English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Leadership educators should strive to promote deeper learning within their students. Fink’s (2003, 2013) taxonomy of significant learning is a framework for intentionally grounding leadership curricula in the principles and practices of evidence-based learning. The purpose of this study was to measure undergraduate students’ significant learning after the completion of a PLTA in a personal leadership course and reflection about the experience. A content analysis of 24 student reflections was used to analyze the six domains of learning: foundational knowledge, application, integration, human dimension, caring, and learning how to learn. Evidence of all six domains of learning were found within the student reflections and it was observed that students who had definite contexts in which to apply and well-defined goals for the assignment could better articulate their learning. Introduction & Background Leadership educators commonly understand the value of engaging pedagogy and active learning strategies in the classroom (Jenkins, 2012). This is evident in leadership education’s wide use of active learning techniques such as case studies, debates, role-playing, problem-based learning, small group activities, simulations, and community engagement within a broad range of leadership development programs. However, as the complexity of higher education increases and as student populations become more diverse, it is necessary for leadership educators to reexamine the active learning strategies and techniques used in their classrooms if they are to enhance leadership learning, as engaged pedagogies may apply differently to students from diverse backgrounds or experiences (Owen, 2015a; Roberts, 2007). Furthermore, as the problems leaders are called upon to solve grow in complexity and interdisciplinary nature, the field of leadership education needs to undergo a transformation “where powerful pedagogies and emerging knowledge about the scholarship of teaching and learning” are utilized (Owen, 2015a, p. 7). Incorporating integrative approaches to learning Journal of Leadership Education DOI: 10.12806/V16/I3/R3 JULY 2017 RESEARCH 68 enables students to “think the world together [rather] than think it apart” (Palmer & Zajonc, 2010, p. 22). Integrated learning is more than merely making connections between disciplines. Rather, it is the ability to synthesize and apply what was learned into new contexts (Owen, 2015a). Thus, in an integrated learning environment, the curricular, co-curricular, and extracurricular experiences are not separated, but are valued equally. Encouraging students to consistently integrate their leadership learning experiences in their daily lives can be challenging; especially if the students have been exposed to competing or conflicting views towards leadership. However, utilizing integrative learning principles to leverage academic challenge, the interaction of faculty and students, and active, collaborative learning opportunities provides opportunities for students to overcome this challenge (Owen, 2015b). When faculty intentionally include the five hallmarks of integrative learning within a leadership course, students are exposed to a model whereby they can develop and refine their ability to integrate leadership concepts into other aspects of their lives, thereby deepening their learning. Owen (2015b) noted that the first hallmark of integrative learning is connections to experience. Finding ways for students to synthesize experiences outside the classroom with the content in the classroom enables students to deepen their understanding of both the experience and the course content. A second hallmark is enabling students to make connections across disciplines. Leadership is a dynamic and interdisciplinary endeavor; therefore, students must be able to combine information and content between classes/disciplines in order to know when and how to adapt their leadership approach effectively. Being able to adapt and apply what was learned in one context to another, or transfer, is the third hallmark of integrated learning. For transfer to occur, an experience cannot be limited only to the experienced context. Rather, students should be encouraged to draw from all of their experiences as they problem solve or confront complex issues. Integrated communication, or the ability to effectively communicate across formats and with diverse audiences or in diverse contexts, is key as the world becomes more interconnected and the speed of change increases. The fifth hallmark is reflection and selfassessment. Students need to understand that leadership development is a life-long process and necessitates being able to recognize the need for change as well as continual learning and development (Owen, 2015b). Leadership educators, as well as students, share the responsibility to create effective leadership learning environments (Roberts, 2007). In these environments, the focus turns from the leadership theories themselves to the process students use to learn the theories. Though efforts have been made to ground leadership in learning (Brungardt, 1997; Daloz Parks, 2005; Day, Harrison, & Halpin, 2009; Preskill & Brookfield, 2009; Roberts, 2007; Vaill, 1998) and multi-institutional research examining the influence of experiences and education in developing leadership has been done, limited research exists detailing the programs that apply these evidence-based practices. Consequently, leadership educators should strive to promote and research deeper learning-focused classroom approaches, as there is evidence that deeper learning will foster deeper leadership competency and capacity (Roberts, 2007). One way to engage in deeper learning is the use of active learning techniques paired with personal and shared reflection. Because of these integrative learning approaches and engaging Journal of Leadership Education DOI: 10.12806/V16/I3/R3 JULY 2017 RESEARCH 69 techniques, leadership educators are able to cultivate learning environments that help students effectively integrate knowledge, skills, and experiences (Owen, 2015a). Furthermore, active learning techniques should be considered levers of learning and that “they might apply differentially to students with diverse backgrounds and prior experiences” (Owen, 2015a, p.9). As a result, it is recommended that active learning techniques be intentionally used “to gauge learning in formative (i.e., during the process) and summative ways (at the end of the experience)” (Owen, 2015a, p. 9). Yet, utilizing active learning techniques in a classroom is not enough. Students must also learn to take ownership of their own education and become self-directed learners. To become self-directed learners, students must learn to “assess the demands of the task, evaluate their own knowledge and skills, plan their approach, monitor their progress, and adjust their strategies as needed” (Ambrose, Bridges, DiPietro, Lovett, & Norman, 2010, p. 191). As students progress through higher levels of education and into their professional lives, having the skills to be a selfdirected learner becomes increasingly important as students take on more complex tasks and are expected to accept greater responsibility for their own learning. According to Ambrose et al. (2010), there are five student stages within the cycle of self-directed learning. First, students must learn to fully assess the task at hand, including any major goals or constraints. Equipped with this understanding, students move on to evaluate their own knowledge and skills as well as any strengths or weaknesses they may personally have that would affect their work. Then, selfdirected students plan their approach to the task in such a way that accounts for the current situation. To enact their plan, students proceed to applying various strategies as they monitor their personal progress. Lastly, self-directed students take the time to reflect on the degree to which their current approach is working; this stage can lead to adjusting the plan and restarting the cycle. As research relating types of learning in an academic leadership context is limited, this study was an opportunity to expand the current literature. The active learning experience of a personal leadership transformation assignment (PLTA) in an undergraduate leadership course was used to describe the types of learning the students experienced throughout the three weeks of the assignment. This research study was designed to address the Association of Leadership Educator’s National Leadership Education Research Agenda Priority I (Andenoro, Allen, HaberCurran, Jenkins, Sowcik, Dugan, & Osteen, 2013). By focusing curriculum development frameworks to enhance the transfer of learning, leadership educators are better able to explore the developmental nature of leadership (Andenoro et al., 2013). Theoretical Framework Traditionally, educators have turned to the cognitive domain of Bloom’s (1956) taxonomy to formulate course work and measure student learning; this domain lists six kinds of learning arranged in a hierarchical sequence: Evaluation, Synthesis, Analysis, Application, Comprehension, and Knowledge. While the value of Bloom’s (1956) taxonomy remains unquestioned, it may be difficult to apply all six kinds of learning identified in the taxonomy’s cognitive domain to the goals and priorities of leadership education specifically in the areas of learning how to learn, ethics, communication skills, character, ability to adapt to change, and leadership and interpersonal skills (Fink, 2003). Journal of Leadership Education DOI: 10.12806/V16/I3/R3 JULY 2017 RESEARCH 70 As an alternative to Bloom’s taxonomy, Fink’s (2013) taxonomy offers a clear guide for leadership educators to intentionally ground their curricula in the principles and practices of evidence-based learning. The taxonomy is based on the belief that for learning to occur, change must also occur within the learner (Fink, 2003). Unlik

Measuring Significant Learning through a Personal Leadership Transformation Assignment in an Undergraduate Leadership Course