See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/264696744

Key Events in Student Leaders' Lives and Lessons Learned from Them

Article  in  International Journal of Leadership in Education · April 2014

DOI: 10.12806/V13/I2/RF1

CITATIONS READS
5 28,623

4 authors, including:

Valerie I Sessa
Montclair State University
57 PUBLICATIONS   1,869 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Learning in Multi-Team Systems View project

Leader possible selves in college: Antecedents and consequences View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Valerie I Sessa on 13 August 2014.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Journal of Leadership Education DOI:10.12806/V13/I2/R1 Spring 2014

Key Events in Student Leaders’ Lives and Lessons Learned from Them

Dr. Valerie I. Sessa

Associate Professor, Psychology
Director of Leadership Development through Civic Engagement
Montclair State University
Montclair, New Jersey 07043
sessav@mail.montclair.edu

Brett V. Morgan
Director, Business Change and Transformation
Wyndham Hotel Group
bvmorgan@gmail.com

Selin Kalenderli
Graduate student
Montclair State University
selin_kalenderli@fulbrightmail.org

Fanny E. Hammond
Graduate Student
Montclair State University
fannyh19@gmail.com

Abstract

This descriptive study used an interview protocol developed by the Center for Creative

Leadership with 50 college student leaders to determine what key developmental events

young college leaders experience and the leadership lessons learned from these events.

Students discussed 180 events and 734 lessons learned from them. Most events defined

by students were challenging assignments, although events dealing with other people,

coursework, and formal leadership programs were also mentioned. Top lessons included

communication, self-identity, leadership identity, and developing leadership task and

management skills. While many lessons could be learned in a variety of different ways, a

number of challenging assignments stood out as important for learning certain lessons.

1
Journal of Leadership Education Spring 2014

Findings suggest that faculty and administrators involved with student leaders can help

the students take a proactive approach to developing themselves as leaders by targeting

important events and important lessons to learn.

Introduction

Although scholars and practitioners in the academy have long been interested in the

theory and practice of leader development in college students, less attention has been paid

to the students’ point of view in these matters. It is generally accepted that leader

development should be part of the education system's responsibility for preparing

individuals to participate in a democratic and progressive society (Astin & Astin, 2000;

Brubacher & Rudy, 2002; Dewey, 1938, as cited in Benson, Harkavy, & Puckett, 2007).

Many colleges and universities across the nation provide their students with leadership

courses, curricular programs, and co-curricular programs that are designed to develop

students’ formal knowledge about leadership as well as opportunities and experiences to

develop students as leaders and actually practice leadership (Dugan & Komives, 2007).

Additionally, student leader development theory and research is alive and well (Dugan &

Komives, 2007). However, how to best approach the task of developing student leaders is

a gray area with scholars and practitioners often left to their “best guess” regarding how

to proceed (Allen & Hartman, 2009). In addition, only a handful of studies (e.g., Hall,

Forrester, & Borsz, 2008; Komives, Owen, Longerbeam, Mainella, & Osteen, 2005;

Logue, Hutchens, & Hector, 2005) have sought to understand leader development from

the students’ point of view, with students describing their own experiences and what they

learned from them in their own words (Dempster & Lizzio, 2007).

2
Journal of Leadership Education Spring 2014

Important questions that remain to be asked include: What are the experiences students

think make the most difference in their own leader development? What do they learn

from these experiences? And are certain experiences linked to certain lessons? Studies

investigating what and how leader development occurs in students would be invaluable

for those involved in and responsible for student leader development (Posner, 2004). The

purpose of this descriptive study is to determine what key developmental events college

student leaders experience and see as important and the leadership lessons they learn

from them.

What we “know” about leader development in students

Leader development is about enhancing the capacity of individuals to experience and

participate in leadership roles and processes (McCauley, Van Velsor, & Ruderman, 2010)

and can be accomplished both within a natural process (Day, Zaccaro, & Halpin, 2004)

and via planned interventions or a combination of the two. Although students do come

into college with some already developed leadership skills (Antonio, 2001; Dugan,

Garland, Jacoby, & Gasiorski, 2008; Kezar & Moriarty, 2000; Smart, Ethington, Riggs,

& Thompson, 2002), students begin to develop or increase their leadership skills during

their college years (Pascarella & Terenzini, 2005). Existing research has examined the

impact of a wide array of collegiate experiences on leader development. Positive

predictive relationships have been established between leader development and general

student involvement, community service, internships, interracial interaction, positional

leadership roles, faculty interactions and mentoring, and formal leader training programs

(Antonio, 2001; Astin, 1993; Astin, Keup, & Lindholm, 2002; Astin, Vogelgesang,

3
Journal of Leadership Education Spring 2014

Ikeda, & Yee, 2000; Berger & Milem, 2002; Cress, Astin, Zimmerman-Oster, &

Burkhardt, 2001; Dugan, 2006; Dugan & Komives, 2010; Kezar & Moriarty, 2000; Smart

et al., 2002; Thompson, 2006; Whitt, 1994).

What the works cited above do not do, and what the literature in general lacks, is the

production of credible accounts of leader development from the students’ point of view.

To date, the research cited above uses quantitative design with variables of interest

identified in advance. Thus students respond to their investigators’ a priori notions about

the topic.

There are a few recent exceptions. For example, Logue et al. (2005) provide insight into

what student leaders think leadership roles are comprised of. They interviewed six

student leaders in depth regarding their experiences of being a leader. They found that

the students overall saw their experiences as positive. Their experiences could be

grouped into three themes: People (interpersonal experiences including leading, helping,

and working in a team), taking action (including getting things done, success, and busy

lives), and leadership experiences in relation to organizations, events, and activities

(including defining events, role differentiation, and structure). However, there was no

attempt to determine what students learned from being in these leadership roles.

Hall et al. (2008) provide insight into skills that are developed by participating in student

leadership roles. They interviewed 21 students currently involved in a variety of

leadership roles in campus recreational sports clubs and they found that these student

leaders learned organization, planning, and delegation through such experiences as

accounting and budgeting, coordinating and running meetings, and organizing events.

4
Journal of Leadership Education Spring 2014

Through involvement in multiple roles, student leaders learned to balance the demands of

academic, personal, and professional responsibilities. Positional leadership roles taught

students to motivate, influence, and mentor/role model positive behaviors. Student

leaders learned problem solving and decision-making through financial decisions, hosting

events, and personal interactions. They learned communication by utilizing a variety of

methods including e-mails, meeting agendas, newsletters, listservs, flyers, and website

development, making announcements, facilitating meetings, and holding office hours.

And finally, by just being involved in general, they learned how to work with others and

how to give and receive feedback. However, in this study, researchers did not attempt to

see if different leadership roles were associated with different types of lessons learned.

Komives et al. (2005) provide insight regarding developmental influences in developing a

leadership identity (answering the question, “who am I as a leader?” as opposed to “what

is the role of the leader?” see Gee, 2001). Using a series of three in-depth interviews

with 13 participants, they determined the influences that fostered the development of

leadership identity. Students identified the following influences: (a) Adults helped

students recognize themselves as leaders, served as role models, mentors, advisors, and

friends; (b) Peers sponsored them, were role models, and were collaborators, teammates,

and followers; and (c) Engaging in groups, meaningful involvement experiences, and

reflective learning opportunities helped the students develop their leadership identities.

While these studies provide an important start into our nascent understanding of leader

development from the student point of view, they also provide a guide or scaffold for a

next step in this research. The above research suggests the following questions: In the

5
Journal of Leadership Education Spring 2014

broad array of possible experiences that students have over the course of their tenure in

college, what are the experiences students think have made the most difference in their

own leader development? What do they learn from these experiences? And are certain

experiences linked to certain lessons?

Interestingly, these questions have already been explored in studies on adult leader

development in organizations. The Center for Creative Leadership (CCL) has been

studying these questions for the past 25 years on a variety of successful leaders and

managers in formal work organizations. By using events, the original research capitalized

on the idea that people tend to remember unusual, unexpected life events that had

important consequences and were emotionally evocative (Brewer, 1986). These life

events may endow more personal meaning and lessons learned (McAdams, 1985). This

research has highlighted the importance of challenging job assignments, events dealing

with other people, and hardships in the development of leaders (see Douglas, 2003;

Lindsey, Homes, & McCall, 1987; McCall & Hollenbeck, 2002; McCall, Lombardo, &

Morrison, 1988; McCauley, Ruderman, Ohlott, & Morrow, 1994; Morrison, White, &

Van Velsor, 1987). However, to date, this research has not been extended to leaders

within college student populations. In this study, we extend and combine research on

student leaders with research on adult leadership development through key events

through the following research questions:

Research Question 1: What key events do student leaders in college report as

significantly impacting their development as a leader?

6
Journal of Leadership Education Spring 2014

Research Question 2: What lessons do student leaders in college report learning as

a result of the key events they have experienced?

Research Question 3: Are certain key events more likely to be linked to particular

lessons?

Method

Participants

The researchers approached senior level Student Affairs Administrators at four different

types of colleges and universities surrounding a large metropolitan area in the mid-

Atlantic region who were in charge of leader development at their institution. These

institutions were approached because they differed on a variety of characteristics such as

size (2 large, 2 small), Carnegie classification (2 teaching, 2 research), and public/private

(2 public, 2 private). The administrators were interested in the study and agreed to

participate. We asked them to identify the students they felt were the best leaders their

college or university had to offer. The qualifications for being the top junior and senior

leaders on their campus were left up to the discretion of the administrator. The

administrators each sent out emails to 30 to 35 traditionally aged juniors or seniors, who

they identified as the top student leaders on their campus, to ask if they would be

interested in participating in the research study. Approximately 130 students were

contacted. If the student indicated interest, the administrators sent the student’s email

address to the researchers. Seventy-two (55%) of the 130 students originally contacted

responded they were interested. Two of the interested students were ineligible because

they were sophomores. Researchers were able to schedule interviews with 50 students

7
Journal of Leadership Education Spring 2014

(38% response rate). Of these students, 62% were female; 60% identified themselves as

white, 16% Asian, 10% Black, and 8% as Latino/Hispanic.

Procedure

The researchers emailed the participants and asked them to sign up for an interview time.

In addition, the participants were asked to complete the following assignment in

preparation for the interview:

To help you get ready for the interview we want to give you time to think about the

following questions:

When you think back on your collegiate leadership experiences, certain

events or stories probably come to mind -- things that lead you to change

or affirm the way you lead. Please write down some notes for yourself

and identify at least three "key events" from your years in college, which

helped shape you into the leader you are today. What happened and what

did you learn from those experiences (the good and the bad)?

A reminder email was sent to the participants confirming the time and place of the

interview. This email also re-prompted the students to think about the main interview

questions.

In-depth interviews

Two members of the research team were present for each 15-45 minute interview. One

member served as the primary interviewer while the second ran the audio equipment,

8
Journal of Leadership Education Spring 2014

listened, and asked prompts as necessary to provide sufficient details. We explained the

reason for the study to the participant and had them sign the consent form. We turned on

the audio digital recorder and began the interview. The standard interview protocol

developed by CCL was tailored for use with college student leaders. The students were

asked the following, “When you think back over your time as an undergraduate student,

certain events or episodes probably stand out in your mind—things that led to lasting

change in you as a leader. Let’s start with the first key event that made a difference in

you as a leader. What happened? As participants described their experiences, the

interviewer and the second member posed follow-up prompts (such as “Please tell me

more about that?” or “Can you describe that in more detail?” or “What was important

about this event?) to elicit sufficient detail from the participant. Once they fully

described the event, they were asked, “What did you learn from this event (for better or

for worse)? This was repeated until the participant had no more lessons to add.

The participants were asked for two more events and lessons. In the event that they had

time and additional events, some students spoke about a 4th and in some instances a 5th

event and the lessons learned.

The interviews were transcribed and prepared for analysis using a pragmatic mixed-

methods approach. Specifically, the open-ended interviews were transformed by using or

creating codes and themes, and then the codes and themes were quantified according to

their frequency in the text (see Creswell, 2009, p. 218).

9
Journal of Leadership Education Spring 2014

Key Events

There were a total of 180 Events from the 50 participants. Key Events were coded into

the four broad and 16 event categories similar to those developed by Douglas (2003) and

Lindsey et al. (1987). Two members of the research team used the following steps to

code these events: (a) Events were coded into the original broad event categories. The

two members discussed what constituted a Challenging Assignment (which stretched

students beyond their current skills), a Hardship (including a mistake or failure or a

personal trauma or tragedy that has at its core a sense of loss. For example, a loss of

identity, or safety/security, or sense of control, or self-confidence, or meaning or

purpose), an Event Dealing with Other People (something is learned through another

person), and a Miscellaneous Event; (b) They used 18 randomly chosen events to help

clarify their understanding; (c) They separately coded the Events into one of the four

broad categories of Challenging Assignments, Hardships, Events Dealing with Other

People, and Miscellaneous and compared their scores. Kappa scores were calculated to

determine reliability (Kappa >.70); and (d) Discrepancies were discussed and resolved

with consensus coding.

Next the same two members of the research team coded Events into event categories

using the following steps: (a) the two members discussed what constituted an event in

each of the original 16 categories; (b) They used 20 randomly chosen events to determine

if the event categories from the original studies were similar enough to use. Here, the

original CCL 16 event categories were modified into 13 event categories (See Table 1 for

the list and definitions of the modified events). For example, fix-its were dropped, line to

10
Journal of Leadership Education Spring 2014

staff switch was modified to organizational switch, and early work and first supervision

were moved from “miscellaneous” to “challenging assignments”. Hardships were

collapsed into a single category, because there were so few of them. In Events Dealing

with Other People, peers, feedback, and recognition were added as new event categories.

Coursework or leader development program was taken out of the miscellaneous category

and given its own category. (c) The two coders separately coded the Events into one of

the event categories and compared their scores (Kappa>.80); and (d) Discrepancies were

discussed and resolved with consensus coding. (Full coding schemes, definitions, and

examples are available upon request.)

11
Journal of Leadership Education Spring 2014

Table 1
Key events
Key Events Definition
Challenging Assignments
Building something (i.e., a club) from nothing or almost
Start from Scratch nothing.
These are temporary in nature and have specific deadlines,
Project/Taskforce/Program beginnings, and ends.
Job expands or the person moves into a higher position that
adds new elements broadening the scope and scale of
Change in scope or scale responsibility
Taking a similar position in a new organization that requires the
Organization Switch person to do things in a different way
Experiences which took place before taking on a leadership role
exposing students to new environments. Sometimes
Pre-leadership Experience characterized by ambivalence.
First leadership role in college First time overseeing someone else.
Other job challenges
Hardships (e.g., lousy job, Including a mistake or failure or a personal trauma or tragedy
problems with others, race/ that has at its core a sense of loss.
gender matters, and personal
trauma)
Events Dealing with Other People
Superiors (either students in a higher leadership position,
Role Models supervisors or faculty/staff) who the participant interacted with
or observed and profoundly influenced the participant’s
leadership.
Superiors who took special interest in the participant and helped
Mentors them.
Peers Interactions with peers either negative or positive which
effected the participants
Feedback/Recognition Events in which the participant was given feedback or
recognition related to performance, pivotal conversations, etc…
Role Modeling/Mentoring Events in which the participant was a role model or served as a
mentor for another person
Other Events dealing with
people
Coursework/Leadership Formal academic courses or formal trainings, attended by
Development programs participants
Other Events
Modified from Douglas (2003) and Lindsey, Homes, & McCall (1987).

Lessons Learned

There are a total of 734 lessons from the 180 events. Two members of the research team

agreed on what constituted separate lessons for each event. Once the Lessons were

delineated, two members of the research team began coding the lessons using the original
12
Journal of Leadership Education Spring 2014

CCL lessons codes. It soon became clear that the coding plan did not adequately capture

the lessons that the student leaders were discussing. A new coding system was designed

in the following way: (a) Each of the two members independently read and inductively

categorized every lesson; (b) The two members met and compared their codes and

refined the codes into a single coding scheme through discussions; (c) Two members of

the research team separately coded the lessons learned using the new coding scheme (See

Table 2 for the list and definitions of the lessons). Scores were compared (Kappas>.90).

Discrepancies were discussed and resolved with consensus coding. (Full coding schemes,

definitions, and examples are available upon request.)

13
Journal of Leadership Education Spring 2014

Table 2

Lessons Learned
Lessons Learned Definition
Identity
Self Identity Learning about who they are on a personal level.
Leadership Identity Developing a leadership identity and learning what it
means to be a leader.
Professionalism The proper way to act in a leadership roles when dealing
with others.
Balancing Roles Balancing and separating differing roles
Individual Competencies
Delegation Importance of delegating, the need to delegate, and how to
delegate
Decision Making Decision-making skills and the importance of making
decisions.
Adaptability/Flexibility Being flexible, making adjustments, using different tactics
and strategies, and adapting one’s leadership style.
Resilience/Persistence/Hard Work Working hard, being persistent, and being resilient.
Taking Initiative Asserting oneself.
Accountability/Responsibility Accountability and learning to take responsibility for
themselves, others, and the roles in which they acted as
leaders.
Big Picture
Seeing the bigger picture, seeing another perspective,
seeing where they fit into the bigger picture, or seeing
themselves from another perspective.
Learning to Teach/Learn
Learning to teach and learn and the importance of this.
Support Systems
Developing and Using Support
Systems The importance and use of networking, resources, and
asking for help
Being a part of someone else’s network, being seen as a
Being a Support System resource, and helping others.
Working with Others
The importance of communication and listening as well as
Communication how to communicate and listen.
Teamwork Working with others as a team.
Conflict
How to and the importance of confrontation, conflict
management, and approaches to conflict.
Diversity
Learning about and appreciating other’s differences
Inspiring and motivating others
Getting buy in. Learning to encourage. Learning how to
inspire and motivate other people to do something.
Other working with others
Getting the job done
Task skills Importance of and learning how to organize, plan, budget,

14
Journal of Leadership Education Spring 2014

and time management.

Environment
Structure of the organization, the resources available to
them in the organization, and the organization in general.

Results

Key Events

At the broad events level, of the 180 key events, 48.9% (88) were Challenging

Assignments, 28.3% (51) were Events Dealing with Other People, 10% (18) were

Coursework or leader development program, 5% (9) were Hardships, and 7.8% (14) were

Miscellaneous Events.

See Table 3 for a description of the 180 key events by event category. The 5 most

frequently mentioned events by event category were as follows: 11.2% (20) were

Receiving feedback or recognition, 10.1% (18) were Coursework or leader development

programs, 8.9% (16) were first leadership role in college, 8.4% (15) were project or task

force, and 8.4% (15) were change in scope or scale.

Table 3
Key events
Key Events Number mentioned
Challenging Assignments
Start from Scratch 13
Project/Taskforce/Program 15
Change in scope or scale 15
Organization Switch 11
Pre-leadership Experience 11
First leadership role in college 16
Other job challenges 6
Hardships (e.g., lousy job, problems with others,
race/gender matters, and personal trauma) 9
Events Dealing with Other People
Role Models 5
Mentors 4
Peers 12
Feedback/Recognition 20
Role Modeling/Mentoring 6

15
Journal of Leadership Education Spring 2014

Other Events dealing with people 4

Coursework/Leadership Development programs 18
Other Events 14
N=180 Key events

Lessons Learned

Of the 734 lessons, the most frequently mentioned lessons learned were as follows: 7.9%

(58) were about learning to communicate, 7.8% (57) learning about self identity, 7.4%

(54) learning about leadership identity, and 7.4% (54) developing leadership task and

management skills. See Table 4 for a description of the 734 lessons learned.

Table 4
Lessons Learned
Lessons Learned Number mentioned
Identity
Self Identity 58
Leadership Identity 54
Professionalism 30
Balancing Roles 19
Individual Competencies
Delegation 17
Decision Making 15
Adaptability/Flexibility 38
Resilience/Persistence/Hard Work 18
Taking Initiative 36
Accountability/Responsibility 29
Big Picture 27
Learning to Teach/Learn 18
Support Systems
Developing and Using Support Systems 36
Being a Support System 28
Working with Others
Communication 59
Teamwork 26
Conflict 21
Diversity 32
Inspiring and motivating others 17
Other working with others 30
Getting the job done
Task skills 55
Environment 34
N=734 lessons

16
Journal of Leadership Education Spring 2014

Lessons learned by Key Events

Students averaged 4.1 lessons for each event (with a range of 1 to 12 lessons). There was

no difference in number of lessons learned between challenging assignments, hardships,

other people, and coursework/LDPs. To determine if there was an association between

any of the lessons by key events, we ran a series of analyses using Goodman & Kruskal’s

tau (Bishop, Feinberg, & Holland, 1975, Goodman & Kruskal, 1954). Five of these were

significant. Student leaders mentioning:

1. Organizational switches (50%), changes in scope and scale (33%) and being a

role model/mentor (33%) were more likely to report that they learned

professionalism than other key events (Goodman & Kruskal’s tau=.13, p<.01).

2. Participating in a project or task force (33%) were more likely to report that they

learned delegation than other key events (Goodman & Kruskal’s tau=.11,

p<.05).

3. Starting a club from scratch (31%), participating in a project or task force (40%),

organizational switches (50%), having a mentor (50%), and being a role

model/mentor (33%) were more likely to report that they learned adaptability

and flexibility (Goodman & Kruskal’s tau=.13, p<.05).

4. Their first leadership experience (44%) were more likely to report that they

learned teamwork (Goodman & Kruskal’s tau=.15, P<.001).

17
Journal of Leadership Education Spring 2014

5. Starting a club from scratch (31%), changes in scope and scale (40%), and their

first leadership experience (37%) were more likely to report that they learned

about the school environment (Goodman & Kruskal’s tau=.14, p<.01).

Three analyses approached significance. Students who mentioned:

1. Changes in scope and scale (33%) and their first leadership experience (37%)

were more likely to report that they learned accountability and responsibility

(Goodman & Kruskal’s tau=.10, p<.10).

2. Changes in scope or scale (47%), hardships (33%), and peers (50%) were more

likely to report that they learned to develop and use their support systems

(Goodman & Kruskal’s tau=.12, p<.10).

3. Pre-leadership positions (36%), organizational switches (40%), and being a role

model/mentor (33%) were more likely to mention that they learned diversity

(Goodman & Kruskal’s tau=.10, p<.10).

There were no relationships between key events and lessons about self identity,

leadership identity, balancing roles, decision-making, resilience/persistence, taking

initiative, big picture, learning to learn, being a support system, communication, conflict,

inspiring and motivating others, and task skills.

Discussion

The purpose of this descriptive study was to identify what key developmental events

successful college student leaders experience, the leadership lessons they learn from these
18
Journal of Leadership Education Spring 2014

events, and if different events were associated with different lessons. The approach used

was to understand leader development from the students’ point of view with students

describing their own experiences and what they learned in their own words (see

Dempster & Lizzio, 2007). In addition, by using events, we capitalized on the idea that

people tend to remember unusual, unexpected life events that had important

consequences and were emotionally evocative (Brewer, 1986). These events may endow

more personal meaning and lessons learned (McAdams, 1985). Students were capable of

reflecting back on their experiences, recalling events that they believe significantly

impacted their development as leaders, and articulating what they learned from these

events.

The first thing this study did was replicate and extend the key leadership experiences

studied in previous research (Antonio, 2001; Astin, 1993; Astin et al., 2002; Astin et al.,

2000; Berger & Milem, 2002; Cress et al., 2001; Dugan, 2006; Dugan & Komives, 2010;

Kezar & Moriarty, 2000; Logue, at al., 2005; Smart et al., 2002; Thompson, 2006; Whitt,

1994). Similar to these studies, the student leaders in this study mentioned courses,

positional leadership roles, other people, and leader training programs. But they also

extended the experiences to include starting clubs from scratch, participating in task

forces, moving into leadership positions that are broader in scope and scale, and

switching into leadership positions in different organizations. In addition, they

mentioned being role models and mentoring others (not just learning from role models

and mentors).

19
Journal of Leadership Education Spring 2014

Our findings add credence to Posner’s (2009) statement, “Leaders learn through practice,

they ‘do’.” The majority of the events recalled were experiential challenging

assignments encountered through student jobs and participation in co-curricular clubs,

associations, and Greek life. However, receiving feedback or recognition and

participating in coursework and leader development programs were also important

events, suggesting that “doing” alone is not sufficient. Student leaders need to also

engage in activities that allow them to formally learn leadership theories and practices

through curricular and formal programs and receive information regarding how they are

doing (feedback).

The second thing this study did was begin to answer the question: What lessons are

student leaders learning from their experiences? Little previous research has explored

this question (see Hall et al., 2008). This study describes the rich array of leadership

lessons that students are learning through their experiences. They are engaged in identity

work, including “forming, repairing, maintaining, strengthening, or revising” relevant self

as well as leadership identities (Komives et al., 2005, Sveningsson & Alvesson, 2003, pp.

1165; cf. Petriglieri & Petriglieri, 2010). Similar to Hall et al. (2008), they are learning

foundational leadership skills and competencies related to how to accomplish work, how

to work with others, and how to be both supported by and support others.

Finally, in this study, we began to determine if different events were related to different

lessons. Little research in the student leader development literature has explored if

leaders learn different lessons from different experiences. We found that although

students are able to learn many leadership lessons through a variety of experiences, a

20
Journal of Leadership Education Spring 2014

number of challenging assignments stood out as important for learning certain lessons:

(a) Participating in task forces and projects was associated with learning delegation and

adaptability and flexibility; (b) The first leadership experience was associated with

learning accountability and responsibility, team work, and about working within the

school environment; (c) Leadership changes in scope and scale were associated with

learning professionalism, accountability and responsibility, developing and using support

systems, and about working within the school environment; (d) Starting a club from

scratch was associated with learning adaptability and flexibility and about working within

the school environment; (e) Switching from leading in one organization into leading in

another organization was associated with learning professionalism, adaptability and

flexibility, and diversity. Finally, although the previous literature has shown that having

a mentor and role model is important to developing as a leader, our research demonstrates

that being a mentor and role model is also important for learning such lessons as

professionalism, adaptability and flexibility, and diversity.

Limitations

Similar to the early seminal work from CCL, this study included a small sample size of

traditionally aged college juniors and seniors. In addition, although students came from

all over the country (and some were from other countries), all attended colleges and

universities in a single region around a large metropolitan area. To further refine the key

events, the lessons learned, and whether certain lessons are associated with certain key

events, more research is needed to extend both the sample size and the sample area to

include a broader array of student leaders across the United States (and then globally). In

21
Journal of Leadership Education Spring 2014

addition, we left the identification and qualification for being the top junior and senior

leaders on their campus up to the discretion of the student affairs administrators. Future

research should consider developing some sort of rubric or rating scheme to help

administrators select the highest potential leaders. With a larger number of campuses to

draw from, we could also limit the number of leaders selected from each campus, again

helping to ensure that the student leaders included are the highest potential.

Future research

Although the student leaders in this study mentioned similar key events to the key events

mentioned by adults in organizations in the original CCL research, they mentioned a

different set of lessons. In line with the nascent realization that as leaders are developing

as leaders, they are also developing as adults (see Day, Harrison, & Halpin, 2009), this

study, compared to the CCL research, suggests that leadership lessons learned varies by

age or level of maturity. A next research question to explore is: How does level of

maturity or development impact leadership lessons learned for leaders at different life

stages?

Practical implications

Because the findings demonstrate both the events that successful student leaders

experience as important as well as what they are learning from them, this study can help

those involved in and responsible for student leader development on college campuses

advise students on how to develop themselves as leaders. This study suggests that the

students recognized that they are learning and developing as leaders through a “mosaic”

22
Journal of Leadership Education Spring 2014

of leadership education, training, and development activities (Scroggs, Sattler, &

McMillan, 2009) encompassing both “learning and doing” (Middlebrooks & Allen,

2009). Learning about leadership, developing leadership skills and competencies, and

doing leadership are different ways of learning and developing as leaders. And all three

ways are important to include in developing leadership in our students. This study

suggests that our best approach is integrated along all three lines. When done

intentionally learning about, learning to do, and actually doing can augment each other.

Conger (1992) suggests that to develop into leaders, students must have a conceptual

understanding of leadership, they must build leadership skills and competencies, they

must grow and change as individuals, and they must receive feedback regarding how they

are doing on all these things. While the students in this study emphasized learning

through “doing leadership” such as project teams, their first leadership role, changes in

scope and scale, and organizational switches, they also mentioned formal leadership

courses (where students can learn about leadership), leader development programs

(where students can receive assessments, try out new skills, receive feedback), and

receiving feedback on their actions as relevant to their learning about leadership.

Thus, leadership faculty and administrators should encourage students interested in

developing their leadership skills to consider choosing from a menu of curricular and co-

curricular experiences. In addition, faculty and administrators should encourage students

to broaden their experiences over time, starting with being a member of a project team or

task force, next taking on a lower level leadership position and then a higher-level

position that broadens their responsibilities, taking on a leadership position in another

arena, starting up a club, and mentoring and being a role model to others. Finally, student

23
Journal of Leadership Education Spring 2014

leaders need feedback to determine how they are doing. Faculty and administrators can

provide feedback via formal assessments and informal conversations. They can also train

the leaders themselves in how to give feedback to each other.

Regarding lessons, faculty and administrators can educate students on the types of

leadership lessons that they might want to learn. Then they can help students decide what

lessons about leadership that they would like to target, ahead of time, and select

challenges or events that will help them learn those lessons. At the end of their college

years, student leaders can be encouraged to reflect on their development as leaders and

what they learned. Formal mechanisms to help student leaders realize and document this

learning could be through capstone experiences, leadership learning portfolios, or co-

curricular transcripts.

References
Allen, S. J., & Hartman, N. S. (2009). Sources of learning in student leadership
development programming. Journal of Leadership Studies, 3(3), 6-16.

Antonio, A. L. (2001). The role of interracial interaction in the development of leadership

skills and cultural knowledge and understanding. Research in Higher Education,
42(5), 593-617.

Astin, A. W. (1993). What matters in college? Four critical years revisited. San
Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Astin, A. W., & Astin, H. S. (2000). Leadership Reconsidered: Battle Creek, MI: W.K.
Kellogg Foundation.

Astin, A. W., Keup, J. R., & Lindholm, J. A. (2002). A decade of changes in

undergraduate education: A national study of system “transformation”. The
Review of Higher Education, 25(2), 141-162.

Astin, A., Vogelgesang, L. J., Ikeda, E. K., & Yee, J. A. (2000). How service learning
affects students. Los Angeles: UCLA, Higher Education Research Institute.

24
Journal of Leadership Education Spring 2014

Benson, L., Harkavy, I., & Puckett, J. (2007). Dewey’s Dream: Universities and
Democracies in an Age of Education Reform. Philadelphia: Temple University
Press.

Berger, J. B., & Milem, J. F., (2002). The impact of community service involvement on
three measures of undergraduate self-concept, NASPA Journal, 40, 85-103.

Bishop, Y. M. M., Feinberg, S. E., & Holland, P. W. (1975). Discrete Multivariate

Analysis: Theory and Practice. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Brewer, U. F. (1986). What is autobiographical memory? In D. C. Rubin (Ed.),

Autobiographical Memory. New York: Cambridge University Press, 25-49.

Brubacher, J. S., & Rudy, W. (2002). Higher Education in Transition: A history of

American Colleges and Universities, 4th edition. New Brunswick: Transaction
Publishers.

Conger, J. (1992). Learning to lead: The art of transforming managers into leaders. San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Cress, C. M., Astin, H. S., Zimmerman-Oster, K., & Burkhardt, J. C. (2001).

Developmental outcomes of college students’ involvement in leadership activities.
Journal of College Student Development, 42, 15-27.

Creswell, J. W. (2009). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods

approaches, 3rd ed. Los Angeles, CA: Sage.

Day, D. V., Harrison, M. M., & Halpin, S. M. (2009). An integrative approach to leader
development: Connecting adult development, identity, and expertise. New York:
Routledge.

Day, D. V., Zaccaro, S. J., & Halpin, S. (2004). Leader development for transforming
organizations: Growing leaders for tomorrow. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

Dempster, N., & Lizzio, A. (2007). Student leadership: Necessary research. Australian
Journal of Education, 51, 276-285.

Dewey, J. (1938). Experience and Education. New York: Collier Books.

Douglas, C. A. (2003). Key events and lessons for managers in a diverse workforce: A
report of research findings. Greensboro, NC: Center for Creative Leadership.

Dugan, J. P. (2006). Involvement and leadership: A descriptive analysis of socially

responsible leadership. Journal of College Student Development, 47, 335-343.

25
Journal of Leadership Education Spring 2014

Dugan, J. P., Garland, J. L., Jacoby, B., & Gasiorski, A. (2008). Understanding commuter
student self-efficacy for leadership: A within-group analysis. NASPA Journal, 45,
282–310.

Dugan, J. P., & Komives, S. R. (2007). Developing leadership capacity in college

students: Findings from a national study. College Park, MD: National
Clearinghouse for Leadership Programs, Multi-Institutional Study of Leadership.

Dugan, J. P., & Komives, S. R. (2010). Influences on college students’ capacities for
socially responsible leadership. Journal of College Student Development, 51, 525-
549.

Gee, J. P. (2001). Identity as an analytical lens for research in education. Review of

Research in Education, 25, 99-125.

Goodman, L. A., & Kruskal, W. H. (1954). Measures of association for cross-

classification. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 49, 732-764.

Hall, S. L., Forrester, S., & Borsz, M. (2008). A constructivist case study examining the
leadership development of undergraduate students in campus recreational sports.
Journal of College Student Development, 49, 125-140.

Kezar A., & Moriarty, D. (2000). Expanding our understanding of student leadership
development: A study of gender and ethnic identity. Journal of College Student
Development, 41, 55-69.

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.

Lindsey, E. H., Homes, V., & McCall, M. W., Jr. (1987). Key Events in Executives’
Lives. Greensboro, NC: Center for Creative Leadership.

Logue, C. T., Hutchens, T. A., & Hector, M. A. (2005). Student leadership: A

phenomenological exploration of post-secondary experiences. Journal of College
Student Development, 46, 393-408.

McAdams, D. P. (1985). Power, intimacy, and the life story: Personological inquiries
into identity. New York: Guilford Press.

McCauley, C. D., Ruderman, M.N. Ohlott, P. J., & Morrow, J.E. (1994). Assessing the
developmental components of managerial jobs. Journal of Applied Psychology,
79, 544-560.

McCauley, C. D., Van Velsor, E., & Ruderman, M. N. (2010). The Center for Creative
Leadership handbook of leadership development. San Francisco: Wiley.

26
Journal of Leadership Education Spring 2014

McCall, M. W., Jr., & Hollenbeck, G. P. (2002). Developing global executives: The
lessons of international experience. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.

McCall, M. W., Jr., Lombardo, M. M., & Morrison, A. M. (1988). The lessons of
experiences: How successful executives develop on the job. Lexington, MA:
Lexington Press.

Middlebrooks, A., & Allen, S. J. (2009). Editors’ introduction: The education of

leadership, volume 8, number 1, 2009. Journal of Leadership Education, 8 (1), ix-
xxi.

Morrison, A. M., White, R. P., & Van Velsor, E. (1987). Breaking the glass ceiling: Can
women reach the top of America’s largest corporations? Reading, MA: Addison-
Wesley.

Pascarella, E. T., & Terenzini, P. T. (2005). How college affects students: A third decade
of research. San Francisco: Jossey Bass.

Petriglieri, G., & Petriglieri, J. (2010). Identity workspaces: The case of business
schools. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 9, 44-60.

Posner, B. Z. (2004). A leadership development instrument for students: Updated.

Journal of College Student Development, 45, 443-456.

Posner, B. Z. (2009). Inside out: Beyond teaching about leadership. Journal of

Leadership Education, 8, 1-10.

Scroggs, L. E., Sattler, J.L., & McMillan, B. (2009). The undergraduate Leadership
Mosaic: A challenge of shared purpose. Journal of Leadership Education, 8, 48-
58.

Smart, J. C., Ethington, C. A., Riggs, R. O., & Thompson, M. D. (2002). Influences of
institutional expenditure patterns on the development of students’ leadership
competencies. Research in Higher Education, 43, 115-132.

Sveningsson, S., & Alvesson, M. (2003). Managing managerial identities:

Organizational fragmentation, discourse, and identity struggle. Human Relations,
56,1163-1193.

Thompson, M. D. (2006). Student leadership process development: An assessment of

contributing college resources. Journal of College Student Development, 47(3),
343–350.

Whitt, E. J. (1994). I can be anything!: Student leadership in three women’s colleges.

Journal of College Student Development, 35, 198-207.

27
 Journal of Leadership Education Spring 2014

Author Biographies
Dr. Valerie I. Sessa is an Associate Professor of Psychology and the Director of
Leadership Development through Civic Engagement minor at Montclair State University.
Prior to Montclair, she worked as a research scientist and director at the Center for
Creative Leadership. Her current research interests include student leadership
development, and learning at the individual, group, and organizational levels.

Brett V. Morgan is a recent graduate of the Industrial and Organizational Psychology

master’s program at Montclair State University. Currently, he is the Director of Business
Change and Transformation at Wyndham Hotel Group. He also teaches psychology and
leadership classes as an adjunct faculty member at Montclair State University.

Selin Kalenderli, a Fulbright Scholar, is a recent graduate of the Industrial and

Organizational Psychology master’s program at Montclair State University. She has
returned to Turkey where she hopes to further specialize in talent management and
leadership development.

Fanny E. Hammond, a Fulbright Scholar from Ghana, is currently a graduate student in

the Industrial and Organizational Psychology master’s program at Montclair State
University.

28

View publication stats