Discussion Questions

DOI: 10.1002/yd.20462

O R I G I N A L A R T I C L E

Composing leadership education by institutional type

Rich Whitney1 Jasmine D. Collins2

1 University of La Verne

2 University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign

Correspondence Rich Whitney, LaFetra College of Education at the University of La Verne, 1950 3rd Street, Leo Hall 101, La Verne, CA 91750. Email: [email protected]

Abstract This issue highlights leadership development approaches within institutional contexts that have not been well represented in leadership education research. As the first publication in the field to address racial equity through the lens of institutional type in this way, authors were given the challenging task of laying a conceptual, historical, and empirical foun- dation for readers in the absence of a robust body of literature. What follows is a synthesis of themes observed across each of the articles, concluding with implications for inclusive leadership research and practice.

INTRODUCTION

“God gave us 12 notes,” Oscar winner Jon Batiste said during his speech when he became the second Black composer to win for writing an original score (Burlingame, 2021). His speech continues explaining these 12 musical notes are the same ones used by greats like Duke Ellington, Bach, and Nina Simone. The magic resides not in the notes themselves, but in how the composer puts them together to make music and to communicate their message to others in unique and special ways. It is the reflection of the composer’s identity, point of view, and lived experiences within a particular time and place that that gives the work its salience. The same thing can be said for the delivery of leadership development and education. Leader development occurs as an individual incorporates new leadership knowledge, skills, behaviors, and mental schemas into existing cognitive and deep identity structures (Day et al., 2009; Komives et al., 2005). Decades of student leadership research have culminated in a widely-accepted pool of theories, methods, competencies, and skills from which leadership programs routinely draw (Guthrie & Chunoo, 2018; Seemiller & Whitney, 2020). However, the place in which leadership is taught and studied is gener- ally taken for granted when researchers examine student leadership outcomes. Taken-for- granted assumptions also occur through the use of color-blind and culture-neutral theo- retical and analytical approaches that neglect identity and lived experience. Without the addition of these layers, the notes fall flat.

There are over 5000 institutions of higher education in the United States (PennGSE, 2021). However, it is generally the case that it is only when an institution/organization is NOT a predominantly White, and male-serving body that the higher education community

New Dir Stud Lead. 2021;2021:123–131. © 2021 Wiley Periodicals, LLC. 123wileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/yd

124 COMPOSING LEADERSHIP EDUCATION BY INSTITUTIONAL TYPE

uses descriptors to distinguish the differences. The field of leadership education tends to subscribe to the same pattern. In this issue, we wanted to center marginalized institutional contexts; not to consider them as “others” or “outside” of the norm but as unique enti- ties with special contributions to offer. This approach presents opportunities for advancing racial equity in postsecondary leadership education, which, in turn, fosters a more holistic understanding of what leadership is and can be (Collins, 2019; Dugan et al. 2011; Guthrie et al., 2018; Wakefield & Bunker, 2010).

As we presented in the Editors’ notes, we recruited authors that could tell the story of the different types of institutions, explain their programs, and talk about examples of pro- grams occurring at these campuses. We purposefully selected authors to represent diverse identities, backgrounds, locations, and experiences in an effort to reflect the contempo- rary landscape of leadership education in United States. We hoped to examine the extent to which leadership program offerings at these various kinds of institutions currently address the unique needs of their racially minoritized student populations. In the end, we sought to provide a resource for leadership educators and catalyze new research directions in the field.

CRAFTING THE COMPOSITION

Initially, article authors were asked to adhere to a predetermined outline to present their work. However, it soon became clear that the importance of allowing the authors to arrange their compositions for the best outcome of their story was more important to the goals of the issue than presenting information in a way that we, as editors, envisioned. It was important for the voice of the authors and the institutional type to prevail.

The final form of the articles presented throughout this issue are now much more inter- esting, they have voice, and each article was able to present essentially those same 12 notes in ways that highlighted their piece of the entire concert. What we present in this concluding article are the connections between institutional type, the theories they tend toward, programmatic influence and options, and how identity seemed to work as a theme through each. In most cases, the student identity and institutional mission are direct over- lays. Finally, we observed the modality and delivery of leadership education and develop- ment across each institutional setting through a variety of programs.

ARRANGING THE PIECES

The first article set the tone of why we are looking at institutional type, the leadership edu- cation fit, and how attending to racial equity enhances leadership. Inclusion is not a tech- nique or something that one DOES TO leadership - it transcends leadership, it is leadership. The many adages, mantras, pithy sayings one could use to describe a team or a functioning group are all for naught if the team is not inclusive of all involved.

The second article provided an overview of how higher education evolved, where it is right now, and where it is going. This article provided an overview to support the further explanation of history and context within each article. This article contextualized and syn- thesized the general view of higher education to support the work of the articles.

To further examine what comes from the core articles on institutions by type, we developed the following schema. With leadership, leadership education, and leader- ship development in the center, we can see how four larger areas are unique in some ways, similar in others, and in some areas, they complement and support each other. Figure 1 provides a visual for how we are arranging the information. The four circles

NEW DIRECTIONS FOR STUDENT LEADERSHIP 125

F I G U R E 1 Four components of leadership education

represent type, theory, program, and identity. The diamond shape in the center is leadership/development/education. The following sections will explore each of the areas in more detail.

INSTITUTIONAL TYPE

The types of institutions included in this issue were predominantly identity-based typolo- gies with women’s colleges, historically Black colleges and universities (HBCU), tribal col- leges and universities (TCU), Hispanic serving institutions (SHSI), Asian American Native American and Pacific Islander serving institutions (AANAPISI), and faith-based (which may or may not be considered as an identity). Also important in the conversation were commu- nity colleges and graduate or professional schools. Many of the articles note leadership and educating leaders as part of their institutional mission. As noted, the acknowledgment of a mission to educate future leaders spanned all types of institutions including: faith-based, community colleges, women’s college, and HBCUs. Also noted in many of the institutional types was the dearth of research regarding the student populations’ leadership education and outcomes.

The HBCU institutions are probably the most well-known and discussed in the literature. The HSI and AANAPISI designations are dependent on enrollment and may not attend to student needs. The TCU institutions have a 51% student population designation as well, but they are tied to location and connections to Tribal affiliations. In some cases, HBCUs have a historical affiliation, but now have a predominantly White population. A similar situation has occurred with women’s colleges allowing men’s enrollment in evening and special programs. In our selection of institutional types, we narrowed the field of private liberal arts colleges to the smaller set of women’s colleges. Over the years, and for survival, some women’s colleges opened their enrollment to men as well. Faith-based institutions are some of the oldest in the country and higher education was the purview of different denominations in the beginning. Due to enrollment concerns, most of these colleges have opened their enrollment to nonmembers and are co-educational as well. The community college type is particularly interesting due to the multiplicity of pathways offered within their institutions. The community college helps with access to higher education for some, workforce development, and professional development. In some cases, the high school connections are as important as the college connections with the community college help- ing on both sides. Finally, the needs of graduate and professional schools with regard to leadership are addressed as an institutional type. This type is vast and a short article in this issue only provides a small glimpse into all the graduate programs available. This issue focuses on the professional schools and how the involvement of leadership, or some refer to the soft skills, as an area of expanding interest in those curricula.

126 COMPOSING LEADERSHIP EDUCATION BY INSTITUTIONAL TYPE

USE OF THEORIES

“There is nothing more practical than a good theory” (Lewin, 1952, p. 161). We know theo- ries help us predict, explain, describe, and control (Dugan, 2017; Northouse, 2019). The use of theory within the learning environment provides a proven track to construct the learn- ing experience (Dugan, 2017; Fried, 2012; Richlin, 2006). Learning occurs not only from the experience that engages the learner to move forward, but through the application of a solid theory to guide such interactions and learning engagements (Kolb, 2015). Each of the institutional types address how leadership is constructed and presented to their students. In most cases, activism for social change is a desired outcome of the leadership experience (Guthrie & Jenkins, 2018). In many cases in this issue, the approaches presented are based on theories of leadership and/or leader development. The social change model for leader- ship development (SCM; HERI, 1996) was presented by faith-based, HBCU, and AANAPISI institutions. The socially responsible leadership scale (SRLS), which served as a foundation for the original SCM, was also cited as a guide for leadership education in HBCUs. Dugan et al. (2011) presented solid reasons why and how the SCM and SRLS was useful in building student leadership capacity. Faith-based institutions included the Leadership Challenge as an additional transformational leadership theory that was often coupled with Strength- sQuest in programs and varying modalities. The AANAPISI article connected their findings to the community cultural wealth theory (Yosso, 2005) to build on the social change model. Professional schools presented the highest number of leadership theories in the delivery of their programs and outcomes. They cited adaptive leadership, transformational, servant leadership, and team leadership. These theories support the medical team need for collab- oration and working together. The medical origins of adaptive leadership seem to support this connection as well.

Due to the limited research within the community college literature on student lead- ership development, the authors pulled from administrative and presidential leadership models in order to present their findings. More will be discussed in the program section about the leadership competencies approach in community colleges.

The HSI article combined leadership theories with more of the identity approach. Latino leadership (Bordas, 2013) was identified as a leadership theory for this identity-based type. The leadership identity development (LID) model (Komives et al., 2005) was also identified as a guiding theory. Women’s colleges identified feminist theories and transformational leadership as a key component in their theoretical mix. The author highlighted contempo- rary leadership theories have been more similar to longstanding women’s ways of knowing (Gilligan, 1993), and the others were now starting to acknowledge this influence. The Tribal Colleges and Universities (TCUs) attributed their leadership work to a more holistic Native American lived experience and their own tribal sovereignty. The Native nation-building model built on the Indigenous knowledge systems and their identity as a student, a leader, and a member of their individual tribes (Brayboy et al., 2012). These latter discussed insti- tutional types highlight the overlap between the theory circle in our model (Figure 1) and the identity circle.

IDENTITY AND THE STUDENT LEADER

Many of the theories described above highlight and center on the identity and the self- awareness of the individual. While some associate with the social change model of lead- ership development (SCM: HERI, 1996) directly, it is safe to say all of them ascribe to the importance of helping the student understand who they are on a number of levels. A leader

NEW DIRECTIONS FOR STUDENT LEADERSHIP 127

arrives into a leadership experience or position with all of their lived experience and their individual worldview (Kolb, 2015; Peterson & Kolb, 2017; Van Knippenberg et al., 2004). The formation of students in many of the institutional types help them understand themselves, their gender, their ethnicity, and their tribal affiliations (Van Knippenberg et al., 2004; Whit- ney, 2011). This concept of “I” and “we” is more of a both/and approach than either “me” or “we” (Bordas, 2012). A “we” culture does not subsume the person, it is inclusive of the person, of all persons. An approach for the benefit of the whole over the needs of just one uplifts the benefit for all. Bordas (2012) asserts, “We cultures center on people,” which is the both/and of the leadership experience (p. 47). By educating and developing the leader- ship of the individuals within all of the institutional types, we are helping to encourage and build the individual for their benefit on an incremental basis and for the whole. The culture shapes one’s attitudes, values, and beliefs; it is how the individual defines their reality, and their leadership.

This lived experience of the TCU student to the understanding of their own self-efficacy of Women’s college students and HSI students is the experience of learning and growing (Kolb, 2015; Peterson & Kolb, 2017; Van Knippenberg et al., 2004). The AANAPISI article reified that current leadership theories can be confusing for their students due to the pri- mary position of the individual in western leadership. The AAPI culture sense of identity is more focused on the we and less on the me. We live in a world of what is happening now (i.e., on the dance floor) and how we need to be prepared for what could happen (i.e., from the balcony; Heifetz et al., 2009). One interesting note on identity in the women’s col- lege article was how the identity of the woman is a big part of their experience and not overly highlighted as an issue when the colleges were all-women populations. When men entered, the identity of the women became more gendered and the whole seemed to adopt a newly skewed view or roles and majors based on gendered roles. Whether the identity focus was on the individual and/or their position and affinity for their respective groups, the overlap between the identity and the programmatic approaches of these institutional types connects how they were teaching and developing leaders (Day et al., 2009). The pro- grams within the HBCU institutions acknowledge a point connects all the types, the maxim is meet them where they are.

PROGRAMS AND LEADERSHIP DEVELOPMENT

The articles all specified that leadership programs were experiential in nature. This learn- ing through engagement is a primary goal of the program development literature for stu- dent affairs (Aiken-Wisniewski et al., 2020). Again, we see leadership was a space using experiential learning to engage students in the leadership environment (Fried, 2012; Kolb, 2015; Petersen & Kolb, 2017). The overlap between the theory circle and the program cir- cles (Figure 1) is how the theories are guiding and using the theories of practice for each of the types. The faith-based institutions highlight programs that were learner centered (the individual identity), while also attending to their theories (strengths and the SCM). The women’s colleges were connecting the individual identity to their skills and theo- ries in of the SCM and feminist theories. HBCUs talked about the holistic approach (e.g., SCM) with the consciousness of self, citizenship, and the connections made in the genera- tional connections of alumni/ae and their students. The Black Greek Letter Organizations reported a higher percentage of their program students were engaged on campus. They also connected the individual with the collective and their culture in identity and the pro- gram sphere. The TCU students were learning about themselves in the various programs while also learning about their collective and the Tribal affiliations. This formation as an

128 COMPOSING LEADERSHIP EDUCATION BY INSTITUTIONAL TYPE

individual leader also helped to secure the future of the Tribe though majors, Indigenous knowledge, and inter-tribal congress collaboration. The HSI programs connected their larger associations with the individual student, and the campus. The “excelencia” pro- gram used a success model to build and guide the Latinx student leaders. Their identity models of mentoring and community engagement helped the student enter their lead- ership roles to learn the process and contribute to the greater good. The AANAPISI stu- dents were connected to the larger community and engaged in AAPI issues and programs to expand their work for the collective and promote more leaders within their institu- tional type. The AANAPISI programs worked on coaching, mentoring, skills, and leader confidence. One of their programs reported they were there to build confidence. The graduate and professional school programs were constructed at a different point of view based on the lived experience of their students (Fried, 2012; Kolb, 2015; Peterson & Kolb, 2017). Using an andragogical approach, their programs were also experiential, because they were often working with adult students who may have more work and off campus experience.

The community college authors approached the program section of their work here a bit differently. They report there are fewer student programs to highlight and present in their article. There are a number of programs offered for the community college administrators and presidents. Using these programs as a guide, they provided a model that can be utilized by community college campuses. They have taken the multiplicity of pathways to success and degrees to build a holistic program. Using a concept of stackable pathways to illustrate their own program, they showed how the model they posited can be used in academic degrees, workplace development, and certification programs. This model is a new addition to the literature complements the other Community College models and programs already in existence.

IN THE KEY OF LEADERSHIP

The center of our model is leadership, more distinctly in our work here is leadership devel- opment and education. The manner we teach leadership by institutional type includes the theories as guides and models for the framework. The identity of those in process (the stu- dents) is created and influenced through the ethos of the place or context in which the edu- cation occurs. The formation of one’s identity is through the lens of the place (institution) within the type (of institution) for the benefit of both the greater group and the individ- ual. Finally, the experience of the programs is how one engages in and has the ability to become part of the process and the learning of leadership. Leadership, at the core, is about inclusion and how people experience it (Ferdman, 2014). The experience is at the individ- ual level, but it happens with the context of a larger group or community, for the positive growth of all involved. The practices, collective norms, and shared values operate at both the societal context and the individual striving to make a positive change (Ferdman, 2014; HERI, 1996).

If leadership is not inclusive and does not attend to all involved at multiple levels, it is not leadership. To be real, to be relational, and to effect change, the answer is inclusive lead- ership. This practice connects everyone, and allows everyONE to have a voice, connect, belong, and contribute (Ferdman, 2014). The attitudes, values, and beliefs each brings is just as important as their strengths, talents, and skills. Inclusivity is more than a compe- tency with measured outcomes and objectives.

Inclusive leadership allows one to simultaneously be an insider within the group and define the group itself. In the process of forming, storming, norming, performing

NEW DIRECTIONS FOR STUDENT LEADERSHIP 129

(Tuckman, 1965), we add the primary step of including and an additional step of trans- forming. Inclusive leadership is about accepting ALL of the members as primary and form- ing with multiple viewpoints, to allow for the civil storming that will undoubtedly occur in a group of committed leaders. Without storming, we have apathy and avoidance, neither of which are helpful in any leadership paradigm. Norming at a higher level of inclusiv- ity, equity, and the many levels of diversity adds to the whole culture, and each person. Through this level of performing, we can transform the group, the actions, the community and the purpose for joining together in the first place. Without inclusive leadership and managing the boundaries together, we have no leadership (Ferdman, 2014).

FUTURE RESEARCH

Leadership educators, scholars, researchers, practitioners and writers need to expand their work within and between all types of institutions. The Multi-institutional Study of Leadership (MSL) has set the stage over the last 15 years to study leadership on many campuses. Contributing to the body of knowledge is required at many levels within the academy and higher education. Most of the articles report the dearth of research in their areas. The community college article presented a new model based on complementary modes of leadership development. This model can be used, and modified to fit differ- ent campus settings, student demographics, and type. Scholars and practitioners can form research teams to study best practices, programmatic outcomes, leadership devel- opment, and the evolving identity of their students and their leadership. One area ripe for research is testing the seeming cannon of leadership theory on various campuses and with many student populations to understand if they are one size fits all. In many cases, new theories and models may evolve and help us understand and expand our study of leadership as well as new and improved ways to understand and develop inclusive leadership.

CAN YOU HEAR THE MUSIC?

In our editors’ notes, we explained the intent in this issue is to bring together how leader- ship education connects to institutional type while at the same time weaving racial equity and inclusion into the conversation. We defined inclusive leadership as what it means to be an insider in a work group or organization; as something that allows everyone across multiple types of differences, to participate, contribute, have a voice, and feel they are con- nected and belong, all without losing individual uniqueness or having to give up valuable identities or aspects of themselves. The articles are presented to bring voice to the many institutional types are teaching leadership and developing leaders. This intent was to inter- rupt the norm that research on campus just means the predominantly White large state and private schools.

“Can you hear the music?” Ask a composer or a conductor while they are looking at a full score for an orchestra if they can hear it. Their answer will be an obvious yes. This score (referred to as the literature) can be on larger paper, and shows the role of each instrument. In all those lines, symbols, numbers, fractions, spaces, steps, and dots they can hear what is happening. Each chair of each instrument of each section of each instrument type for each setting adds to this sound. Without both the individual within the larger organization and the coordination of the whole Jon Batiste could not have won an award. Of the many instruments in the orchestra, they all use the same twelve notes.

130 COMPOSING LEADERSHIP EDUCATION BY INSTITUTIONAL TYPE

R E F E R E N C E S Aiken-Wisniewski, S. A., Whitney, R., & Taub, D. J. (2020). The missing competency: A program development model

for student affairs. Stylus Publishing. Bordas, J. (2012). Salsa, soul, and spirit: Leadership for a multicultural age (2nd ed.). Berrett-Koehler. Bordas, J. (2013). The power of Latino leadership. Berrett-Koehler. Brayboy, B. M. J., Fann, A. J., Castagno, A. E., & Solyom, J. A. (2012). Postsecondary education for American Indian

and Alaskan Natives: Higher education for nation building and self-determination. ASHE Higher Education Report, 37(5), 53–70.

Burlingame, J. (2021). ‘Soul’ wins best score Oscar, making Jon Batiste, the second Black composer to receive the award. Variety. https://variety.com/2021/artisans/awards/best-score-oscar-trent-reznor-jon- batiste-1234959913/

Collins, J. D. (2019). Intersectionality and student leadership development: Advancing the quantitative research agenda. In D. Mitchell, J. Marie, & T. L. Steele (Eds.), Intersectionality & higher education: Theory, research & praxis (2nd ed., pp. 137–148). Peter Lang.

Day, D. V., Harrison, M. M., & Halpin, S. M. (2009). An integrative approach to leader development. Routledge Dugan, J. P. (2017). Leadership theory: Cultivating critical perspectives. John Wiley & Sons. Dugan, J. P., Bohle, C. W., Gebhardt, M., Hofert, M., Wilk, E., & Cooney, M. A. (2011). Influences of leadership pro-

gram participation on student capacities for socially responsible leadership. Journal of Student Affairs Research and Practice, 48(1), 65–84.

Ferdman, B. M. (2014). The practice of inclusion in diverse organizations: Toward a systemic and inclusive frame- work. In B. M. Ferdman & B. R. Deane (Eds.), The professional practice series. Diversity at work: The practice of inclusion (p. 3–54). Jossey-Bass/Wiley. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118764282.ch1

Fried, J. (2012). Transformative learning through engagement. Stylus Publishing. Gilligan, C. (1993). In a different voice: Psychological theory and women’s development. Harvard University Press. Guthrie, K. L., & Chunoo, V. S. (2018). Opening up the conversation. In K. L. Guthrie & V. S. Chunoo (Eds.), Chang-

ing the narrative: Socially just leadership education (pp. 1–8). Information Age Publishing. Guthrie, K. L., & Jenkins, D. M. (2018). The role of leadership educators: Transforming learning. Information Age

Publishing. Guthrie, K. L., Teig, T. S., & Hu, P. (2018). Academic leadership programs in the United States. Leadership Learning

Research Center, Florida State University. Heifetz, R., Grashow, A., & Linksy, M. (2009). The practice of adaptive leadership. Harvard Business Press. Higher Education Research Institute (HERI). (1996). A social change model of leadership development guidebook,

version III. HERI. National Clearinghouse for Leadership Programs. Kolb, D. (2015). Experiential learning (2nd ed.). Prentice Hall. Komives, S. R., Owen, J. E., Longerbeam, S. D., Mainella, F. C., & Osteen, L. (2005). Developing a leadership identity:

A grounded theory. Journal of College Student Development, 46, 593–611. https://doi.org/10.1353/csd.2005. 0061

Lewin, K. (1952). Field theory in social science: Selected theoretical papers by Kurt Lewin. Northouse, P. G. (2019). Leadership: Theory and practice (8th ed.). Sage. Tavistock. Multi-institutional Study of Leadershi (MSL). www.leadershipstudy.net. PennGSE. (2021). https://www.urbanedjournal.org/education/how-many-colleges-are-in-the-us-numbers-of-

colleges-and-educational-institutions/ Peterson, K., & Kolb, D. A. (2017). How you learn is how you live. Berrett-Koehler. Richlin, L. (2006). Blueprint for learning. Stylus Publishing Seemiller, C., & Whitney, R. (2020). Creating a taxonomy of leadership competency development. Journal of Lead-

ership Education, 19(1), 119. Tuckman, B. W. (1965). Developmental sequence in small groups. Psychological Bulletin, 63(6), 384–99. Van Knippenberg, D., Van Knippenberg, B., De Cremer, D., & Hogg, M. A. (2004). Leadership self, identity: A review

and research agenda. Leadership Quarterly, 15, 825–856. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.leaqua.2004.09.002 Wakefield, M. & Bunker, K. A. (2010). Leader development in times of change. In E. Van Velsor, C. D. McCauley, &

M. N. Ruderman (Eds.). The Center for Creative Leadership handbook of leadership development (pp. 197–220). Jossey-Bass/Wiley.

Whitney, R. (2011). What Nevada leaders say about the leadership process. The Nevada Review, 3(1), 18–42. Yosso, T. J. (2005). Whose culture has capital? A critical race theory discussion of community cultural wealth. Race

Ethnicity and Education, 8(1), 69–91.

NEW DIRECTIONS FOR STUDENT LEADERSHIP 131

A U T H O R B I O G R A P H I E S

Rich Whitney is an associate professor and chair of the organizational leadership doc- toral program in the LaFetra College of Education at the University of La Verne. Rich teaches classes in personal leadership, leadership theory, team dynamics, and program development.

Jasmine D. Collins is an assistant professor in the Agricultural Leadership, Education, and Communications Program at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. Her work focuses on shifting the field of leadership education toward critical conversations of power, justice, and equity in an effort to help educators and educational leaders cul- tivate and sustain inclusive learning environments to support marginalized students in their development.

How to cite this article: Whitney, R., & Collins, J. D. (2021). Composing leadership education by institutional type. In R. Whitney & J. D. Collins (Eds.). New Directions for Student Leadership: No. 171. Advancing racial equity in leadership education: Centering marginalized institutional contexts (pp. 123–131). Wiley. https://doi.org/10.1002/yd.20462

Copyright of New Directions for Student Leadership is the property of John Wiley & Sons, Inc. and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.