View in EDS HTML Full Text PDF Full Text

Integral Practices Anchoring LeaderShape's Program Curriculum

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Title: Integral Practices Anchoring LeaderShape's Program Curriculum
Language: English
Authors: Juan C. Mendizabal (ORCID 0009-0006-2672-1326), Kristen Young (ORCID 0009-0001-6522-6567)
Source: New Directions for Student Leadership. 2024 (183):71-80.
Availability: Wiley. Available from: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. 111 River Street, Hoboken, NJ 07030. Tel: 800-835-6770; e-mail: cs-journals@wiley.com; Web site: https://www.wiley.com/en-us
Peer Reviewed: Y
Page Count: 10
Publication Date: 2024
Document Type: Journal Articles
Reports - Descriptive
Descriptors: Leadership Training, Program Content, Curriculum Development, Scaffolding (Teaching Technique), Prior Learning, Metacognition, Curriculum Design, Program Development, Self Concept, Identification (Psychology), Technology, Process Education
DOI: 10.1002/yd.20626
ISSN: 2373-3349
2373-3357
Abstract: This article explores how the leadership learning framework can scaffold leadership development training toward meaningful, observable change. This change occurs when students have opportunities to take their existing leadership knowledge and combine it with new information to increase their leadership metacognition both conceptually and in practice. To bring these concepts to reality, we provide examples of the philosophies and priorities influencing LeaderShape's curriculum design. Examining core curricular themes of identity development, technology, and process-based learning, the authors share the rationale for implementation. They also provide suggestions for leadership operationalization based on LeaderShape's most utilized training programs, all grounded in critical elements of the LLF.
Abstractor: As Provided
Entry Date: 2024
Accession Number: EJ1449309
Database: ERIC
Full text is not displayed to guests.
FullText Links:
  – Type: pdflink
    Url: https://content.ebscohost.com/cds/retrieve?content=AQICAHj0k_4E0hTGH8RJwT4gCJyBsGNe_WN95AvKlDbXJGqwxwGCpHiR5BzCzV-EMtHba1UIAAAA4jCB3wYJKoZIhvcNAQcGoIHRMIHOAgEAMIHIBgkqhkiG9w0BBwEwHgYJYIZIAWUDBAEuMBEEDE6Wogl3BIBn5u4xlgIBEICBmhQG9T-AJSCLBaUomPeg0trBCUWQkRhQqPgJ7_2MsimjFifXvk88l7FkfEWCLQJPL_Ixq-ukaKFuS6wfOCxdyf0cSiqZZ3RydDzSgYlmelBGG04D5wSoKWI1oyzdK8_1qV47BoWYI9HkLoa--XmsuNbFoJMdB3_jpKnhmB6OFDJlvuzaxekFXkUDD5V9g3fny5yWVQhjuSfBe_U=
Text:
  Availability: 1
  Value: <anid>AN0180987368;[i75m]01sep.24;2024Nov22.02:20;v2.2.500</anid> <title id="AN0180987368-1">Integral practices anchoring leadershape's program curriculum </title> <sbt id="AN0180987368-2">INTRODUCTION</sbt> <p>This article explores how the leadership learning framework can scaffold leadership development training toward meaningful, observable change. This change occurs when students have opportunities to take their existing leadership knowledge and combine it with new information to increase their leadership metacognition both conceptually and in practice. To bring these concepts to reality, we provide examples of the philosophies and priorities influencing LeaderShape's curriculum design. Examining core curricular themes of identity development, technology, and process‐based learning, the authors share the rationale for implementation. They also provide suggestions for leadership operationalization based on LeaderShape's most utilized training programs, all grounded in critical elements of the LLF.</p> <p>Students are best served when their leadership training simulates life‐long leadership skills with practical applications to students' everyday lives (Bitton & Barnes, [<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref1">3</reflink>]). Utilizing the principles of the leadership learning framework (LLF), this article holds a learner‐first focus. We introduce the revamped LeaderShape curriculum as a practical example of leadership training in action. Then, we explore the importance of continuous leadership learning through the development of reflective skills and autonomous learning opportunities for students to practice after their training has ended.</p> <p>The perspectives shared in this article are reflective of our own programmatic and curricular experiences both within and beyond LeaderShape. Kristen Young has been a member of the LeaderShape staff for 20 years and has experience in higher education and student affairs. She is currently a practitioner in the higher education adjacent space, collaborating with college campuses in the United States and internationally. Juan Mendizabal is a member of the LeaderShape staff and has facilitated with LeaderShape for 5 years. He has experience in secondary education, student affairs, and mindfulness education, holding previous administrative roles in K‐12, higher education, and youth leadership non‐profit settings.</p> <p>Organizationally, LeaderShape's position as an insider‐outsider within higher education—partnering with a wide range of institutional types and developing name recognition across higher education while also existing separately from any university campus—creates an opportunity for the LeaderShape staff to experiment with a leadership curriculum unencumbered by institutional norms or requirements. Therefore, we take seriously our responsibility to not only respond to campus' learning needs but also to exist on the cutting edge of leadership pedagogy.</p> <hd id="AN0180987368-3">Scaffolding learning in leadership trainings</hd> <p>These pedagogical goals reflect Guthrie and Jenkins' ([<reflink idref="bib10" id="ref2">10</reflink>]) emphasis on scaffolding leadership learning so students are able to, "...practice and build on lessons toward mastery and observable behavior change" (p. 63). When utilizing the strategy of scaffolding, leadership educators benefit from identifying clear learning outcomes that can build on one another, usually increasing with complexity and personal contextualization throughout the duration of the training. With this endpoint in mind, it becomes more feasible for leadership educators to identify a variety of accessible student entry points that both honor prior knowledge and accurately assess the group's collective growth potential. In addition to considering training logistics such as duration, location, and format (all of which can and should influence content delivery), leadership educators can begin their scaffolding design to help learners move along the learning continuum and incorporate opportunities for both practice and mastery.</p> <p>When scaffolding leadership learning, it is imperative that the curriculum designer remain curious about troubling conventional notions of outcome‐ and mastery‐oriented learning by questioning what constitutes a reasonable learning outcome and for whom. Beyond the binary of focusing on skill‐building or process in leadership learning, the training curriculum should explore process management <emph>as a skill</emph> for student leaders pursuing social change in any context. This design philosophy does not discount the usefulness of competency‐based learning but instead recognizes the limitations of mastery within short‐term training and appreciates skillful process cultivation as an indicator of future mastery.</p> <p>Scaffolding is the strategy at the center of all LeaderShape program curriculum design with the intention of moving participants into authentic leadership complexity by the end of the program. For LeaderShape programs, these practices are most often engaged in the <emph>learning community</emph>, which is LeaderShape's term for a large programming space where up to 70 participants, facilitators, and support staff assume the roles of teachers and learners to one another. The <emph>learning community</emph> is the holding space for leadership complexities, reflecting Guthrie and Jenkins' ([<reflink idref="bib10" id="ref3">10</reflink>]) focus on, "...experiential, relational, interactional, and interpersonal aspects of leadership learning" (p. 67) as critical components of leadership training.</p> <p>LeaderShape programs create synergy in their learning communities to demonstrate how leadership is enacted within and through the community, simulating the possibilities—and challenges—of community‐oriented, relational leadership. Participants have shared how the container of the <emph>learning community</emph> itself has informed their learning, noting how, "...values and integrity can be heavily influenced by our community and society" (Boise State LeaderShape Institute™ participant, personal communication, [<reflink idref="bib14" id="ref4">14</reflink>]) and that, "...it takes courage to lead and integrity for people to follow" (Texas Woman's University LeaderShape Institute™ participant, personal communication, [<reflink idref="bib13" id="ref5">13</reflink>]).</p> <p>Since LeaderShape's approach is practiced in relationships and through community, we understand no curricular tool, no matter how trendy or relevant, can ever substitute the power of authentic collectivism. Rather, our curriculum explores which tools and pedagogies exist <emph>in service of</emph> developing communities that can co‐create a just, caring, and thriving world. This collective, socially just approach equates to the behavioral change our leadership trainings are designed to cultivate beyond any other skill. Leadership educators have a responsibility to select tools and pedagogies that reflect the uniqueness of their contexts, recognizing that the most useful scaffolding strategy for one training may not best serve the next. Just as the LeaderShape staff has engaged deeply with Generation Z learning styles and cultural norms to ensure our trainings are generationally responsive, we encourage leadership educators to habitually practice consciousness of context for their own constituents.</p> <hd id="AN0180987368-4">Centering identity development in leadership learning</hd> <p>Recent scholarship has normalized identity development within leadership education after a long history of its omission in mainstream leadership literature. The culturally relevant leadership learning (CRLL) model (Bertrand Jones et al., [<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref6">2</reflink>]) contends leadership educators should <bold>both</bold> embrace identity as a cornerstone to leader development <bold>and</bold> situate that exploration in a larger systemic evaluation of the oppression that has plagued traditional leadership development theory and the higher education institutions in which such theory is espoused. While identity development is a worthy outcome in its own right, it is vital for programs to utilize the skill of identity development—a process spanning education, critical thinking, externalization, and reflection—to scaffold leadership learning. Both processes require thoughtful unlearning with cognitive dissonance, ultimately in service of crystallizing the harmful impact of master narratives about identity <emph>and</emph> leadership. (Bertrand Jones et al., [<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref7">2</reflink>])</p> <p>In alignment with one of LeaderShape's core tenets, <emph>living in a state of possibility</emph>, the parallel and intersecting tracks of identity and leadership development represent the omnipresent goal of authentic leadership development in LeaderShape programs. Participants are challenged to consider the possibility that their identities and histories are the keys to, not the detriments to, their leadership effectiveness (Shamir & Eilam, [<reflink idref="bib16" id="ref8">16</reflink>]). Embedded in LeaderShape's definition of leadership is a belief that leaders live "uniquely with integrity," meaning that leaders are practicing their highest level of integrity when embracing a unique leadership vantage point developed from lived experience, core values, and personal ways of knowing that no other leader can replicate. If we believe that who we are is how we lead, then knowing who we are is essential. With a curriculum designed to be implemented across all university age groups, co‐curricular areas, and geographic locations, the absence of identity development in our curriculum would not only reject the importance of leadership as a form of identity (Fuselier & Beatty, [<reflink idref="bib9" id="ref9">9</reflink>]) but also imply a philosophy of leadership education that perpetuates dominant narratives centered around privilege.</p> <p>LeaderShape's centering on identity development is a deliberate aspect of our curriculum review process exercised most recently through the revision of the Institute™ curriculum. The Institute™ is a 4‐day immersive experience that has shaped leadership culture on college campuses since 1992. A feedback review process is the beginning of every LeaderShape curriculum revision and focuses on identifying evaluation trends, outlining the scaffolding of participants' ideal development via learning outcomes, and drawing a throughline of identity development in all aspects of leadership learning. With a framework of deconstruction and reconstruction (Dugan, [<reflink idref="bib6" id="ref10">6</reflink>]), LeaderShape's curriculum development team, most recently led by an external consultant, practiced another LeaderShape idiom of <emph>having a healthy disregard for the impossible</emph> by considering what a new Institute™ curriculum would look like if identity development were at its core—even if this meant parting ways with activities and simulations that have been hallmark program elements for decades.</p> <p>This revision process also strived to meet the moment of higher education's complex relationship with laws and policies restricting identity‐based curriculum, as LeaderShape serves organizations in a range of states with varying political, social, and legal contexts. Positioning identity development as a personal experience to be explored rather than a curriculum to be learned has provided an opportunity for our training to remain in integrity with our mission and vision while also adapting to the ever‐changing national landscape of United States identity politics.</p> <p>Though identity is integrated throughout the Institute™ curriculum, one exemplary activity is the formation of an identity canvas on Day 2 of the program. Participants receive an 11 × 17 inch sheet of paper and a variety of craft materials to create a depiction of their identities from the vantage points of self, community, and society. Inspired by a list of social identity examples from their program manual, participants explore what they identify with, how they identify with it, and how their understanding of identity has changed. An excerpt from the facilitator manual for this activity reads,</p> <p>We're constantly learning and unlearning what it means to be X or be a part of X group, and we have the opportunity to regularly assess if that feels true or helpful to us. We're taking a snapshot of this moment for this activity with the understanding that things, including us and our societal understandings, change and can be changed. (The LeaderShape Institute™ Manual, [<reflink idref="bib14" id="ref11">14</reflink>], p. 47)</p> <p>This excerpt is one demonstration of the scaffolding used for identity development and its synchronicity with leadership development, further bridging the gap between leadership positionality and <emph>living uniquely with integrity</emph>.</p> <p>A skill like this one represents a milestone later in a training scaffolding design, as it requires learners to already have a foundational knowledge of both topics being woven together (in this case, personal identity and leader identity). The Institute™ is an ideal training container for this type of learning given its multi‐day retreat format; however, leadership educators can incorporate higher‐level leadership synthesis like this example through an equivalent, long‐term experience (such as a leadership course) or by requesting pre‐requisite knowledge of major training topics prior to entering training.</p> <hd id="AN0180987368-5">Engaging students in digitally native environments</hd> <p>A pervasive intergenerational tension in higher education, including leadership education spaces, is what role, if any, technology can play in enhancing leadership learning rather than detracting from it. While some leadership educators have been resistant to embracing social media or even the phone as a learning tool, it is essential to move past our biases and engage traditionally aged college students in a digital language that increases their self‐efficacy and maintains cultural relevance. Though there are inevitable uncertainties to navigate with technology (Does our rural retreat site have reliable internet access? Do our assessment QR codes work? Will everyone have access to a smartphone?), it is important to recognize that a learner‐centered curriculum utilizes tools, even imperfectly, that create an implicit connection with students because such tools are cornerstones in their everyday lives.</p> <p>In alignment with a wealth of literature justifying the usefulness of technology in leadership education and education more broadly (Cabellon & Brown, [<reflink idref="bib5" id="ref12">5</reflink>]), LeaderShape practices our individual and collective commitment to adaptability by experimenting with a "phone‐positive" mentality in our learning communities (see Table 1).</p> <p>1 TABLE "Phone‐positive" learning modalities.</p> <p> <ephtml> <table><thead><tr><th>Methodology</th><th>Tools utilized</th><th>Guidance for use</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>Integrating slide‐based presentations with crowd‐sourced feedback</td><td>Mentimeter</td><td>In addition to increasing participant engagement, Mentimeter's format addresses programmatic growth areas of learning style variety and accessibility.</td></tr><tr><td>Program ambassadors</td><td>Students who have had positive engagement with leadership programs</td><td>Provide measurable influencer outcomes and work to cultivate an ever‐present culture on campus so all students and staff who have participated in a leadership program can remain in the community and advocate for ongoing partnerships.</td></tr><tr><td>Utilizing social media trends to advance learning</td><td>Current and relevant social media platforms and styles</td><td>Invites participants to create and post only if desired to their social media platforms about their key learnings.</td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <p>In addition to the literal incorporation of technology in our programs, LeaderShape is also leaning into lessons social media culture can teach us about leadership as a role of influence. Social media influencers, another phenomenon of generational novelty, are modeling digital collectivism that can be highly successful in gaining <emph>followers</emph> (both leadership and social media term) with the ultimate goal of motivating followers to do something (both a social media "call to action" and a description of the leadership process). Of course, not every social media influencer seeks to create positive change and therefore does not satisfy many definitions of leadership; however, it is undeniable that many traditionally aged college students perceive popular social media figures as cultural shifters that influence what members of their generation care and think about (Freberg et al., [<reflink idref="bib8" id="ref13">8</reflink>]).</p> <p>From a training perspective, leadership educators can take inspiration from digital collectivism and the ways in which social media influencers define and expand their visions. Depending on the scope of the leadership training, outcomes can remain limited to individual leader identity development and personal skill‐building—neither of which are inherently unimportant goals but nonetheless focus on developing personal leadership capacity only. Leadership educators may benefit from teaching personal capacity‐building skills within the context of positive influence for others; for example, framing authenticity development as a skill not just for the benefit of the leader's self‐awareness but also as a positive group outcome that leads to liberation, or interrogating the concept of power not just from a personal and ethical lens but as a systemic leadership reality that leaders skillfully navigate.</p> <p>LeaderShape has become intrigued by the reality that many contemporary cultural leaders have emerged from an extensive social media following, and if social media influencing is effective in reaching and developing a presence with college students, we would be wise to find avenues to mirror the social media influencer strategy in our own organization. The process of welcoming technology into two signature LeaderShape programs ventured beyond a mere sprinkling of videos and instead represented a more substantial pedagogical shift. Catalyst™, a 1‐day experience focused on leader identity and habit development, underwent an extensive curriculum revision prior to LeaderShape facilitators offering 50 sessions in 2023.</p> <p>An essential tool that emerged in the updated Catalyst™ curriculum is Mentimeter (www.mentimeter.com; [<reflink idref="bib15" id="ref14">15</reflink>].), an app that integrates slide‐based presentations with crowd‐sourced feedback through the use of a unique session code. In addition to increasing participant engagement, Mentimeter's format addresses programmatic growth areas of learning style variety and accessibility. Participants in the revised Catalyst™ curriculum also experience an independent learning opportunity mirroring the vision storytelling in the Institute™ curriculum with QR codes leading to a choose‐your‐own‐adventure Passion Prompt activity. Given the unpredictability of technology, LeaderShape has trained facilitators for backup options if Mentimeter experiences glitches, and some learning options in the Passion Prompt activity do not require internet access.</p> <p>Philosophically, LeaderShape has taken cues from social media influencers by developing a template for Institute™ campus partners to appoint their own LeaderShape Ambassadors (influencers). Similar to corporate social media influencers, LeaderShape Ambassadors receive incentives to reach specific program registration or recruitment milestones determined by the supervising campus partner. In addition to measurable influencer outcomes, ambassadors cultivate an ever‐present culture of LeaderShape on campus so all students and staff who have participated in a LeaderShape program can remain in the community and advocate for ongoing LeaderShape partnerships.</p> <p>Additionally, LeaderShape has created an influencing activity in the Catalyst™ curriculum that invites participants to create (and post only if desired) a TikTok about the passions and causes for which they intend to practice leadership. At a minimum, the incorporation of TikTok seeks to validate the integration of students' personal lives with their leadership roles, signaling that using authentic tools in their process is important—even if those tools are not visible in dominant leadership paradigms. The technological relevance of LeaderShape's curriculum, as well as leadership education more broadly, will benefit from future scholarship written by digitally native leadership educators whose recommendations are informed by lived experience.</p> <p>A common mantra in leadership education is that "one size does not fit all," referencing a breadth of approaches, strategies, and philosophies that can engage learners in leader/leadership development (see Table 2).</p> <p>2 TABLE Reconsidering the ways in which we assess mastery and progress.</p> <p> <ephtml> <table><thead><tr><th>Paradigms to reconsider</th><th>Questions to answer for the context of program development</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>Is mastery important, or is progress important?</td><td>How are your programs currently measuring mastery and progress?Where is the emphasis being placed from the learner's perspective?Where is the emphasis being placed from the leadership educator's perspective?</td></tr><tr><td>How can participants experience autonomy and ownership in their learning within a leadership training's larger design?</td><td>As a leadership educator, how do I get out of the way so students can learn at their own pace and in the manner that best fits their learning style?How can collective learning experiences also be personalized for students' own meaning‐making?</td></tr><tr><td>How is embodiment being practiced in the leadership programs being developed?</td><td>How does the curriculum acknowledge the uniqueness of bodies and, therefore, the uniqueness of each body's wisdom?</td></tr><tr><td>What power‐based paradigms about the learner/teacher relationship need to be deconstructed?</td><td>How will the facilitator know if participants are meeting the program's learning outcomes if they are not able to witness/attest to participants' performance of the behaviors the facilitator deemed desirable/necessary?What can be done to move students from passive learners to active participants in the learning process?</td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <p>At the same time, leadership programs typically espouse learning objectives that all participants are expected to master by the curriculum's end. In LeaderShape's curriculum design process, we ask: is mastery important, or is progress important? This is a foundational question for leadership educators to consider in the development of their curriculum.</p> <p>Believing the latter to be true, LeaderShape has integrated multiple opportunities in both the Institute™ and Catalyst™ curriculum for participants to explore the type of learning and development most relevant to their experience at that time, acknowledging that many participants represent great diversity in age, major, classification, and lived experience. Self‐reflection is the anchor of this autonomous learning framework. First, participants must be able to identify the ways in which they aim to customize their LeaderShape experience and then determine whether they are meeting their own expectations as the program continues. Even mastery of their <emph>own</emph> self‐designed goals is not as important as the skill of self‐reflection and calibration during the Institute™.</p> <p>During these self‐guided aspects of the curriculum, LeaderShape facilitators trust participants' autonomy and humbly recognize that facilitated content is not always the most important. Participant independence challenges traditional paradigms of facilitation (typically grounded in domination), eliciting questions such as: Will participants still engage in the activity if they are not in the same room as the facilitator or not being watched? Can they learn what they need to learn without the facilitator's content knowledge expertise? To move through these facilitation assumptions, LeaderShape grounds participants in another LeaderShape premise: <emph>Everyone is a teacher, and everyone is a learner</emph>. This framework creates the expectation facilitators will not embody the curriculum from a place of authority but rather utilize the collective knowledge in the room to guide conversations and learning: a shift from the way many college and university students have been socialized into their roles as passive learners.</p> <p>A key operationalization of autonomous learning is the Institute™'s emotional and behavioral regulation zones to honor participants' embodied ways of knowing. Introduced on the first day of the program and referenced throughout, these zones—representing practices such as breathwork, soothing self‐touch, movement, nature, and sensory experiences—are not only content processing checkpoints; they also teach participants that self‐knowledge and self‐awareness of their bodies, emotions, and impact in our community are lifelong leadership skills.</p> <p>Inviting participants to consider the wisdom of their bodies when enacting leadership, a form of metacognition deemed essential by Guthrie and Jenkins ([<reflink idref="bib10" id="ref15">10</reflink>]), challenges decades of the leadership cannon that centers academic expertise or intellect over somatic knowledge. As Hamill writes in <emph>Embodied Leadership</emph>, "Any leadership development approach will always be less powerful unless it embraces the embodied mind and begins to work with the whole self," which leads to self‐cultivation (Hamill, [<reflink idref="bib11" id="ref16">11</reflink>], p. 70). Bodies are inherently connected to identity‐based leadership content, as bodies can be markers of social identities participants hold, and bodies remember the crucible moments (Bennis & Thomas, [<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref17">1</reflink>]) and formative experiences that have shaped their leader identities.</p> <p>Additionally, in the Catalyst™ curriculum, participants explore a variety of tools to help clarify the context, population, or social issues for which they plan to enact leadership. The Passion Prompt activity segment of the program allows participants to physically place themselves where they would like to be throughout the program space as they choose from a menu of leader development options such as values inventories, identity assessments, and reflective journaling.</p> <p>Facilitators make clear that participants do not need to visit every station and that, for example, spending the entire activity time taking the Enneagram test and sharing their results with a partner is just as valuable as completing four optional reflection pages in their Catalyst™ manual. When the activity ends, the group convenes to learn from one another's differentiated, individualized experiences rather than processing shared content as they have in other segments of the day. As a result, they leave with a range of takeaways: anything from a blueprint for garnering more community support to an enhanced understanding of their organic interests and passions based on a browser history review.</p> <hd id="AN0180987368-6">CONCLUSION</hd> <p>An increased focus on identity, technology, and process is anchoring this era of leadership program development. As we continue to utilize the LLF to build transformational leadership development experiences, we acknowledge that any pedagogical framework is only as effective as its relevance to the specific campuses our programs serve. From virtual programs at community colleges to in‐person retreats at large public universities, our curriculum is intended to move with the synergy of contemporary leadership education while honoring students' unique learning needs, facilitator authenticity, and community belonging.</p> <p>LeaderShape's motto of <emph>to lead, live</emph> represents our investment in holistic, trauma‐informed, psychodynamic schools of leadership training, as many of our programmatic outcomes align with everyday human behaviors that strengthen the connection in personal and professional contexts. In contrast to many historical perceptions of leadership training that can depict coldness, transactional energy, and "right or wrong" binary thinking about the leadership process, the following resources have either inspired LeaderShape's curriculum design process or reflect our curricular values of autonomy, embodiment, and community.</p> <p></p> <ulist> <item> <bold> Holding change: The way of emergent strategy facilitation and mediation by adrienne maree </bold> [<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref18">4</reflink>] : This text has influenced both the content and process of our facilitator training. Facilitators for LeaderShape programs understand their responsibility to follow the energy of the group, deliver content in their own voice and style, and make decisions in alignment with their own authenticity</item> <p></p> <item> <bold> Integral education: New directions for higher learning by Sean </bold> [<reflink idref="bib7" id="ref19">7</reflink>] : This text reflects larger design principles for LeaderShape's training, such as the first and foremost focus on the learner's experience, safety, and connection to life experiences. The philosophies of integral education are aligned with the casual, fun, community‐oriented flow of LeaderShape training.</item> <p></p> <item> <bold> Queering leadership by Zena </bold> [<reflink idref="bib17" id="ref20">17</reflink>]<bold>and <emph>Teaching with Tenderness</emph> by Becky</bold>[<reflink idref="bib19" id="ref21">19</reflink>] : These texts emphasize the possibilities of learning and facilitation being soft and expansive rather than rigid and traditional. Both authors prioritize genuine feeling and self‐awareness as precursors to learning, reminding leaders and educators that our work cannot overlook its responsibility to be humane.</item> <p></p> <item> <bold> Window of tolerance introduced by Siegel in Developing the mind ( </bold> [<reflink idref="bib18" id="ref22">18</reflink>]): A model now commonly used in mental health, grief, and social‐emotional education, the window of tolerance has become a critical tool integrated in the LeaderShape Institute™ to help learners build awareness of their training experience, from comfortable to overwhelmed.</item> </ulist> <p>While these sources of inspiration will change as continued research is done in these areas, LeaderShape's commitment to evolving leadership education that fosters environments where students can thrive authentically and collaboratively, embodying the true essence of transformational leadership will continue to serve as a foundation for our curricular approach and pedagogical focus.</p> <ref id="AN0180987368-7"> <title> REFERENCES </title> <blist> <bibl id="bib1" idref="ref17" type="bt">1</bibl> <bibtext> Bennis, W. G., & Thomas, R. J. (2007). Crucibles of leadership. Harvard Business Review, 80, 39 – 45. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctvpg85tk.9</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib2" idref="ref6" type="bt">2</bibl> <bibtext> Bertrand Jones, T., Guthrie, K. L., & Osteen, L. (2016). Critical domains of culturally relevant leadership learning: A call to transform leadership programs. In K. L. Guthrie, T. Bertrand Jones, & L. Osteen (Eds.), New directions for student leadership: No.152. Developing culturally relevant leadership learning (pp. 9 – 21). Jossey‐Bass. https://doi.org/10.1002/yd.20205</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib3" idref="ref1" type="bt">3</bibl> <bibtext> Bitton, A. L., & Barnes, A. C. (2024). Elevating leadership learning: Critical considerations for training design and implementation. New Directions for Student Leadership, 183, 00 – 00.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib4" idref="ref18" type="bt">4</bibl> <bibtext> brown, a. m. (2021). Holding change: The way of emergent strategy facilitation and mediation. AK Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib5" idref="ref12" type="bt">5</bibl> <bibtext> Cabellon, E. T., & Brown, P. G. (2017). Remixing leadership practices with emerging technologies. In J. Ahlquist, & L. Endersby (Eds.), New directions for student leadership: No. 153. Going digital in student leadership (pp. 9 – 20). Jossey‐Bass. https://doi.org/10.1002/yd.20226</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib6" idref="ref10" type="bt">6</bibl> <bibtext> Dugan, J. P. (2017). Leadership theory: Cultivating critical perspectives. Jossey‐Bass.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib7" idref="ref19" type="bt">7</bibl> <bibtext> Esbjörn‐Hargens, S., & Gunnlaugson, O. (2010). Integral education: New Directions for Higher Learning. State University of New York Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib8" idref="ref13" type="bt">8</bibl> <bibtext> Freberg, K., Graham, K., McGaughey, K., & Freberg, L. A. (2011). Who are the social media influencers? A study of public perceptions of personality. Public Relations Review, 37 (1), 90 – 92.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib9" idref="ref9" type="bt">9</bibl> <bibtext> Fuselier, N., & Beatty, C. C. (2023). Social identities and leadership identity development. New Directions for Student Leadership, 178, 45 – 54. https://doi.org/10.1002/yd.20432</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Guthrie, K. L., & Jenkins, D. M. (2018). The role of leadership educators: Transforming learning. Information Age Publishing.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Hamill, P. (2013). Embodied leadership: The somatic approach to developing your leadership. Kogan Page.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> LeaderShape. (2023). Evaluation report for Boise State University.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> LeaderShape. (2023). Evaluation report for Texas Woman's University.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> LeaderShape. (2023). The LeaderShape Institute™ Manual.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Mentimeter. (n.d.). <ulink href="http://www.mentimeter.org">www.mentimeter.org</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Shamir, B., & Eilam, G. (2005). " What's your story?" A life‐stories approach to authentic leadership development. The Leadership Quarterly, 16 (3), 395 – 417. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2005.03.005</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Sharman, Z. (2019, March 30). Queering leadership. Zena Sharman. https://zenasharman.com/blog/queering‐leadership</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Siegel, D. J. (1999). The developing mind: Toward a neurobiology of interpersonal experience. Guilford Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Thompson, B. (2017). Teaching with tenderness: Toward an embodied practice. University of Illinois Press.</bibtext> </blist> </ref> <aug> <p>By Juan C. Mendizabal and Kristen Young</p> <p>Reported by Author; Author</p> <p></p> <p>Juan C. Mendizabal is the director of program quality and management at LeaderShape. A leadership educator with curricular and co‐curricular experience, he manages partnerships with campuses and organizations that host LeaderShape programs.</p> <p>Kristen Young is the executive director at LeaderShape. She serves as the organizational leader and is responsible for strategic planning, fundraising, program management, and overall operational oversight to advance the mission and goals of LeaderShape.</p> </aug> <nolink nlid="nl1" bibid="bib10" firstref="ref2"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl2" bibid="bib14" firstref="ref4"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl3" bibid="bib13" firstref="ref5"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl4" bibid="bib16" firstref="ref8"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl5" bibid="bib15" firstref="ref14"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl6" bibid="bib11" firstref="ref16"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl7" bibid="bib17" firstref="ref20"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl8" bibid="bib19" firstref="ref21"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl9" bibid="bib18" firstref="ref22"></nolink>
Header DbId: eric
DbLabel: ERIC
An: EJ1449309
AccessLevel: 3
PubType: Academic Journal
PubTypeId: academicJournal
PreciseRelevancyScore: 0
IllustrationInfo
Items – Name: Title
  Label: Title
  Group: Ti
  Data: Integral Practices Anchoring LeaderShape's Program Curriculum
– Name: Language
  Label: Language
  Group: Lang
  Data: English
– Name: Author
  Label: Authors
  Group: Au
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Juan+C%2E+Mendizabal%22">Juan C. Mendizabal</searchLink> (ORCID <externalLink term="https://orcid.org/0009-0006-2672-1326">0009-0006-2672-1326</externalLink>)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Kristen+Young%22">Kristen Young</searchLink> (ORCID <externalLink term="https://orcid.org/0009-0001-6522-6567">0009-0001-6522-6567</externalLink>)
– Name: TitleSource
  Label: Source
  Group: Src
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="SO" term="%22New+Directions+for+Student+Leadership%22"><i>New Directions for Student Leadership</i></searchLink>. 2024 (183):71-80.
– Name: Avail
  Label: Availability
  Group: Avail
  Data: Wiley. Available from: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. 111 River Street, Hoboken, NJ 07030. Tel: 800-835-6770; e-mail: cs-journals@wiley.com; Web site: https://www.wiley.com/en-us
– Name: PeerReviewed
  Label: Peer Reviewed
  Group: SrcInfo
  Data: Y
– Name: Pages
  Label: Page Count
  Group: Src
  Data: 10
– Name: DatePubCY
  Label: Publication Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2024
– Name: TypeDocument
  Label: Document Type
  Group: TypDoc
  Data: Journal Articles<br />Reports - Descriptive
– Name: Subject
  Label: Descriptors
  Group: Su
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Leadership+Training%22">Leadership Training</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Program+Content%22">Program Content</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Curriculum+Development%22">Curriculum Development</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Scaffolding+%28Teaching+Technique%29%22">Scaffolding (Teaching Technique)</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Prior+Learning%22">Prior Learning</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Metacognition%22">Metacognition</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Curriculum+Design%22">Curriculum Design</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Program+Development%22">Program Development</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Self+Concept%22">Self Concept</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Identification+%28Psychology%29%22">Identification (Psychology)</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Technology%22">Technology</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Process+Education%22">Process Education</searchLink>
– Name: DOI
  Label: DOI
  Group: ID
  Data: 10.1002/yd.20626
– Name: ISSN
  Label: ISSN
  Group: ISSN
  Data: 2373-3349<br />2373-3357
– Name: Abstract
  Label: Abstract
  Group: Ab
  Data: This article explores how the leadership learning framework can scaffold leadership development training toward meaningful, observable change. This change occurs when students have opportunities to take their existing leadership knowledge and combine it with new information to increase their leadership metacognition both conceptually and in practice. To bring these concepts to reality, we provide examples of the philosophies and priorities influencing LeaderShape's curriculum design. Examining core curricular themes of identity development, technology, and process-based learning, the authors share the rationale for implementation. They also provide suggestions for leadership operationalization based on LeaderShape's most utilized training programs, all grounded in critical elements of the LLF.
– 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: EJ1449309
PLink https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=eric&AN=EJ1449309
RecordInfo BibRecord:
  BibEntity:
    Identifiers:
      – Type: doi
        Value: 10.1002/yd.20626
    Languages:
      – Text: English
    PhysicalDescription:
      Pagination:
        PageCount: 10
        StartPage: 71
    Subjects:
      – SubjectFull: Leadership Training
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Program Content
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Curriculum Development
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Scaffolding (Teaching Technique)
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Prior Learning
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Metacognition
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Curriculum Design
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Program Development
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Self Concept
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Identification (Psychology)
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Technology
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Process Education
        Type: general
    Titles:
      – TitleFull: Integral Practices Anchoring LeaderShape's Program Curriculum
        Type: main
  BibRelationships:
    HasContributorRelationships:
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Juan C. Mendizabal
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Kristen Young
    IsPartOfRelationships:
      – BibEntity:
          Dates:
            – D: 01
              M: 09
              Type: published
              Y: 2024
          Identifiers:
            – Type: issn-print
              Value: 2373-3349
            – Type: issn-electronic
              Value: 2373-3357
          Numbering:
            – Type: issue
              Value: 183
          Titles:
            – TitleFull: New Directions for Student Leadership
              Type: main
ResultId 1