University of Louisville
Office of Civic Engagement,
Leadership, and Service
Recommendations
By
Corey Seemiller, PhD
May 2009
OVERALL ANALYSIS
After researching the programs, being in the office, and meeting and talking with various partners,
collaborators, students, and faculty/staff, it appears that the CELS staff and those I interacted with
care deeply about students and offering meaningful experiences for them. The 3 CELS staff seemed
very open to new ideas and really have the best interest of the students in mind. It appears that
students enjoy interacting with the CELS staff and crave more interaction with the staff. The
following report is broken into 3 main sections: Recommendations, Structural Options for LEAD,
and Ideas for Leadership Curriculum. The first section, Recommendations, includes my
recommendations about vision, theoretical foundation, niche, staffing, attracting students,
partnerships, modifications to existing programs, new programs, and logistics. The second section,
Structural Options for LEAD, includes 3 possible structures for LEAD. Finally, Ideas for Leadership
Curriculum includes ideas for both leadership development and leadership training curriculum.
RECOMMENDATIONS
Vision
VISION AND STRATEGIC PLAN
It looks as though some thoughts have been put to paper about new initiatives for CELS especially
as they relate to the Student Affairs strategic plan. I would recommend developing a vision and
strategic plan with goals and timelines that is very specific and breaks down new initiatives into
small pieces. Utilize the university and student affairs strategic plans as guidance, but develop your
own objectives as well. It is important to lay out a plan of at least 5 years and parcel out
implementation of programs/initiatives over those 5 years.
Theoretical Foundation
DEFINITIONS
After my meeting with the CELS staff, it appears that although they have some of the same
philosophies around the definition of leadership, they did not have a core operational definition. I
would suggest developing and adopting definitions of leadership, service, and engagement that
reflect all the programs of the office. Guide your program development and practice using these
definitions and share them with others.
FRAMEWORK
I would highly recommend investigating, educating yourselves, and adopting one or more leadership
models to use as a framework for your leadership initiatives (LEAD, conference, class, etc.). Plan all
of your outlines for programs using this framework as if you were developing lesson plans for a class.
The learning and development should be cumulative. The Bonner 5 Es are a great example of a
framework.
CAS STANDARDS
One resource you will want to consider using to assist you in the development of your programs and
the office as a whole is the CAS Standards for Leadership. It will be important for CELS staff to go
through the CAS Standards and decide what really matters most to have as program objectives since
the list from CAS is long and broad. It is better to identify 5 program objectives from CAS and do
them well than to try integrate every program objective which may result in not really doing any of
them very well.
LEARNING OUTCOMES AND ASSESSMENT
The process that Pam was going through to write learning outcomes for ECPY seemed like a very
good one. I know the plan was to write measurable learning outcomes for all programs. I suggest
engaging in this process of developing learning outcomes as one of the first orders of business so that
all programs have measurable outcomes. You will want to integrate learning outcomes from the
critical thinking model, but add others that reflect learning not related to critical thinking. Develop
specific language for a particular outcome, and if another program has that same outcome, use the
exact language. Develop and use common assessment questions for all programs. Then, you can
benchmark your programs against each other.
PROGRAM CONNECTION
I noticed that CELS seemed to lack a core, meaning that there were a cluster of programs offered,
but they did not seem to feel connected to each other. These programs could have been easily offered
out of Student Activities, Housing, Office of Community Engagement, the Cultural Center, etc.
Although these programs are good, something needs to tie them together-a common experience,
common language, shared theory, branding, etc. so they feel appropriately placed in CELS.
Niche
ADOPT LEADERSHIP DEVELOPMENT AS A NICHE
The programs offered seemed to be loosely tied to a theoretical/developmental framework and more
often reflected leadership training or networking with professionals in different fields rather than
transformational leadership development. The program that most reflects leadership development is
the ECPY course, which I believe can serve as a model to the other programs offered. It is apparent
that many units engage in leadership training for their peer mentors/advisors, SGA, RAs, etc. The
niche that stands out to me is for CELS to be the hub of leadership development on campus.
Leadership development includes all the transformational components of leadership (values
exploration, identity development, talking across differences, etc.). Leadership training includes
those specific skills helpful to be in an organization (running meetings, budgeting, event planning,
time management, etc.). It was clear from my conversations with people that although leadership
training was occurring, leadership development was not happening very much on campus. If CELS
could be this hub for doing leadership development for a variety of students prior to them being
trained for a position, students and their organizations/units would be better off.
CHANGE CURRICULUM TO REFLECT LEADERSHIP DEVELOPMENT
It was also noticeable in some programs, especially Freshman LEAD, that much of the session
facilitation is outsourced to speakers. In a leadership development program in which the experience
is intended to be developmental for students, it is much more powerful for the same one, two, or
three people to be there each session and facilitate every topic without bringing in outside speakers.
This gives continuity to the material by having the facilitator(s) build on it each session with topics
intentionally designed to be cumulative. In addition, having the same facilitator(s) will also mean
that he/she will know the audience better than the outside facilitators brought in for one session.
Because of this, he or she can adapt sessions as necessary to fit with the group and previous learning
experiences. The continuity of the facilitator(s) also maintains the trust built within the leadership
program. Regardless of how good the outside speaker is, he or she is still an outsider to a community
that has hopefully built an intimate sense of trust throughout their time together. Although I believe
it is important to bring in speakers from time to time to expose students to people in various career
fields and have them share their ideas on leadership, this approach is not ideal when doing
comprehensive leadership development with the same set of students.
TRAINING MODULES
Although I recommend leadership development as the niche for CELS, I would suggest providing
some centralized support for other units/organizations wanting and needing to do leadership
training with their students. I would recommend developing a set of training modules (lesson plans)
that are grab and gos for other professionals who are doing leadership training for their student
leaders. For instance, develop a one hour module on running meetings. Then, make the curriculum
available for others to use. This way, you share your expertise in leadership skills with others
without having to run everyone’s training. Also, there is a common language with students who
have been through particular modules in their respective roles.
Staffing
STAFF TRAINING IN LEADERSHIP
All CELS staff need exposure to and training on leadership development. If they are not already,
they should be members of the National Clearinghouse for Leadership Programs, go to the
Leadership Educators Institute, National Leadership Symposium, and/or the International
Leadership Association, as well as read a lot of foundational books/articles about leadership. Each
of them should be comfortable developing leadership development and training curriculum for use in
a retreat, class, meeting, etc. and be comfortable facilitating the curriculum.
DEVELOP STUDENT ROLES AND OWNERSHIP
Although it did not necessarily come up as a concern from students, one thing that stood out most to
me is the lack of student involvement in developing and running their own programs. Having the
sophomore directors for Freshman LEAD is a great model to draw from. Perhaps students can write
curriculum, coordinate events, oversee other students’ experiences. I believe all programs could have
more students running various aspects of them. This could assist in staffing, allow for more heads to
solve problems and develop ideas, create student ownership in their own experience, as well as set
up a structure that allows peers to mentor peers (which some argue is more effective). These roles
may be TA positions for the leadership classes, cohort leaders for LEAD, one or more SOUL
coordinators, speaker series coordinator, coordinator of America Reads, etc.; any position that
would be useful in working with each program.
CREATIVE STAFFING
At this point, I am not recommending more full-time or graduate staff than have been slated for in
2009-2010. I believe that with the incorporation of students into leadership roles, many new
initiatives could be undertaken. In addition, partnering with the CSP program may allow more
graduate students to be involved in coordinating programs for their internships. Also, it may be
useful to have the RLC of the leadership living learning community attend CELS meetings as they
apply to LEAD. This person may even be great to teach a section of ECPY.
Attracting Students
BRAND YOURSELVES:
I would suggest branding your office and your programs. Capitalize on Engage.Lead.Serve. Buy the
domain name and reroute it to your office website. Also, I would recommend putting
Engage.Lead.Serve under every logo for every program you offer. Stuart Esrock could be a great
resource for you to brainstorm ways to get your office and/or program names out there.
SERVE BROADER AND LARGER AUDIENCE
It appears that there are some excellent programs in CELS, but the number served is so small
compared to both the campus population as well as the staff time put into them. As I recognize
programs like Bonner Leaders and ASB are important and very transformational for those who
participate, with the limited staffing in the office, I would recommend utilizing staff to develop and
coordinate programs that serve a much larger and wider constituency. I am not recommending
eliminating these programs, but these may be able to be run by students thus freeing up professional
staff time to do higher level leadership development and service learning work.
OPEN AND RENAME FRESHMAN LEAD
Rename Freshman LEAD to LEAD and open it to any student who wants to participate. If the
concepts are truly developmental, a sophomore or senior could benefit from going through it just as
much as a first year student. In addition, the word “freshman” is being used less and less on college
campuses (instead first-year is being used) because of its male gendered language, “man.”
ACCEPT MORE STUDENTS IN LEAD
Open up LEAD to take in 100-120 students. Have those who completed LEAD serve as
coordinators, cohort leaders, etc. This additional free staffing would provide great leadership
opportunities for students and help with staffing the program. From a budget perspective, have a
group of students serve on a fundraising committee and write grants or engage in fundraising to
offset costs for the additional people in the program.
COMPLETION OF LEAD FOR LEADERSHIP ROLES
I highly suggest working with more campus partners to require the completion of LEAD to be
considered for a leadership role (REACH is a great model). Maybe add peer mentors, peer advisors,
RAs, Frazier interns, any of the new CELS positions (SOUL coordinator, coordinator of America
Reads, TAs, etc.). For partners outside of CELS, if only taking students who have completed LEAD
is not an option, maybe you can ask them to agree to consider first any student who has completed
LEAD for leadership positions before others who have not completed LEAD.
OUTREACH TO VARIOUS POPULATIONS
If LEAD were opened up and other programs expanded as detailed below, the programs themselves
would no longer appear to be limited to first-year students and work study students. Just opening
LEAD will draw students from various populations. In addition, creating partnerships in which
LEAD is a requirement for a student to be in a particular leadership role, may give you free
marketing. When each of these units outreaches to students to get them to apply for leadership roles
and indicate that the students must have completed LEAD to do so, you are getting widespread
marketing. The more partners you have, the more marketing you will get (you will need to be careful
not to have so many partners that you do not have enough space in LEAD to cater to them). In
addition, all marketing materials should explicitly appear to invite students of all backgrounds and
experiences to be involved and should be available in the LGBT office, Cultural Center, Interfaith
Center, Student Activities, Disability Resource Center, first-year seminars, and anywhere that serves
transfer students, commuter students, etc. Marketing that includes testimonials from students who
have participated in programs in which they mention a leadership role they have been in may help
show the diversity of involvement of participants.
Partnerships
CREATE A CAMPUS-WIDE LEADERSHIP COMMITTEE
One of the things I noticed about the University of Louisville that differed from other campuses I
have been to is the decentralization of campus services and programs. I was amazed that not only
are there very small departments that may specialize in one or two things, some departments seemed
to have overlapping program underpinnings (such as REACH and First Year Initiatives and CELS
and Office of Community Engagement.) Some departments that seemed related also didn’t
necessarily report through the same Vice President or Vice Provost either. This may make the work
that CELS does very difficult as leadership training is one of those things that many other
departments appear to do with their own students in a freestanding way. Because of this, I would
suggest creating a committee or board in which all those who do anything that helps develop or train
students as leaders come together monthly to discuss issues, collaborate on programs/events, and
create a centralized leadership calendar.
DEVELOP AND MAINTAIN PARTNERSHIPS
It appeared to me that the partnerships created with partners outside the university and partners
within the university have proven to be invaluable to both parties. Building and developing
partnerships is a great asset CELS has. It will be important during the strategic planning process to
identify more future partners. I would suggest having formalized campus-based partnerships with the
Interfaith Center, LGBTQ Center, Cultural Center, and others. A formalized partnership may mean
that a unit’s student leader positions are tied to the completion of LEAD, professionals from these
units serve on the campus-wide leadership committee, and/or that there is some joint programming
between the units. The Frazier Intern Program could be a nice model for outside partnerships either
as a program specific to LEAD or as a freestanding program.
Modifications to Existing Programs
CURRICULUM DEVELOPMENT WITH LEAD
What I noticed most about Freshman LEAD is that it relies heavily on outside speakers to come talk
to the students. Like I said, I would suggest creating a leadership development curriculum for LEAD
that is based on a framework, is transformative, and is cumulative. Only bring in speakers on
occasion and not in the context of leadership development. Developmental curriculum should be
facilitated by Gerome and perhaps a cadre of trained students who are with the students each
session. Leadership development topics may include values clarification, identity development,
ethical decision-making, strengths, and appreciation of differences. They should be in an order that
makes sense from a developmental perspective. I would suggest having topics related to leadership
training such as running meetings, delegating, and public speaking not in this curriculum but in
training they receive later regarding a position they enter or role they take on and/or in the training
modules developed by CELS. I would recommend having a much greater emphasis on teambuilding
throughout LEAD including having a ropes/challenge course. In addition, incorporating inclusivity
and SafeZone/Ally components into the curriculum is vital.
LEAD ACCOUNTABILITY
Although I believe the point structure for LEAD is moving in the right direction, students can still
not complete the required components of the program and “complete” LEAD. I would recommend
taking the concept behind this point structure one step further. I recommend having a makeup
assignment for each LEAD event, session, or requirement. These makeups should be a little more
rigorous than the requirement itself so as to urge students to participate in the original event. This
also creates accountability for students and displays to other students who do complete everything
that the program is holding students accountable and that everyone who “completes” LEAD truly
completes LEAD.
LEADERSHIP LIVING LEARNING COMMUNITY IN LEAD
You have the perfect venue to truly develop an intentional living learning community, and it appears
a calendar has been laid out with programs for next year. Instead of creating a freestanding
leadership program for people who live in the hall, you can be incredibly intentional about selecting
students to live in the hall and have them automatically be in LEAD. Make LEAD your signature
program that is the gateway to leadership positions on campus and has its own living learning
community. Have some LEAD events and socials in the residence hall. In addition, you could
cluster living learning community residents in cohorts together and assign them a resident who has
completed LEAD to serve as their cohort leader. This cohort model will be further explained under
Structural Options for LEAD.
CONFERENCE PLANNING AFTER LEAD
I would suggest opening up the opportunity to plan the leadership conference to those who have
completed LEAD instead of those in it. This will allow for a similar leadership base for all students
on the planning committee and an opportunity for them to attend the conference before they plan it.
You will also get wisdom from students who may want to be on the planning committee for more
than one year. These returners can provide great mentorship for the new planning committee of
students and challenge them to not recreate the wheel. In addition, some feedback was given to
move the conference to October so students have the year to implement what they learned.
INTEGRATE SERVICE INTO LEADERSHIP CONFERENCE
One way to tie your programs together is to blend service with leadership at the conference. You
may want to have some time slots during the conference with opportunities for participants to
engage in service learning. Perhaps this could begin with someone from a local agency talking to the
participants about the agency, the issue being addressed through service, and the underlying causes
of the issue before going out to do the service. This could include pre and post reflection.
MORE SECTIONS OF ECPY CLASS
I am recommending that this course be a requirement for LEAD. The curriculum is a model for the
type of curriculum that would make a good fit for LEAD as it is developmental and cumulative.
Instead of recreating the wheel, this would be great to incorporate into LEAD. In addition,
millennial students like structure (this would be meeting weekly and having the same instructor) and
reward (which is receiving academic credit for participating), both which are inherent in offering
leadership as an academic course. Student survey results also pointed to taking a leadership class as
one of the leadership development programs most attractive to students. In addition, having students
take a course allows you to have a structure which supports the students being accountable and
coming as well as completing their work in a timely manner. Therefore to accommodate 100-120
students in LEAD, there would need to be 5-6 sections; more if you also want this class to be open to
non-LEAD participants. These classes should be taught by each professional staff in the CELS (Pam,
Gerome, and Kim) and each graduate assistant if the institution allows this. If more sections are
needed beyond the CELS staffing, campus partners should be outreached to. These classes could
have undergraduate teaching assistants (who have completed LEAD) who would be able to do a
great deal of the grading, record keeping, and some teaching.
MONTHLY SOUL
It was mentioned that SOUL may begin to be a monthly program. I would highly recommend
moving in this direction. This program seems to be excellent and using it as a model is in my mind a
very smart thing to do. You may want to partner with various fraternities, sororities, clubs,
departments, etc. so that their students come in droves to different weekends. Also, make sure that
the marketing is widespread (first year seminars, perhaps) so that it is open to all students. For those
who complete a certain number of SOULs during the year, they may be awarded a “dedication to
service” certificate. In addition, you may want to have a LEAD SOUL day. This is a great way to tie
the programs together. Have a student or two serve as coordinators setting up all the logistics. In
addition, Family Scholar House was interested in having their residents do service with the other
students during one or more SOULs. While the residents are doing service (they have to do 4 hours
a month), have one of the sites for that SOUL be the Family Scholar House and some students can
go there to provide childcare while their parents are at another service site.
ASB WEEKENDS AND CLEARINGHOUSE
The ASB program seems solid, although we did not discuss pre and post reflection at any great
length. If extensive pre and post reflection is not already being done, I would suggest that this is
incorporated into ASB. In addition, offering local shorter versions of ASB (like a weekend) may be
doable in order to have more and serve more students. I am aware that it may not be as deep as the
entire week experience, but students could return from a weekend ASB-like trip and want to set up a
week-long one with friends or members of another organization they are in. This would create a
great opportunity for CELS to serve as the ASB consultants for groups that want to do an ASB. You
could meet with them and go through a standard ASB planning checklist. Then, CELS could serve
as the ASB clearinghouse.
New Programs
SPEAKER SERIES
I did hear mention of setting up a speaker series. I would recommend developing a bi-weekly
leadership speaker series. This is a great venue to bring in outside speakers to talk about a variety of
topics. This is not meant to be developmental or cumulative but more an opportunity for inspiration,
networking, and to learn a few lessons in leadership. Outreach to upper class students capitalizing on
the diverse array of speakers from various fields that may be good for them to interact with as they
think about transitioning out of UofL. In addition, this could be a good requirement for LEAD
students so they have that outside speaker interaction and again could be a way to tie CELS
programs together.
STUDENT “FOCUS LOUISVILLE”
One way to connect with upper division students would be to create a student version of Leadership
Louisville (Focus Louisville). This could help connect them to Louisville and perhaps interest them
in staying in the city after graduation.
MOVE ODK
I would recommend moving ODK from Student Activities to CELS. It is a leadership honorary and
very specific to the leadership work CELS does. On other campuses, ODK is often in the leadership
office. This group could be very involved in helping set up some leadership programs/events. They
may be a great group to task with getting a Focus Louisville program off the ground and running it
with Leadership Louisville.
Logistics
RECONFIGURE SPACE
Lacking a “brand,” being in what I think is a nice, yet very hidden space in the Dean’s Office with
no area for students to hang out, plan programs, etc., and having a long name, creates a real lack of
exposure for students, faculty, and staff. It may be easier to get your name out and network across
campus so people know who you are than it will be to create a student-centered space in the office
you are in. What do you do when you are the place to be and there is nowhere to gather? There does
seem to be a staff room in the back with a table, fridge, etc. Although I know that it may disrupt staff
to not have this area, this could be a perfect place for student work stations for their leadership roles
and a meeting/gathering space for CELS students.
LIMIT WEB-BASED PROGRAMS
There was a very cold response with every person I interacted with as well as on the student survey
when I brought up the idea of doing online leadership development or training. It would be good to
update the website (some links take you to a blank page and the site is not catchy). However, you
may want to steer away right now from ideas that involve podcasting, youtubing, twittering, and
anything that is similar to a STOMP module. In addition, the use of Blackboard for LEAD could be
much more interactive with chats and discussions instead of just posting reflections. On the other
hand, facebook is always a good way to connect to students. It will be important to keep the pulse on
the student body to see if there is an interest develops in online leadership development or training in
the future.
DEVELOP A COMPREHENSIVE BUDGET
Most of my recommendations do not have monetary needs associated with them, but those that do
would be quite modest (especially since I am not recommending more staffing). I would recommend
putting together a master budget of all proposed programs with real costs associated and use this to
develop your strategic plan. In addition, if LEAD becomes the precursor program for many student
positions across campus, you may be able to work with these partners to put forth some money from
their budgets to help LEAD that they would have otherwise spent on extensive selection and
training processes.
STRUCTURAL OPTIONS FOR LEAD
In addition to my above comments about LEAD (open it to all students, change name, take 100-120
students, have those who have completed LEAD come back and run the program, have more
partnerships like the one with REACH, require ECPY class, and have the curriculum be
developmental), there are 3 different structural options that I recommend. Included are pros and
cons of each.
Option 1:
Cohort-Based Co-Curricular LEAD Program
DESCRIPTION OF PROGRAM
The basic structure of this program involves having a cohort-based student-led program in the Fall
and have a curricular component in the Spring (ECPY class). To do this, students who have
completed LEAD or are about to complete LEAD could apply for and fill LEAD staff
positions/leadership roles for the next year. These may include ECPY TAs, coordinators,
recruitment team, social planning committee, etc. You will need to create the roles necessary for the
program. Students would need to be trained before the program started in the Fall. It is important to
identify some committees students could be on while in LEAD. Perhaps the social planning
committee is run by someone who completed LEAD and he/she recruits committee members from
current LEAD students.
Outreach for students to be in LEAD would need to begin in the Spring for any current students who
want to participate come Fall semester. Orientation would need to be a great mechanism for
outreach to any incoming students. Selection for the students would remain similar to what it
currently is (structure and timeline). Because of more students applying to the program and getting
interviews, a new more manageable way to interview or select may need to be considered. The
developmental portion of the program would be 1 year long. Students wanting more leadership
experience could come back for a second, third, and fourth year running the program. During the
year, students would complete the following requirements:
Fall semester
1. Students would attend a retreat nearly entirely comprised of teambuilding in large groups and by
15-person cohorts. Have cohort leaders lead many activities for their cohorts.
2. Students would participate in weekly meetings led by a cohort leader. Each cohort selects its day
and time to meet weekly. Each meeting has a laid out developmental curriculum that the cohort
leaders are trained in facilitating. They facilitate the sessions. Jerome meets with cohort leaders
weekly as a group.
3. Students would attend 3 speakers in the existing Speaker Series.
4. Students would participate in one (pre-arranged or one of their choice) SOUL.
5. Students would participate in a service project as a cohort with a community partner (one they
select or a pre-selected one). This project would include researching the issue, engaging in the
service, and pre and post reflection of the experience.
6. Students would attend 2 socials put on by the social planning committee to enhance their
connection to others in the program as well as have fun which was the most frequently cited idea
when students were asked what they wanted out of a leadership program in the student survey.
Spring semester
1. Students would take the ECPY class. This curriculum would need to be honed based on the
curriculum being used for the Fall semester cohort meetings. This way, it is not duplicative and
can serve as a continuation to the Fall semester meetings.
2. Students would attend an etiquette dinner put on by Career Services (may have to set up one or
two specifically for LEAD students).
3. Students would engage in 10 hours of community service with an agency of their choice.
4. Students would work in teams of 3 to tackle a campus issue and present ideas to stakeholders
(this could be tied in as an assignment in the ECPY class or a freestanding event).
PROS
1. Easy transition from existing structure since timelines are similar and structure is in place.
2. Focuses on teambuilding and getting to know other participants through socials. Students may
feel more connected.
3. Empowers students who have completed LEAD to return for a second year.
4. Gives cohort leads ownership and autonomy in a real-life leadership situation.
5. Has required events/activities that complement the weekly meetings and class in the spring.
6. Students can enter the program after the Fall semester has started.
7. Students facilitating curriculum creates mentoring opportunities and students may learn better
from other students.
8. Current LEAD students can serve on committees while in LEAD and can be mentored from a
committee chair that finished LEAD previously.
9. This also ties in various current and future CELS programs-ECPY class, Speaker Series, and
SOUL.
CONS
1. Having students facilitate weekly meetings is a big shift in philosophy.
2. Having students facilitate curriculum may lead to a disparity in the effectiveness of the
curriculum. Some cohorts may end up with a great facilitator and get the material whereas others
may not.
Option 2:
Curricular and Co-Curricular LEAD Program
DESCRIPTION OF PROGRAM
The basic structure of this program involves having a curricular program in both Fall and Spring
with co-curricular components both semester to supplement the coursework. To do this, students
who have completed LEAD or are about to complete LEAD could apply for and fill LEAD staff
positions/leadership roles for the next year. These may include ECPY TAs, coordinators,
recruitment team, social planning committee, etc. You will need to create the roles necessary for the
program. Students would need to be trained before the program started in the Fall. It is important to
identify some committees students could be on while in LEAD. Perhaps the social planning
committee is run by someone who completed LEAD and he/she recruits committee members from
current LEAD students.
Since the students would begin the program in the ECPY class in the Fall semester, outreach and
selection would need to take place before the Fall semester. Outreach and selection for returning
University of Louisville students can happen during the prior Spring semester and Orientation is a
great recruiting grounds for incoming students. Because the selection would need to happen earlier
and there are more students to consider, I would recommend doing an application only screening
instead of interviews. Select students for LEAD before school starts and enroll them in a section of
the ECPY course for Fall semester. Students would complete the following requirements:
Fall semester
1. Students would attend a retreat nearly entirely comprised of teambuilding in large groups and by
ECPY class cohorts. Have TAs lead many activities for their class cohorts.
2. Students would attend 3 speakers in Speaker Series.
3. Students would participate in one (pre-arranged or one of their choice) SOUL.
4. Students would participate in a service project with a cohort from within their ECPY class and
with a community partner (one they select or a pre-selected one). This project would include
researching the issue, engaging in the service, and pre and post reflection of the experience.
5. Students would attend 2 socials put on by the social planning committee to enhance their
connection to others in the program as well as have fun which was the most frequently cited idea
when students were asked what they wanted out of a leadership program in the student survey.
Spring semester
1. Students would take an advanced leadership class (deeper and more transformative experiences
than the Fall class). I noticed that Pam is developing a layout for this already. 5-6 sections would
need to be offered and could be taught by the CELS staff and campus partners.
2. Students would attend an etiquette dinner put on by Career Services (may have to set up one or
two specifically for LEAD students).
3. Students would engage in 10 hours of community service with agency of student’s choice.
4. Students would work in teams of 3 to tackle a campus issue and present ideas to stakeholders
(this could be tied in as an assignment in the advanced leadership class or a freestanding event).
PROS
1. Having to take a class both semesters could create more accountability for students.
2. Having classes both semesters would ensure that students are reading, reflecting, and writing
about leadership. This helps in their understanding of leadership and their own development but
also helps with their critical thinking and writing skills.
3. Having an advanced class may allow LEAD students to go deeper into their development (social
justice and other highly transformative topics).
4. Leadership development curriculum would be facilitated by staff who have an expertise in the
curriculum and facilitation skills to do it.
5. Students may feel more connection with CELS staff by having a class with them twice a year.
6. Focuses on teambuilding and getting to know other participants through socials. Students may
feel more connected.
7. Has required events/activities outside of class so students still have that co-curricular experience.
8. This also ties in various current and future CELS programs-ECPY class, Speaker Series, and
SOUL.
CONS
1. Would need to recruit in spring and summer. If a student “missed” their chance, they couldn’t
join a class late. They would need to wait until the next year.
2. No opportunity for cohort leaders which could be a great role to empower students to return after
they finish LEAD.
3. Requires staff to teach a class each semester.
Option 3:
Curricular Multi-Year LEAD Program
DESCRIPTION OF PROGRAM
The basic structure of this program involves having a curricular program that requires coursework
over several semesters with no outside co-curricular requirements. Students completing the
coursework could earn a leadership minor. To do this, students who have completed LEAD or are
about to complete LEAD could apply for and fill the positions of course TAs. Students would need
to be trained before the program started in the Fall. NOTE: This model would not be used if partnerships
were developed that required a student to complete LEAD before applying for or being accepted for a leadership
role on campus as this model requires several semesters to complete and may be limited more so in numbers than
the first two options.
Since the students would begin the program in ECPY in the Fall semester, outreach and selection
would need to take place before the Fall semester. Outreach and selection for returning University of
Louisville students can happen during the prior Spring semester and Orientation is a great recruiting
ground for incoming students. Because the selection needs to happen earlier and there are more
students to consider, I would recommend doing an application only screening instead of interviews.
Select students for LEAD before school starts and enroll them in a section of the ECPY course for
Fall semester. Students would complete the following requirements in this order:
1. Students would take the ECPY class.
2. Students would then take a leadership strategies course (need to be developed but would consist
of same information from leadership training modules and taught by campus partners who may
want their students to take the class for training purposes).
3. Students would then take an advanced leadership class (deeper and more transformative
experiences than the current ECPY class). Pam is working on this. 5-6 sections would need to be
offered as well and could be taught by the CELS staff and campus partners.
4. Students would take 2 leadership electives from among existing leadership courses on campus
(communication, business, etc.). These classes would need to be identified, faculty would need to
be partnered with, and the classes would need to be put on a list for students to choose from.
5. Students would participate in a 3-credit leadership internship in the community.
6. Students would take a capstone course.
PROS
1. Could lead to a leadership minor that would appear on their transcript.
2. Actively involves faculty from across campus-collaborative and gets the CELS name out.
3. Much deeper and more cumulative learning for students.
4. Able to do an internship and capstone course to apply and reflect on experiences.
5. May attract students who do not have time to be involved in a leadership program unless they
work it into their academics.
CONS
1. Would need to recruit in spring and summer. If a student “missed” their chance, they couldn’t
join a class late. They would need to wait until the next year.
2. No solid opportunity for student involvement in coordinating program.
3. No additional activities that are not curricular. Misses out on teambuilding.
4. Need to find an academic department this could be housed in (the core courses), instructors, and
faculty willing to put their departmental leadership courses into the mix as electives.
5. Heavy workload for CELS staff to teach courses.
IDEAS FOR LEADERSHIP CURRICULUM
After asking those I spoke with about knowledge and skills they thought University of Louisville
students should have upon graduation, using the data from the student survey, and researching job
listings from local employers, there were definitely themes that fall into both leadership development
topics and leadership training topics. These may help you in integrating leadership development into
LEAD and creating grab and go modules for leadership training. The topics are listed below.
Leadership Development
Understanding Self
 Learning about self-Myers Briggs, StrengthsQuest
 Values exploration
 Identity development
 Creating a mission and vision
 Ethical decision-making and personal responsibility
 Developing autonomy
 Finding passion
 Developing balance
 Developing and cultivating passion
 Critical thinking and problem solving
 Managing change
 Risk taking
Understanding the Group
 Understanding the group process
 Developing a vision for a shared purpose
 Understanding organizational culture
 Understand different perspectives
 Effective communication
 Creating and maintaining healthy relationships
 Developing an inclusive environment
 Talking across differences
 Understanding privilege
 Navigating power structures
 Coalition building
 Empowering others
 Negotiating conflict
Understanding Community
 Being part of a community
 Developing a sense of social responsibility
 Understanding global and local issues
 Understanding causes of global and local issues
 Serving the community
 Advocating for a cause



Applying theory to real world issues
Creating social change
Reflecting on change
Ideas for Leadership Training Modules

















Stress management
Time management
Networking
Public speaking
Effective writing
Effective listening skills
Succession planning
Running meetings
Delegating
Supervising others
Planning an event
Multi-tasking
Setting goals
Customer service-FISH
Recruiting members
Retaining members
Evaluating programs and events