly

Authentic leadership in the college classroom.

Article Excerpt
Abstract

As leadership continues to grow as an academic area of study at universities across the nation, leadership educators continue to create and modify curriculum that represents the current discipline of leadership. This article explores the theoretical and philosophical foundations of an authentic leadership development course taught in the college classroom and shares recommendations for leadership educators seeking to implement a personal leadership development course on their campus.

Introduction

Universities and colleges across the country continue to add leadership courses to their list of offerings. Brungardt (1996) reported a decade ago that as many as 500 colleges and universities across that nation were offering leadership development programs. As the trend grows, not only are courses being added, but both minors and majors in leadership are being created. Furthermore, leadership programs rather than claiming one academic home have planted roots across our universities in not only the business or social sciences, but in the agricultural, natural, and technical sciences. As leadership grows as an academic discipline, so does the need to define what leadership actually is as a course of study (Pennington, 2005).

Most of my peers would agree that students of leadership must study leadership theory, not only graduate students, but also undergraduate students. Students of leadership should know the difference between leadership traits and leadership styles. They should be able to discuss contingency models of leadership and differentiate between the terms transactional and transformational as they apply to leadership. But beyond the basics, there appears to be little agreement. After, or possibly before, a basic course in leadership theory, what should we be teaching? Should there be more than one theoretical course? Should our students be studying teams, should they be studying ethics, maybe both, or maybe something else? What about context? Should leadership be taught within a specific context? Or should students major in leadership as a stand-alone program? Should leadership as a discipline develop a common core of study or should each program continue to do what works for them? As a discipline, many of these questions will take years to answer, upon which some will never be agreed.

At Oklahoma State University we have found what works for us. In short, we agree that there should be more than one theory course, that theory does not necessarily need to be taught in an introduction to leadership course, although theory should serve as a foundation for what is taught; that context is important but does not change the core leadership concepts taught; and yes, courses that focus on specific leadership topics are important but should continue to evolve with the current literature. We also agree that in the new millennium authentic leadership development is a key component for a collegiate-level leadership program....

View this article FREE - Now for a Limited Time, try Goliath Business News
Free for 3 Days!