Enhancing the Gift of Leadership: Innovative Programs for All Grade Levels

Full text

Enhancing the Gift of Leadership
Innovative Programs for All Grade Levels
Hava E. Vidergor, Ph.D.
Dorothy Ann Sisk, Ph.D.
The International Centre for Innovation in Education (ICIE)

© 2013 The International Centre for Innovation in Education (ICIE)
Cover drawing: Claire Ochsner
Cover design: Bilal Al-Mallah
Copy editor: Taisir Subhi Yamin, Ph.D.
All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced in any form by any electronic or
mechanical means (including photocopying, recording, or information storage and retrieval
without permission in writing from the ICIE.
This book my be purchased at special quantity discount for educational, business or sales
promotional use.
For information, please e-Mail: sandra@icieworld.net, or write to :
Dr. Sandra K. Linke,
Director, ICIE,
Heilmeyersteige 93,
D-89075, Ulm-Germany.
The ICIE and associated logos are trademarks and/ or registered trademarks of the International
Centre for Innovation in Education, Sweden AB
Org.nr 556728-5423
Vidergor, Hava E.
Sisk, Dorothy A.
Enhancing the Gift of Leadership:
Innovative Programs for All Grade Levels
ISBN-
ISBN-

DEDICATION
To Itzhak,
You have inspired me to swim in new waters and leave my mark.
Challenging, encouraging and rejoicing, in every small accomplishment I made.
Sharing my passion for gifted education.
Together, we have planted and cultivated ideas coming to life in this book.
I could not have found a better partner and friend.
With love. Hava E. Vidergor
To all of the teachers, administrators, parents, and gifted students who have
enriched my life and strengthened my resolve to be a gifted education advocate.
Dorothy Ann Sisk

About the Authors
Hava E. Vidergor, Ph.D. in gifted education from the
University of Haifa, Israel. She is a pedagogical coordinator
and lecturer in a certification program for teachers of gifted
students at Oranim Academic Teachers’ College in Israel,
supervises M.A. theses in Gordon Academic College, and
teaches leadership at Oranim Gifted Education Center. She
has published several research papers in gifted education
journals, and is the initiator and co-editor of The Handbook
for Teaching Gifted and Able Students with C. R. Harris and
T. S. Yamin and Enhancing the Gift of Leadership with D.A.
Sisk. Hava has developed a comprehensive
Multidimensional Curriculum Model (MdCM) for teaching
gifted and able students. She is an active member of the
World Council for Gifted and Talented Children (WCGTC) and serves on international
organizing and scientific committees for the International Center for Innovation in Education
(ICIE) conferences. She has presented a number of papers, posters and has conducted
workshops in World Council, Asia-Pacific and ICIE international conferences. She is also an
invited lecturer in certification programs for teachers of gifted in Israeli universities and from
overseas, as well as in a large number of professional development programs for teachers of
high achievers. She serves as the Israeli delegate of the World Council for Gifted and Talented
Children and is currently the director of the HV Gifted Expertise Center.
e-Mail: vidergor@bezeqint.net
Website: www.hvgifted.com

Dorothy A. Sisk, Ph.D., holds an endowed chair in education
of gifted students at Lamar University in Beaumont, Texas.
Dr. Sisk is an international consultant focusing on leadership
and creativity development. She was a professor at the
University of South Florida, coordinating programs for
training teachers of the gifted, and the former director of the
U.S. Office of Gifted and Talented in Washington, DC. She
currently directs the C.W. and Dorothy Ann Conn Gifted
Child Center at Lamar University, and teaches the courses for
the endorsement in gifted education. She received the
Distinguished Leaders Award from the Creative Education
Foundation (CEF) in 1989, the Distinguished Service Award
from the National Association for Gifted Children (NAGC)
in 1983 and 1994, the Creative Lifetime Award from CEF in
1994, and was selected for the Hall of Fame Award of CEF in 2005. Dr. Sisk served as one of
the founders and was the first president of the American Creativity Association, and president
of The Association for Gifted and Talented (TAG), the Florida Association for Gifted, and the
World Council for Gifted and Talented Children (WCGTC), where she was executive
administrator, and editor of Gifted International from 1980-1990. She has conducted training
sessions throughout the United States and internationally. Dr. Sisk is author of Creative
Teaching of the Gifted, and Making Great Kids Greater; co-author with Doris Shallcross of
Leadership: Making Things Happen, The Growing Person, and Intuition: An Inner Way of
Knowing; co-author with E. Paul Torrance of Gifted Children in the Regular Classroom and
Spiritual Intelligence: Developing Higher Level Consciousness; and co-author with Susan
Israel and Cathy Block of Collaborative Literacy: Using Gifted Strategies to Enrich Learning
for Every Student. In addition, she has contributed numerous articles and chapters in books on
gifted education.
e-Mail: dorothy.sisk@lamar.edu

Table of Contents
PART ONE: INTRODUCTION TO ENHANCING LEADERSHIP
CHAPTER ONE: WHAT IS LEADERSHIP?
Leadership as a Type of Giftedness
Definitions of Leadership
Leadership Myths
CHAPTER TWO: LEADERSHIP THEORIES
Trait Theory
Leadership Style Theory
Situational Leadership Theory
The Social Change Model of Leadership Development
Developing the Seven C’s of the Social Change Model (SCM)
ELIAS: A Theory U Inspired Model
Sternberg WICS Model of Leadership
What does it take to become an emerging leader?
Character Traits and Values of Leadership
Screening and Identification of Students Gifted in Leadership
CHAPTER THREE: CURRENT RESEARCH ON LEADERSHIP DEVELOPMENT
Authentic Assessment of Leadership in Problem-solving Groups
Using Visual Learning to Enhance the Leadership of Gifted Students
Emotional Intelligence, Moral Judgment, and Leadership of Academically Gifted Students
Building Leadership Skills in Middle School Girls through Interscholastic Athletics
Leadership Skills of Gifted Students at the Secondary Level in a Rural Setting
Trends in Creative Leadership Research and Implementation for Education
CHAPTER FOUR: THE IMPORTANCE OF TEACHING FOR LEADERSHIP - DEVELOPING
LEADERSHIP SKILLS IN THE 21st CENTURY
New Ways of Thinking about the Nature of Leadership and Leadership Development
Developing Leadership Skills for the 21st Century
New Ways of Thinking about the Classroom of Today
What is a Global Citizen?
References

PART TWO: PROGRAMS AND MODELS OF LEADERSHIP DEVELOPMENT
CHAPTER FIVE: THE TEACHER AS THE COORDINATOR OF A LEADERSHIP PROGRAM
Policy, Program Design and Funding
Students
Teachers
Curriculum
Instruction
Assessment
Collaboration
CHAPTER SIX: SPECIAL PROGRAMS FOR LEADERSHIP DEVELOPMENT
The Oprah Winfrey Leadership Academy
African Leadership Academy
Hugh O’Brian Youth Leadership Organization
World Leadership Congress
Creative Leadership Training Program at the Chinese University of Hong
California State Summer School for Math & Science
University of Northern Colorado Leadership Enrichment Program
University of Southern Mississippi Leadership Program
Blackpool Enterprise Education
Boys State
Girls State
Camp RYLA
Camp Grady Spruce
Youth Leadership Metrocrest
Washington Student Leadership Program
Bronx Leadership Academy High School
Disneyland Youth Leadership (Y.E.S.) Program
Global Leadership Academy
Global Leadership Adventures
Youth Leadership Program
National Indian Youth Leadership Project (NIYLP)
Rising Stars Youth Leadership Program
Mexico Youth Leadership Program
Toastmasters Youth Leadership Program
Texas Governor’s School (TGS)
Youth Lead the Way
Leaders without Borders
Georgetown University Leadership and Ethics Program
Junior Leadership rogram
LEAD-Israel
CHAPTER SEVEN: THE CIRCULAR LEADERSHIP MODEL (CLM)
Brief Overview
Leadership Programs
The Circular Leadership Model (CLM)
References
CHAPTER EIGHT: THE MULTIDIMENSIONAL MODEL
General Learning Theory and Development
Preparing Students for the 21st Century

Selected Concepts from Current Curriculum Models for Gifted and Able Students
The Construction and Components of the Multidimensional Curriculum Model
The Multidimensional Curriculum Model’s Unique Characteristics
What Students Are Best Served Using MdCM?
What Skills Will be Developed?
Designing Units of Instruction Using the Multidimensional Curriculum Model
References
CHAPTER NINE: THE SISK MODEL FOR DEVELOPING LEADERSHIP
Sisk Model for Developing Leadership Giftedness
References

PART THREE: LEADERSHIP PROGRAMS BY GRADE LEVELS
Characteristics of Leadership Programs
Enhancing the Abilities and Talents - Developing The Gifts and Potentials of Students
Program Description
Teaching Strategies and Activities
CHAPTER TEN: ELEMENTARY SCHOOL LEADERSHIP PROGRAM
Program Outline
4th Grade Program
5th to 6th Grade Program
Exemplary Lessons: 4th Grade
Exemplary Lessons: 5th to 6th Grades
CHPTER ELEVEN: MIDDLE SCHOOL LEADERSHIP PROGRAMS
Program Outline
Exemplary Units
CHAPTER TWELVE: HIGH SCHOOL LEADERSHIP PROGRAM
Program Outline
Exemplary Lessons
CONCLUDING THOUGHTS
Subject Index

PREFACE
LEADERSHIP is not an academic subject, it is a set of skills that enable individuals to
identify problems and solutions that can make a difference in our world. The key to leadership
development comes through the individual teacher and calls for a transition from traditional
teaching to a student/ teacher interaction that is truly dynamic. It will require risk-taking as
teachers embark on developing lessons in fundamentally different ways and a spirit of
"entrepreneurship" or creating a new way of doing activities. This book will be a personal
journey for you as the teacher as you establish a culture in your classroom that fosters
leadership. Try the lessons and adapt them to the needs of your students, and remember using
these lessons will help make the world a better place. Once your students truly understand the
nature of leadership development, they will love the challenge and freedom that the lessons
encourage and they will ask for more!

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
We would like to express our deepest appreciation to colleagues who have shared their
ideas about learning theory and practice including: J.P. Guilford, Benjamin Bloom, Frank
Williams, Calvin Taylor, Howard Gardner, Joseph Renzulli, Ned Herrmann, Joyce Van Tassel-
Baska, Belle Wallace, Carole Ann Tomlinson and Donald Treffinger. All of these individuals
have been and are giants upon whose shoulders we stand to share our ideas about leadership
development. We acknowledge the seminal work of Frances Karnes and John Feldhusen,
colleagues who have displayed a passion toward leadership development, and to all of the
graduate students and gifted students over the years who demonstrated their leadership and
enriched our lives with their journey toward reaching their potential.
We are especially thankful to our publisher Taisir Subhi Yamin and the International
Centre for Innovation in Education (ICIE) without whom this book would not have become a
reality.

FOREWORD
There are five distinct areas of giftedness: general intellectual ability, visual/ performing
arts, creative thinking, specific academic ability, and leadership, each with its own set of
characteristics. But leadership does not simply fit into its own box, nor does giftedness in
leadership exclude giftedness in other areas. Giftedness in leadership requires an instinctive
understanding of the social setting, appreciation of the individuals with different strengths who
comprise that setting, and the way in which they may be guided to accomplish a clear goal that
reflects consensus and validates efforts. In this respect, leadership is an art.
Leadership is also a science. It requires knowledge of the product, the ability to define
parameters clearly, and a vision of the end product that utilizes the skills of the people involved
to a maximum effect. It involves responsibility, organization, and commitment, along with
decision-making and judgment that weighs consequences of action and reaction. Leadership
fits comfortably into the concept of giftedness and is a natural area for our most promising
students, for change is brought about by people with a vision who can translate that vision into
reality.
The art and science of good leadership requires goal-oriented procedural techniques
along with a knowledge base that is geared to smooth operation of all components to make it
work and strengthen its purpose. There is need for a book that will guide teachers in becoming
successful coordinators of gifted programs and ability to integrate the programs within the
school while providing opportunities for an enriched education that incorporates challenge.
Enhancing the gift of leadership: Innovative programs for all grade levels by Hava E. Vidergor
and Dorothy A. Sisk fulfills this role admirably. Beginning with an historical outline of
leadership that had its origins in the works of Plato and Aristotle, the book provides reach and
stretch beyond definition to guide the educator of the gifted through the many knowledge
dimensions needed for application in practice.
Realistic in its approach to guiding leadership, the book emphasizes the place of the
gifted program within the school structure and operation and delineates the leadership role with
reference to specific skills and the application of those skills. It is a useful, practical book that
will become a valuable reference for those who would assist the gifted to fulfill their proper
role in bringing about positive change in a volatile and uncertain world. At the same time it
gives examples of successful programs that are culturally inclusive and ethnically sensitive and
offer structure, not stricture, creative thinking, not absolutes, and ethical construct, not
imposition of values.
The book is outstanding in its orientation towards viability with comprehensive and
definitive approaches to the skills needed for teachers who would become effective
coordinators of leadership programs. The chapter devoted to this aspect directs attention to
identification with reference to multiple means of providing effective assessment techniques.
It emphasizes monitoring and includes the value of debriefing along with collaboration that is
culturally sensitive and inclusive. It makes a point of case studies and includes validation

techniques such as celebrations and newsletters with a view to successful leadership and
appreciation of teamwork.
Many of the chapters in this book contain templates and timelines, facilitating the course
of action and the associated development of skills needed for leadership programs. Evaluation
is integrated into the whole book with expectations and critique emphasized so that self-
assessment is derived from a thorough understanding of process and product, along with
standards of performance that meet well-established, cogent criteria. The chapters on models
of instruction are stimulating and incorporate creative and critical thinking while encouraging
introspection and examination of ethics and values. Suggestions for utilization of role models
and outside resources such as extending invitations to working, successful leaders and making
available information and activity centers serve as concrete options for enriching leadership
programs and connecting gifted students with the real world. This includes the power of
technology that can bring a center or speaker right into the classroom if transportation is a
concern.
The authors bring to this extraordinary volume a long personal history of devotion to the
field, broad enriched perspective, and a global view with a rare and rich insight from their own
experience and considerable and successful leadership efforts. This is an exciting book for any
educator of the gifted and it will prove to be of enduring value. More than 50 percent of the
global population is under the age of 25, as pointed out in chapter four, The importance of
teaching for leadership – developing leadership skills in the 21st century. With the changing
face of the world picture and immigration and refugee flow increasing day by day, this is a
book for the future that takes the long view and it should be included in every library of every
educator of the gifted.
For all grade levels, the book goes beyond the why to tell the how, the what, and the
when, with specific activities that enhance ability, motivate planning for action, and inculcate
responsible decision-making, encouraging program development for gifted students of all ages
to project and apply learned concepts that make a difference, with a range that stretches from
the school to the world. It is a new world, with new discoveries that stretch beyond the universe,
technological advances that were undreamed of only 50 years ago, and many personal and
political challenges that beg for fresh approaches that can only come from a source of gifted
children and youth who have developed the skills and experienced the training that will enable
them to engage in effective leadership.
I am most pleased to be invited to write this foreword and thank the authors for the
privilege of reading this book before publication. In the words of John Fitzgerald Kennedy: “It
is time for a new generation of leadership, to cope with new problems and new opportunities.
For there is a new world to be won.” (Television address, July 4, 1960). Hava E. Vidergor and
Dorothy A. Sisk have provided a vehicle that will enable them to do so.
Carole Ruth Harris, Ed.D.
Director, G.A.T.E.S. Research & Evaluation, Winchester, Massachusetts

PART ONE:
Introduction to Enhancing Leadership

Chapter One:
What is Leadership?
Interest in identifying and nurturing leadership potential can be traced to the early writing
of Aristotle and Plato. Aristotle in Nicomachean Ethics described the role of the leader as one
of creating an environment in which all members have an opportunity to realize their potential.
He said the ethical role of the leader is to create conditions under which followers can achieve
their potential, rather than enhancing the power of the leader. Aristotle has been dead for nearly
2,400 years, but his ideas about leadership are still timely.
Plato used an extended allegory in The Republic to illustrate “… our nature in its
education and want of education” (Watt, l997, p. 514). He used the cave as an allegory to
contrast the world of the senses and the intelligible world with its effect on the philosopher.
The cave allegory represents the beginning of Plato’s argument that only philosophers should
rule and lead. In the dialogue between Socrates and Glaucon, Plato described prisoners chained
to face a wall, and behind and above the prisoners, people were carrying objects along a road.
Beyond the road there was a fire casting shadows of people onto the wall in front of the
prisoners. These images were all the prisoners could see. If the prisoners were freed, and forced
to turn around, they would then see the people on the road and the fire, and experience reality
as it was, not as it seemed to be in the cave.
Plato wrote about those who were not content with the bondage of the chains breaking
free so they might discover the cause of the dancing shadows, only to return and find deaf ears,
as they tried to share their new knowledge. The allegory of the cave is related to Plato’s Theory
of Forms as the highest and most fundamental kind of reality, and not the material world of
change known through the senses. According to Plato, only knowledge of the Forms constitutes
real knowledge. Both Aristotle and Plato practiced the use of dialogue and engaged learners in
building their own knowledge. Aristotle said virtue and wisdom will elude leaders who fail to
engage in ethical analysis of their actions (Watt, l997). This last idea attributed to Aristotle is
reflected in the work of Sternberg (2005) in the WICS model of leadership.
Leadership as a Type of Giftedness
The first formal definition of giftedness was provided in a report to the U.S. Congress
on the state of the art of gifted education mandated by the U.S. Commissioner of Education
Sydney Marland. This report later became known as the Marland Report (l972) in which
leadership was listed as one of six areas of giftedness. The most recent definition of giftedness
established in the Jacob K. Javits Gifted and Talented Students Education Act (1988) defines
gifted as:
The term “gifted and talented students” means children and youth who give evidence of
high performance capability in such areas as intellectual, creative, artistic or leadership
capacity, or in specific academic fields; and who require services or activities not
ordinarily provided by the schools in order to develop such capabilities fully. (Public
Law l00-297, Section 4l03. Definitions)
Most of the states in the United States use the federal definition of giftedness in planning
and implementing state plans and state legislation; however, the majority of the programs for
gifted students focus on the intellectually gifted. This is most notable in states that have adopted
the term “Advanced Academics” in lieu of Gifted Programs. Stephens & Karnes (2000) in their
research found only 18 states included leadership as part of their state definition, and they said

even though leadership has been included in the federal definition for over 39 years, it was the
least served area or domain of giftedness. Gifted students have the potential to function as
leaders with characteristics of empathy and sensitivity to justice, honesty, fairness, and a sense
of responsibility for making a difference. These characteristics of gifted students can accelerate
the development of the necessary knowledge, skills, and cooperative attitude needed to
function and contribute interdependently in schools and in communities.
The process of developing leadership potential represents an amazing journey in self-
actualization, and through activities that enhance intrapersonal and interpersonal skills, and
learning to relate to others in a spirit of interdependence, gifted students can develop their
leadership potential. The importance of developing leadership is embodied in the philosophy
of the Roeper School in Birmingham, Michigan. In Educating Children for Life: The Modern
Learning Community, Annemarie Roeper co-founder with her husband George of the Roeper
School said:
Humanity has made two promises to its children. The first is to prepare a world, which
accepts them and provides them with opportunities to live, grow and create in safety.
The other is to help them develop their whole beings to the fullest in every respect.
Education is the vehicle through which we try to keep these promises (Roeper, l990, p.
3).
Definitions of Leadership
In the Handbook of Leadership Bass (l98l) concluded after a review of leadership
literature there were almost as many definitions of leadership as there were people trying to
define the concept. More recently, Matthews (2004) reviewed publications on leadership
education specifically for gifted and talented youth. He included articles from 1980-2004 and
found common themes characterize most of the definitions: l) its social nature is usually
expressed through relationships and the use of interpersonal influence; 2) developmental
aspects which involve building general as well as task-specific skills; and 3) the particular
context of leadership including the organizational setting surrounding individuals and other
external structural features that influence the ways in which individuals express leadership
abilities.
Selected representation of definitions include:
• Leadership can be viewed as a relationship between those who are exerting influence
and those who are being influenced (Hollander, 1964).
• Leadership is clearly a role that leads toward goal achievement, involves interaction
and influence and usually achievement, and usually results in some form of changed
structure or behavior of groups, organizations, or communities (Lassey & Fernandez,
1976).
• Leadership is the process of influencing the activities of an individual or a group in
efforts toward goal achievement (Hersey & Blanchard, 1977).
• Leadership is an ability which may lead to a better job, to more security and self-
confidence and to greater service to society as a whole (Richardson & Feldhusen, 1987).
• Leadership is the ability to influence the activities of an individual or group toward the
achievement of a goal (Addison, l984).
• Leadership is the avenue to the achievement of our personal and corporate goals
(Calloway, l985).
• Leaders fill a void or need in that there must be a group, which is willing, or more likely
wants to be led. (Lipper, 1985).

• Leadership is the process of persuasion or example by which an individual (or
leadership team) includes a group to pursue objectives held by the leader or shared by
the leaders and his or her followers (Gardner, 1990).
• Leadership is an interpersonal relation in which others comply because they want to,
not because they have to (Hogan, Curphy, & Hogan, 1994).
• Leadership is the capability to guide others in the achievement of a common goal
(Dobosz & Beaty, 1999).
• Leadership is the ability to create a vision for positive change, help focus resources on
right solutions, inspire and motivate others, and provide opportunities for growth and
learning (Martin, 2007).
• Leadership can be defined as one’s ability to get others to willingly follow, (Hakala,
2008).
• Leadership is the capacity of a system or a community to co-sense and co-create its
future as it emerges (Scharmer, 2009).
These definitions differ as Matthews (2004) pointed out in his review. The variety of
leadership definitions reflect the multitude of factors affecting leadership and the different
perspectives from which to examine leadership as a construct (Karnes & Bean, 2000).
Leadership Myths
There are almost as many myths about leadership (Connor, 2009; Whipple, 2009;
Nielsen, 2009; Birk, 2010; Smith 2010) as there were individuals compiling them; however,
there are similarities and some degree of congruence that lends creditability to the need for
building an understanding of leadership.
Whipple (2009) listed six “great” myths about leadership:
1) Great leaders are more intelligent than mediocre leaders. In fact, Whipple said raw
intelligence is not correlated with outstanding leadership, and there is a maximum point
beyond which higher IQ is actually a predictor of lower success as a leader. He added
that highly intelligent leaders may have difficulty relating to their followers and often
struggle and are frustrated with the pace and level of understanding in others. Goleman
(2006) in developing his Emotional Intelligence Theory found that while IQ did not
correlate with leadership effectiveness, what he called Emotional Intelligence (EI)
showed a positive correlation with effectiveness.
2) Great leaders work harder than poor leaders. Whipple said that exceptional leaders
may be passionate about their work, but they also have a good sense of balance and
make time to do other things.
3) Great leaders have charisma because they look the part. Whipple pointed out that
leadership had little to do with how one looks, and said that many leaders are humble
and do not seek the trappings that go along with looking the part. He provided examples
of Mother Teresa and Mahatma Gandhi. Smith (2010) agreed with Whipple and said
many leaders are charismatic, but most are not and the leaders’ cause, purpose and
mission make them charismatic.
4) Great leaders have a college education. Many great leaders had little formal education
including Abraham Lincoln, Andrew Carnegie, Bill Gates and Steve Jobs. Smith (2010)
agreed with Whipple and said it is a myth that good leaders have more education than
other people.
5) Great leaders are expert at playing politics. Whipple makes a distinction between being
politically astute and conducting oneself in an ethical manner. He said leaders need to
understand the nature of politics and participate in political thought, but not get caught
up in manipulating others in an attempt to gain success.

Birk (2010) listed 10 most commonly held myths which are similar to those of Whipple;
particularly, in regard to formal education. Birk’s list is more detailed in the functions or tasks
of leadership.
1) Leadership and management are the same dynamic. Birk said leadership involves
having vision, creating and establishing a culture for change and creativity; whereas,
management is about executing plans, taking care of details and getting the job done.
2) Having a big title like CEO, CFO, VP or Director makes you a leader. Birk said there
is little or no relationship between titles and leadership. Connor (2010) agreed with Birk
and said position or title does not equate to leadership.
3) Leaders can motivate others. Birk said that the leader creates or develops an
atmosphere in which others become motivated.
4) Leadership is easier than management. Birk emphasized that leadership is complicated
and hard work.
5) Leadership is a function of academic success. In reality, Birk pointed out that academic
achievement and education don’t always make a good leader. Napoleon Hill (1987) is
a good example of a successful individual with the lack of a college education. He was
encouraged by Andrew Carneige, who also had little formal education beyond grade
school to interview great thinkers, and Hill went on to become an “expert” in leadership
development. Hill’s theories are well known in his book Think and Grow Rich and his
tape series the Science of Personal Achievement. Some leaders were dropouts including
Bill Gates and Steve Jobs who became world famous leaders in the field of technology.
6) Leadership is about being liked. Birk said leaders often make unpopular decisions and
are not always liked. It often takes a period of time or history for a leader to be
appreciated.
7) Leadership means you have a lot of friends. In reality, Birk said leadership can be very
lonely for leaders.
8) Leadership is about the “soft stuff.” In reality, Birk emphasized that leadership is about
dealing with people and making decisions.
9) Leadership is about the tangibles, metrics and money. Birk stressed that leadership is
about relationships.
10) Everyone can be a leader. Birk said everyone can be a personal leader in their own life,
and with the right training and mentorship anyone can become a leader. Smith (2010)
agreed with Birk and said most people have the potential to become a good leader.

References
Addison, L. (1984). Investigation of the leadership abilities of intellectually gifted students. Unpublished
dissertation. Tampa, FL: University of South Florida.
Bass, B. (1981). Stogdill’s handbook of leadership: A survey of theory and research. New York: Free Press.
Birk, S. (2010). The 10 most common myths about leadership. Healthcare Executive, Nov-Dec.25 (6) 30-32, 34-
36, 38.
Calloway, W. (1985). The promises and paradoxes of leadership. Leadership, 12-15.
Connor, P. J. (2000). Five destructive myths. CMA Management, Vol. 73, 14-15.
Dobosz, R., & Beaty, L. (1999). The relationship between athletic participation and high school students’
leadership ability. Adolescence, 34(131), 215-220.
Gardner, J. (1990). On Leadership. New York: Free Press.
Goleman, D. (2006). Emotional intelligence. Westminster, MD: Random House.
Hakala, D, (2008). The top 10 leadership qualities-HR World.
Retrieved from www.HRworld.com
Hersey, P. & Blanchard, K. (1977). The management of organizational behavior: Utilizing human resources.
Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Hogan, R., Curphy, G. & Hogan, J. (1994). What do we know about personality: Leadership and effectiveness?
American Psychologist, 49, 493- 504.
Hollander, E. (1964). Leaders, groups and influence. New York: Oxford University Press.
Jacob K. Javits Gifted and Talented Students Education Act. (1988). P.L. 100-297. Title IV, Part B, Sec. 1101.
Karnes, F. A., & Bean, S. M. (2000). Adventures and challenges: Real life stories by girls and young
women.Scottsdale,AZ: Great Potential Press.
Lassey, W. & Fernandez, R. (1976). Dimensions of leadership. Leadership and Social Change. La Jolla, CA:
University Associates.
Lipper, A. (1985). Leadership: Making things happen. Buffalo, NY: Bearly Limited.
Marland, S. P. (1972). Education of the gifted and talented: Report to the Congress of the United States by the
U.S. Commissioner of Education and background papers submitted to the U.S. Office of Education, 2 vols.
Washington, DC: U. S. Government Printing office (Government
documents, Y4.L 11/2: G36)
Martin, A. (2007). The changing nature of leadership. Greensboro, NC: Center for Creative Leadership.
Matthews, M. (2004). Leadership education for gifted and talented youth: A review of the literature. Journal for
the Education of the Gifted. 28, 77-113.
Hill, N. (1987). Think and grow rich. New York: Penguin Group.
Nielsen, J. (2009). The myth of leadership. Palo Alto, CA: Davis-Black Publishing.
Richardson, W. & Feldhusen, J. (1987). Leadership education: Developing skills for youth. Monroe, NY: Trillium,
Press.
Roeper, A. (l990). Educating children for life: The Modern learning community. Minneapolis: Free Spirit
Publishing.
Scharmer, O. (2009). Ten Propositions on transforming the current leadership development
paradigm. Amherst, MA: Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
Smith, J. (2010). Creative Leadership: Welcome to the 21st century. Academic Exchange Quarterly, 14 (4).
Stephens, K. & Karnes, F. (2000). State definitions of the gifted and talented revisited. Exceptional Children, 66,
219-238.
Sternberg, R. J. (2005). A model of educational leadership: Wisdom, intelligence, and creativity synthesized.
International Journal of Leadership in Education: Theory & Practice, 8, 347- 364.
Watt, S. (1997). Introduction: The theory of forms (Book 5-7) Plato Republic, London: Wordsworth Edition
Whipple, B. (2009). Six great myths about leadership. Hilton NY: Leadergrow Inc.

Chapter Two:
Leadership Theories
Trait Theory
The trait theory is the oldest theory of leadership, and is often referred to as the “Great
Man” theory. It can be traced to the early ideas of Aristotle who thought leaders were born, not
made. The trait theory was explored at length by Thomas Carlyle and Francis Galton. In Heroes
and Hero Worship, Carlyle (1841) listed the talents, skills and physical characteristics of men
who had risen to power. Galton (1869) in Hereditary Genius concluded that leadership was
inherited and leaders were born, not developed. Both of these major works set the stage for
viewing leadership as being traits or characteristics of a leader, and this view dominated the
thinking about leadership for decades.
Stogdill (1948) an internationally known leadership researcher reviewed 124 studies of
personal factors which could be associated with leadership. He found the personality trait
theory could not be substantiated. Stogdill said leadership is an active process and not merely
the possession of a combination of traits. He described a working relationship between
members of a group and the leader, and he noted leaders earn status through active participation
and demonstration of an ability to complete tasks. Stogdill identified five personal factors
which appeared to interact with four situational factors:
Personal Factors
Situational Factors
Intellectual Capacity
Mental Level
Achievement
Status Skills
Responsibility
Needs and interests of followers
Participation
Objectives to be achieved
Status
These personal factors and situational factors not only interact, but they are influenced
by the work situation or leadership setting. Stogdill (l948) and later Mann (1959) said persons
who are leaders in one situation may not necessarily be leaders in other situations. During the
l980’s statistical advances allowed researchers to conduct meta-analyses and Lord, Vader &
Alliger (1986) found individuals emerge as leaders in a variety of situations, and there were
significant relationships found between leadership and the traits of intelligence, adjustment and
extraversion.
Leadership Style Theory
The second type of leadership theory to be examined is the Leadership Style theory. The
classic work in this theory was conducted by Lewin, Lippit & White (1939). They identified
three patterns of leadership: democratic, autocratic, and laissez-faire. Democratic leadership
was described as situations which could be described as fair and just, with everyone having an
opportunity to offer ideas, opinions, and solutions. Autocratic was described as situations in

which absolute obedience was called for by the leaders with little or no opportunity for adding
ideas, or showing any kind of dissent. Last, laissez-faire was described as situations in which
the leader was non-involved, providing little or no leadership and there was confusion and
chaos. The work of Lewin et al. was extended by Tannenbaum, Weschler and Massarch (1961)
who suggested leadership could be conceptualized on a continuum of leadership ranging from
boss-centered leadership to subordinate-centered leadership.
McGregor (1960) provided another example of leadership style as a theory with his
Theory X and Theory Y. This theory was congruent with the authoritarian vs. democratic
leadership. Theory X viewed power coming from one’s position and subordinates were
considered unreliable. Theory Y viewed leadership as being given to the group and
subordinates were considered self-directive and creative, if they were properly motivated.
McGregor’s theory viewed leadership as relational and was the forerunner of a third type of
leadership which is situational.
Situational Leadership Theory
In this theory, individuals are perceived as having leadership manifested in specific
situations. Hollander (1964) described leadership as a relationship between people exerting
influence and those who are influenced. Hersey & Blanchard (l982) extended Hollander’s ideas
and introduced three components of situational leadership: 1) task behavior, 2) relationship
behavior, and 3) effectiveness. Concern for task was described as productivity, and relationship
behavior was defined as concern for people. In addition, they introduced the concept of task-
relevant maturity with two types of maturity, job maturity and psychological maturity. Job
maturity was defined as competence, achievement motivation, and willingness to take on
responsibility. Psychological maturity was defined as self-respect, self-confidence, and self-
esteem.
Hersey & Blanchard (l982) also suggested attitudes and behaviors of subordinates can
provide clues for the leader to use in knowing how to best interact with them. With new
employees or antagonistic or lethargic subordinates, the leader needs to focus on high task
orientation “get the job done” and low relationship. As employees learn the job or change their
attitude, the leader can then move to high task and high relationship. As they mature, the leader
can lessen the emphasis on task and invest more in relationships. Finally, as subordinates
demonstrate full maturity, the leader then lessens task concern and concern for relationships.
A more recent situational model includes a transformative component.
The Social Change Model of Leadership Development
The Social Change Model of Leadership Development (HERI, 1996) described
leadership as a relational, transformative, process-oriented, learned, and change-directed
phenomenon (Wagner, 2006). The Social Change Model (SCM) is based on the principles of
situational leadership as a purposeful, collaborative, values-based process resulting in positive
social change. In the SCM, social responsibility and change for the common good are achieved
through the development of eight core values targeted toward enhancing the level of self-
awareness of individuals and the ability to work with others. The individual core values
include: Consciousness of Self, Congruence, and Commitment.
The group core values include: Collaboration, Common Purpose, and Controversy with
Civility. The core value for society and community values is Citizenship. The interaction
between and across these seven core values facilitates Social Change for the common good
which is the eighth value. The SCM model has considerable applicability to leadership

programs (Kezar, Carducci, & Contreras-McGavin, 2006); particularly, for leadership
programs designed for gifted students with its focus on empowering individuals to address
social change and socio-cultural issues. The SCM model is depicted in Figure 1.
Figure 1: Social change model.
Developing the Seven C’s of the Social Change Model (SCM)
Individual Values
Consciousness of self can be developed by encouraging gifted students to develop and
to use their intrapersonal skills in activities and experiences that will help them become more
aware of their beliefs, values, attitudes, and emotions that motivate them to take action. As
gifted students develop consciousness of self, they will become more mindful and aware of
how their current emotional state and the “perceptual lens” they use in interacting with others
and with information affect them cognitively and affectively.
Congruence can be encouraged and reinforced by asking gifted students to reflect in
journal writing, and to discuss socio-cultural issues in small groups. As they reflect on their
interpersonal actions and note if they are acting in ways that are consistent with their values
and beliefs, they will build an understanding of the importance of congruence. One activity to
develop increased congruence is providing time for gifted students to examine the biographies
of leaders who were able to behave with consistency, genuineness, authenticity, and honesty
toward others in the face of challenges and stress, and then ask the students to reflect on the
thinking, feeling, and behaving of these leaders.
Commitment development can be encouraged in gifted students by creating an
environment that supports their individual learning passions. Then the students can be
encouraged to identify service projects in their schools, centers or in their communities. As
they develop a significant investment in these projects, their energy for the projects will be
reflected in increased intensity and perseverance.

Group Values
Collaboration can be experienced by gifted students as they work on group projects
focusing on generating creative solutions and actions such as Future Problem Solving with
shared group responsibility and accountability. The power of the group process can be
strengthened if the groups are dissimilar in ethnicity and skill level which will encourage the
students to recognize the importance of different points of view and the power of diversity.
Common Purpose is essential in the SCM and one initial activity for gifted students in
a leadership program is to assist them in developing a shared vision and group purpose. As the
students engage in leadership training and projects, and share aims and values, a common
purpose can be realized.
Controversy with Civility is an essential skill for gifted students, with their critical and
dominant characteristics, they need to learn to listen to all points of view and to do so with
civility. Gifted students may need to be guided to recognize that differences in viewpoint may
often lead to creative outcomes.
Community Values
Citizenship can be developed as gifted students engage in social service projects and
recognize that members of a community are interdependent. Individuals or groups from the
community who are working in projects with responsibility for others can be invited to share
examples of their vision and active community involvement with the students.
Change is the essential goal of leadership development in the SCM model, and
leadership activities developed using the model will provide opportunities for gifted students
to become part of positive social change. Gifted students want to make a difference and to
make the world a better place for themselves and others, and the SCM model can be an
essential tool in enabling them to develop their leadership.
ELIAS: A Theory U Inspired Model
Scharmer (2009) described the single-person-centric concept of leadership as outdated
and he said real leadership takes place through collective, systemic, and distributed action.
Emerging Leaders Innovate Across Sectors (ELIAS) is a Theory U inspired model. Participants
work through the ELIAS program and experience systems change beginning with a number of
stages. The first stage Scharmer called Downloading and Denial in which there is a focus on
the past; this is followed by Debate in which the problem is viewed and blame is placed on
others; then there is Dialogue in which multiple perspectives are viewed including each
person’s part in creating the issue. This stage is followed by Connecting to Source in which
there is an uncovering of common will and a shift from a “me” to a “we” focus. This stage is
followed by Envisioning in which there is a crystallizing of the vision and intention; then
Enacting in which there is a prototyping of the “new” by linking head, heart, and hand; and
finally Embodying in which there is institutionalizing of the “new” in processes and practices.
Throughout the ELIAS leadership experience, there is an emphasis on open mind, open heart,
and open will. These situational conceptual theories and frameworks will add considerable
meaning and relevance to the development of viable leadership programs for gifted students.
Sternberg WICS Model of Leadership
Sternberg (1999) said good leadership is in large part a decision-making process.
Therefore, developing leadership will involve guiding gifted students who may be future

leaders in developing the skill to ask the kind of questions they need to ask, and the decision-
making skills to make wise creative decisions. Sternberg and Lubart (1995) defined key
creative decision-making skills as being able to redefine problems, analyze problems, sell
solutions, realize the limitations of knowledge, take sensible, principled tasks and overcome
obstacles. Successful leaders propel followers from where they are to where the leader wants
them to go (Sternberg, 1999). In addition, the leader will be successful to the extent that
followers reach the destination willingly, with maximum positive and minimum negative
outcomes for the leader-follower system (Sternberg, Kaufman & Pretz, 2002).
The WICS model of leadership is composed of three components: wisdom, intelligence
and creativity, synthesized. Sternberg (2005) said creative skills are needed to come up with
functional ideas and to convince others of the value of the proposed ideas. Wisdom balances
the effect of ideas on the individual, on others, and on institutions in both the short and long
term. Leaders can be creatively intelligent, analytically intelligent and practically intelligent
without being wise (Sternberg, 2005). Wisdom is especially important in today’s world as a
result of advances in technology, including destructive technology. This mismatch between the
development and the lack of development of wisdom places the world at an enormous risk
(Sternberg, 2005).
It is often difficult for gifted students to think wisely because they lack wise role models
and they may have perceived self interests in a “What’s in it for me?” attitude or “What’s in it
for us?” which represent thinking in short term rather than long term effects. In addition, there
may be a lack of opportunities for gifted students to engage in dialogue and dialectical thinking
which the ELIAS theory identified as components of leadership. Wisdom, according to
Sternberg (2005), involves the use of intelligence, creativity and experience toward a common
good. WICS can provide a useful model for leadership development involving synthesizing
wisdom, intelligence, and creativity. Sternberg stressed the importance of conceptualizing
leadership as decision-making. Therefore, in working with gifted students it is important for
educators to help gifted students develop and make use of their characteristics of sincerity,
honesty, integrity, and compassion in making wise decisions. Service projects can build on
these characteristics as gifted students engage in activities that provide experiences toward a
common good.
What does it take to become an emerging leader?
Emerging leaders become role models and inspire or motivate group members to
persevere when actions or ideas are stalled, provide intellectual stimulation, and identify
matches between individual traits of group members and the tasks that need to be accomplished
(Guastello, 1995). Examples of leadership qualities are listed in the Scales for Rating the
Behavioral Characteristics of Superior Students (SRBCSS) (Renzulli, Smith, Callahan,
Hartman, & Westberg (2002):
• Responsible Behavior
• Follow-through on projects
• Respect and willing compliance of others
• Self-confidence
• Ability to organize
• Ability to cooperate
• Tendency to direct activities when involved with others.
These behavioral characteristics suggest that gifted students who demonstrate leadership
characteristics can be problem solvers, facilitating and directing actions to identify solutions
and to become emerging leaders (Davis & Rimm, 2004).

Character Traits and Values of Leadership
Leadership as defined by Hakala (2008) as the ability to get others to willingly follow.
He said leaders can be found and nurtured, and it is this role that schools and centers need to
demonstrate by actively involving students in leadership activities and providing “choice” in
activities the students can pursue. Hakala identified nine characteristics of leadership qualities:
integrity, dedication, magnanimity, humility, openness, creativity, fairness, assertiveness, and
a sense of humor.
• Integrity involves the ability to integrate outward actions with inner values. Leaders
with integrity can be trusted because they are the same on the outside in their actions,
as they are on the inside with their values. Leaders with integrity do not stray from their
values in stressful situations; consequently, followers always know where they stand.
• Dedication is demonstrated by leaders who do whatever is necessary to get a task
completed. By setting an example, the leader can inspire group members to stay with a
task until it is completed, and the group can see that they have been able to achieve a
“great” product.
• Magnanimity is when the leader shares the spotlight and ensures that every group
member is recognized for their part in the project.
• Humility is evidenced as the leader recognizes all group members and is humble.
Hakala (2008) pointed to Gandhi as a role model for humility with his “follower-
centric” leadership role.
• Openness is demonstrated as the leader listens to others, and accepts new ideas. It also
involves suspending judgment which encourages group members or followers to feel
comfortable in sharing new ideas.
• Creativity is defined as being able to think outside of the box and to reward the
ingenuity and originality of group members. Encouraging the group to use What if?
statements can stimulate followers to think differently and come up with new ideas.
• Fairness is essential for a leader and taking time to check for accuracy and precision in
the facts, before moving forward with a solution or action. It includes treating all group
members fairly, and it involves decreasing impulsivity to avoid leaping to conclusions.
• Assertiveness involves being able to clearly state the goal, the expectations, and the
time-line so all of the group members are on the same page. Assertiveness is not the
same as aggressive behavior, it is being able to clearly state expectations, so there are
no misunderstandings.
• Sense of Humor is a leadership characteristic that can relieve stress or tension and even
redirect hostility. Hakala (2008) said humor builds camaraderie and bonding in the
group.
These leadership characteristics listed by Hakala are similar to the twelve intellectual
indicators identified by Costa (2000), and the l6 habits of mind (Costa & Kallick, 2008). In his
ideas about transformative education, Costa championed teaching for intelligence. The Costa
intellectual indicators included: Persistence, decreasing impulsivity, listening to others,
flexibility in thinking, meta-cognition, checking for accuracy/precision, questioning, drawing
on past knowledge, precision of language and thought, using all senses, ingenuity, originality,
creativity and wonderment, enjoyment, and curiosity.
Screening and Identification of Students Gifted in Leadership
Over the last 40 years, a number of instruments have been developed for use in screening
and identifying leadership in elementary and secondary students; however, instruments with
reliability and validity are limited. Most of the instruments can provide useful information

about the leadership characteristics and behaviors of students, and this information can be used
in planning and developing leadership programs. In addition, the information can be used in
measuring the impact of leadership programs on the participating students. Most of the
instruments available are self rating, but teachers and parents can both rate the students to
provide additional information concerning the leadership of students being considered for
leadership programs. Friedman, Jenkins-Friedman, and Van Dyke (1984) conducted a study to
find out which nomination method was more effective in identifying students with leadership
ability. They found students who self-nominated either singly or in combination with other
types of nomination scored more highly on leadership than students nominated by their peers
or teachers or both.
When students are involved in leadership activities in schools or centers that encourage
active involvement and independent research, it is helpful if the identification of leadership is
an ongoing process, since the students with leadership potential may be able to qualify as they
experience leadership activities and are able to demonstrate their leadership. Methods available
to identify leadership potential include: Parent, teacher, and self-rating checklists or nomination
forms, socio-metric assessment, observations of group tasks in leadership activities, and
commercially prepared screening and identification instruments (Bean and Karnes, 2001). A
selected number of instruments are listed which can be useful in identifying students with
potential in leadership.
One instrument widely used in local school programs is the Rating the Behavioral
Characteristics of Superior Students Scale (SRBCSS) scale, originally developed in 1976 and
revised in 2002, that lists seven leadership characteristics. The original scale had four rating
areas: learning, motivation, creativity, and leadership. Leadership Characteristics (Part 4) was
validated by Hartman (1969) who compared the ratings of teachers and peers. He found
correlations were high for teachers and students in grades 4, 5 and 6. Additional studies
conducted found the Leadership Characteristics (Part 4) assessed many behavioral
characteristics found in the research on leadership. Burke, Harworth & Ware (1982) used a
factor-analytical structure of the SRBCSS and concluded the behavioral characteristics were
descriptive of leadership expectations in a school setting. The SRBCSS manual contains
information on construct validity, alpha reliability and inter-rater reliability, as well as detailed
information on how to develop local norms.
Another self-rating scale is the Roets Rating Scale for Leadership (Roets, 1986). The
scale can be administered to students in grades 5-12. Twenty-six items are listed and students
respond on a Likert 5 point scale of Almost Always, Quite Often, Sometimes, Not Very Often,
and Never. The Roets Scale was field tested with 1,057 students in both public and private
schools. Validity was established by administering two other measures of leadership with
correlations of r =.71 and .77. An investigation of reliability of the Roets Scale with the
SRBCSS leadership scale yielded a correlation of r=.55.
The Eby Gifted Behavior Index was developed by Eby (1989) and contains six checklists
to identify the behavioral processes of elementary and secondary gifted students in a number
of talent areas: verbal, math, science, problem solving, musical, visual, spiritual and social
leadership including: active interaction with the environment, reflectiveness, perceptiveness,
persistence, goal orientation, originality, self-evaluation, independence, and effective
communication of ideas. A 5 point Likert scale is used and validity and reliability studies on
the social/leadership checklist are included in the manual.

The Khatena-Morse Multitalent Perception Inventory developed by Khatena & Morse
(1994) measures the talents of artistry, musical, creative imagination, initiative, and leadership.
Form A contains four leadership items, and form B contains six items in leadership. The
Inventory has a technical manual including standardization data, and information on the
validity and reliability of the test.
The Gifted and Talented Evaluation Scale (GATES) was developed to evaluate
giftedness as defined in the federal definition of gifted education and includes items to measure
intellectual ability, academic skills, creativity, leadership, and artistic talent. There are ten items
in the leadership section. Teachers, parents and others can rate students on the GATES. It has
been field tested with 1,000 gifted and talented students. Studies of test-retest reliability and
internal consistency yielded 90 coefficients (Gilliam et al., 1996).
The Leadership Skills and Behavior Scale was developed by Sisk (1987). The scale is
based on the definition of leaders as creative problem solvers and consists of items for gifted
students to self-rate on eight skills including: Decision-making, problem-solving, group
dynamics, communicating, organizing, implementing, planning, and discerning opportunities.
In addition, there are two items focusing on motivation and positive self-concept. Students
respond to the questions using a rating scale of 1-5 with Never, Seldom, Sometimes, Often,
and Always. Validity and reliability are not provided, but the Leadership Skills and Behavior
Scale has been used as a pre-post test measure for a number of three week residential leadership
programs for academically gifted students, and the mean score differences on the pre-post tests
of leadership were significant at the .05 level (Sisk, 2011).

References
Burke, J., Haworth, C., Ware, W. (l982). Scale for rating behavioral characteristics of superior students: An
investigation of factor structure, Journal of Special Ed., l6 (4) 477-485.
Bean, S. & Karnes, F. A. (2001). Developing the leadership potential of gifted students, In F.A. Karnes & S.M.
Bean (Eds.) Methods and materials for teaching the gifted, Waco, Tx:Prufrock Press.
Carlyle, T. (1841). Heroes and hero worship. London: James Frasier.
Costa, A. (2000). Teaching for intelligence. Transforming Education, 22-30.
Costa, A. & Kallick, B. (2008). Learning and leading with habits of mind: 16 Essential Characteristics for
success, Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
Davis, G. & Rimm, S, (2004). Education of the gifted and talented. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
Eby, J. (1989). Eby Gifted Behavior Index (Administration Manual). East Aurora, NY: D.O. K.
Friedman, P., Jenkins-Friedman, R. & Van Dyke, M. (1984). Identifying the leadership gifted: Self, peer or teacher
nomination? Roeper Review, 7, 91-94.
Galton, F. (1869). Hereditary genius. London: Macmillan.
Gillian, J., Carpenter, B. & Christensen, J. (1996). Gifted and Talented Evaluation Scales, Austin, TX: Pro-Ed.
Guastello, S. (1995). Facilitating style, individual innovation, and emergent leadership in problem solving groups.
Journal of Creative Behavior, 29, 225-239.
Hartman, R.K. (1969). Teachers’ Identification of student learners. Unpublished paper, University of Conn.,
Storrs.
Higher Education Research Institute [HERI]. (1996). A social change model of leadership development:
Guidebook version III, College Park MD: National Clearinghouse of Leadership programs.
Hersey, P. & Blanchard, K. (1982). Leadership style: Attitudes and behaviors. Training and Development Journal,
36(5), 50-52.
Hollander, E. (1964). Leaders, groups and influence. New York: Oxford University Press.
Kezar, A., Carducci, R., Contreras-McGavin, M. (2006). Rethinking the “L” word in higher education: The
revolution in research on leadership. ASHE Higher Education Report, Vol. 3l, #6. San Francisco: Jossey-
Bass.
Khatena, J. & Morse, D (1994). Khatena-Morse Multitalent Perception Inventory. Bensonville, IL: Scholastic
Testing Service.
Lewin, K., Lippit, R., & White, R. (1939). Patterns of aggressive behavior in experimentally created social
climates. Journal of Social Psychology, 10, 271-299.
Lord, R. G., De Vader, C. L. & Alliger, G. M. (1986). A meta-analysis of the relation between personality traits
and leader perceptions: An application of validity generalization procedures. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 71, 402-410.
Mann, R. D. (1959). A review of the relationship between personality and performance in small groups.
Psychological Bulletin, 56, 241-270.
McGregor, D. (1960). The human side of enterprise. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Renzulli, J., Smith, L., Callahan, C., Hartman, R. & Westberg, K. (2002). Scales for rating the behavioral
characteristics of superior students-Revised edition. Mansfield Center, CT: Creative Learning Press.
Roets, L. (1986). Roets Rating Scale for Leadership. Des Moines, IA: Leadership Publishers.
Scharmer, O. (2009). Ten Propositions on transforming the current leadership development paradigm. Amherst,
MA: Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
Sisk, D. (1987). Leadership Skills and Behavior Scale, in Leadership: A special type of giftedness. Monroe, NY:
Trillium Press.
Sternberg, R. J. and Lubert, T. I. (1995), Defying the crowd: Cultivating Creativity in a Culture of Conformity,
New York: The Free Press.
Sternberg, R. J. (1999), Wisdom, Intelligence, and Creativity Synthesized, Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press.
Sternberg, R. J., Kaufman, J.C. and Pretz J.E. (2002), The Creativity Conundrum: A Propulsion Model of Kinds
of Creative Contributions, New York: Psychology Press.
Sternberg, R. J. (2005). A model of educational leadership: Wisdom, intelligence, and creativity synthesized.
International Journal of Leadership in Education: Theory & Practice, 8, 347
364.
Tannenbaum, R., Weschler, I., & Massarch, F. (196l). Leadership and organization: A behavioral science
approach. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Wagner, W. (2006). The social change model of leadership: A brief overview. Concepts & Connections, 15(1), 9.