Dugan, J.P., Komives, S.R., & Segar, T.C. (2008). College student
capacity for socially responsible leadership: Understanding norms and
influences of race, gender, and sexual orientation. NASPA Journal (National Association of
Student Personnel Administrators, Inc.), 45(4), 475-500. Retrieved
from: http://journals.naspa.org/jsarp/vol45/iss4/art3/
The article College Student Capacity for Socially
Responsible Leadership uses measures from the social change model of
leadership development to determine college students’ ability to develop
socially responsible leadership skills. The
social change model of leadership development was selected because of its focus
on college students and its national influence on student leadership
development (pp. 477). The authors
define leadership “as a process through which social change is achieved” (pp.
489) and use eight values by which students’ ability towards social change is
gauged. The values include consciousness
of self, congruence, commitment, common purpose, controversy with civility,
citizenship and change (pp.484).
Consciousness of self, congruence, and commitment address students’
ability to develop individually while collaboration, common purpose, and
controversy with civility focus on group development (pp. 477). Finally, citizenship and change addresses the
ability to interact on a societal level (pp. 477).
Overall, the study found female students scored
higher on seven of the eight leadership values than male students. This finding was in line with previous
research. As well, African American students
scored the highest on every measure, scoring evenly with multiracial students
on congruency, while Asian American students scored the lowest on all of the
measures. The authors correlate African
American’s high capacity for social change leadership to the concept of
collectivism within the culture (pp. 489).
Collectivism also plays a key role within the Asian American culture but
did not have the same impact on their findings.
The findings of the study were quite interesting. The authors set out to understand how race,
gender and sexual orientation impact students on capacity for leadership. However, very little of the article was spent
discussing the implications the research had
on each of the groups. The
authors noted who scored the highest and lowest and attempted to make
connections to historical understandings of cultural values. However, more credibility to the findings and
connections could have been made if the authors were able to use their data to
better understand why and how race, gender or sexual orientation influences a
student’ “capacity for social responsible leadership”. For instance, the authors question the
responses of Asian American students and attempt to explain why they
consistently scored lower. They offer
two explanations: Asian American students have a difficult time recognizing
themselves as leaders (pp. 489); or question Asian American students response
pattern as a difficulty using Likert scale assessments to select “extreme
responses” (pp. 490). Both of these conclusions
are based on previous research; but raise the question if the analysis of this dataset
allowed them to draw these conclusions.
Examining this article in relation to Kirton’s
Adaption-Innovation Theory*, Kirton assumes all people can provide
leadership. This leadership is based on
a person’s adaptive or innovative style which is in connection to thinking
(Kirton, pp.1) without regard to race, gender or sexual orientation. It will be interesting to see if Kirton will
distinguish leadership ability that is dichotomized by race, gender or sexual
orientation.
As a practitioner, this article is usefully in
starting the dialogue around understanding the influence race, gender and
sexual orientation has on students’ capacity for social change leadership. The article appears to raise more questions
than provide answers. The research also
provides evidence that as more higher education institutions began to
reemphasis the need for leadership development programs, more work needs to be
done to better understand the dynamics of race, gender and sexual orientation
as it influences a student’s ability to mature in their leadership that will influence
social change. The research can
challenge student affairs practitioners to find ways to encourage more female
and African American students to enter leadership development programs to gain
the skills to bring about social change.
At the same, practitioners need to be cautious not to overemphasize the
research findings in regards to race, gender and sexual orientation influences
and overlook students outside of the highlighted parameters who may exhibit an
interest and one day make amazing social change advances.
*
Kirton, M.J. (2003). Adaption-innovation
in the context of diversity and change.
New York: Taylor & Francis Group.
This is an interesting article. Yes, the instrument and conceptual model is relatively new, so the findings do start to raise questions.
ReplyDeleteI find the cultural aspect of this interesting. I dont' agree that Asians do not see themselves as leaders, but they do view leadership differently; just as they do creativity and other aspects of original thought and decision making. I think as practitioners we should recognize this difference and explore how Asians can be included in this conceptual model.
Yes, it makes sense that females and African Americans see themselves as change agents, as this has been a long fight for their rights. I am curious to know if there is an interaction effect here; meaning if women African Americans scored even higher?
It isn't necessary to address these questions here. I often provide questions that may not have an answer to think outside-the-box a little.