Search for: All records

The purpose of the study was to examine the “after-effects” of a leadership training program on university students. Data were collected using both cross-sectional and case study methods, and by interviewing students. The data were tabulated and analyzed using descriptive statistics and analyses. The participants included both male and female students; most of them were in their early twenties; juniors, and held department-wide, college-wide, or university-wide positions. Moreover, the majority of participants indicated that they participated in the workshops offered because they wanted to improve their leadership skills. They also indicated that they learned one new thing; for instance, leadership skills; teamwork; managing people, and grant writing. Furthermore, they all indicated that they have used, at least some of the information that they received from the workshops, such as information on voluntary organizations; leadership skills; financial management; grant writing; how to network; and dealing with different types of persons in organizations. Also, all the respondents mentioned that they were doing one thing differently, such as flexibility in leading; how to prioritize activities and tasks; using conflict resolution information; paying more attention to team members; sharing information with networks; and encouraging colleagues to provide or contribute ideas in team meetings. The students made suggestions for future workshops, such as including students from other colleges; more role-playing in the delivery of the workshops, and starting workshops early. The study has provided additional knowledge as to what university students think about the after-effects of a leadership training program. 

University students’ leadership training programs have different dimensions, and they may be impacted by several factors. Yet, relatively few studies have been conducted on this issue. This study, therefore, examined the relationships and impacts of specific factors regarding a university students’ leadership training program. Data were collected using a questionnaire and analyzed using descriptive statistics, including correlation, and regression analysis. Considering the study participants, there were more females than males; more sophomores relative to other class classifications, and more participants intended to hold a college leadership position than otherwise. Furthermore, on the views on leadership, a very high proportion of the participants strongly disagreed or disagreed that leadership in an organization or a community is over-hyped (View 1), and an even higher proportion of participants strongly agreed or agreed that leadership in an organization or a community is needed depending on the type of entity (View 2). The regression results revealed that for model 1, gender, age, and incentive classification had statistically significant effects on View 1, and for model 2, none of the factors had a statistically significant effect on View 2. However, a revised version of model 2 showed that incentive classification was statistically significant. It may be that gender, age, and incentive classification are important factors in students’ views on leadership. 

Different factors may impact participation in leadership programs for university students. However, not many studies have been conducted on this issue. Therefore, this study analyzed the impact of selected factors on the participation status of university students in a leadership training program. Regarding study participants, there were more female participants than male participants. Also, more of the recruited students did not participate in the training compared to those who participated, and more of the participants were in the immediate incentive group compared to the delayed incentive group. Further, regarding the receipt of incentives, a very high proportion of the recruited students received their incentives. In terms of class classification of participants, there were more sophomores in the trainee groups. The regression results revealed that for model 1, only the incentive classification had a statistically significant effect on student participation, and for model 2, gender, incentive classification, and receipt of incentives had statistically significant effects on student participation. It may be that gender, incentive classification, and receipt of incentives are important factors in university students’ leadership training. However, incentive classification may be the paramount factor. 

The study assessed the relationships between socioeconomic factors and reflective thinking of college students. The data were collected from a purposive sample of college students in a leadership training program and analyzed using descriptive statistics and correlation analysis. The results show that the proportions of strongly disagreed or disagreed responses were generally higher than the proportions of the strongly agreed or agreed responses at the low level of the Critical Thinking Development Model (CTDM). However, the proportions of strongly agreed or agreed responses were generally higher than the proportions of the strongly disagreed or disagreed responses at the middle and high levels of the CTDM. The correlations reveal that, overall, there were more positive than negative relationships between the selected socioeconomic factors and reflective thinking. The results further revealed that there were two positive and significant relationships (coefficients); specifically, the ones between “sometimes try to recognize the need to practice reflecting on issues” and the intent to hold a college leadership position, and “sometimes have good habits reflecting on issues” and gender. It may be that the intent to hold a college leadership position and gender matter in reflective thinking. 

Soft skills are important to leadership and leadership styles; however, there are limited studies on how soft skills affect the perceived leadership styles of college students. Therefore, the study assessed the effects of soft skills on the perceived leadership styles of college students. The data were collected from a purposive sample of college students in a leadership training program. Data was analyzed using descriptive statistics and multiple regression analysis. The results show that the most dominant leadership styles were, telling, selling, and delegating. Regarding the selected soft skills vis-à-vis what participants would do in scenarios, there were four high combined “most likely” and “likely” responses, 70% or above for communication: particularly, for active listening, conflict resolution, writing a letter, and public speaking. For problem-solving, all five combined “most likely” and “likely” responses, were high, above 70% for creative skills, research and consult, consensus solutions, decision-making skills, and critical thinking skills. Furthermore, for work ethic, there were four high combined “most likely” and “likely” responses, above 60% for correcting an oversight, doting “is” and crossing “ts”, doing a task methodically, and completing a task on time. Additionally, the results of the multiple regression showed that the problem-solving soft skills, overall, dominated the composite leadership style. Therefore, problem-solving may be a critical soft skill that affects leadership styles.