Leadership Education in Colleges: Toward a 21st Century Paradigm

Abstract

The industrial view of leadership is inadequate for educational purposes because it does not address the nature of the complex social relationships among people who practice leadership, nor does it accurately accommodate their purposes, motives, and intentions. A distinction among the practices of training, development, and education provides a means to explore an understanding of these complex social relationships relative to the preparation of leaders for the future. The content of leadership education in the future will cover three broad categories: the evolution of social change and development, the processes that influence social development, and the dynamics of human nature in change processes. Leadership education is aimed at producing citizens for a democratic society.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Barker, R.A. (1997). How can we train leaders if we do not know what leadership is? Human Relations, 50(4), 343-362.

Burns, J.M. (1978). Leadership. New York: Harper & Row.

Foster, W. (1986). The reconstruction of leadership. Victoria, Australia : Deakin University Press.

Harré, R. , Clarke, D. , & DeCarlo, N. (1985). Motives and mechanisms. London : Methuen.

Hutchins, R. (1936). The higher learning in America. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

Kuhn, T.S. (1970). The structure of scientific revolutions, (2nd ed). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Rost, J.C. (1991). Leadership for the twenty-first century. New York: Praeger.

Rost, J.C. (1993). Leadership development in the new millennium. The Journal of Leadership Studies, 1(1), 92-110.

Tucker, R. (1981). Politics as leadership. Columbia, MO: University of Missouri Press.

10.

Yammarino, F. , J. (1995). Dyadic leadership . The Journal of Leadership Studies. 2,(4), 50-74.