1. ePortfolios for Leadership Identity Development: Some Very Preliminary Findings George Mason University dcambrid@gmu.edu

2. Lives We Lead: Three-year project at George Mason University; Leadership development portfolio using the Open Source Portfolio model; Research as part of the third cohort of the Inter/National Coalition for Electronic Portfolio Research.

3. I/NCEPR: Institutional research teams examining the impact of electronic portfolio practice on learning; 46 institutions in four cohorts; Third cohort focuses on student affairs -academic affairs collaboration; US, Canada, England, Scotland, Netherlands; Book to be published by Stylus in 2008.

4. Methodology - Design research: –Intervention design informed by theory; –Evaluated for effectiveness & contributions to further development of theory. Grounded theory: –Collaborative coding of portfolio, video & interview data by inter-disciplinary team. –Theoretical sampling.

5. Leadership theory - Leadership Identity Development: –Based on research on undergraduate student leaders at the University of Maryland. –From positional leadership to multi-dimensional perspective: Identity; Relationships; Community. Evidence in leadership portfolios: –Products, reproductions, attestations.

6. Theories of Reflection - Kolb’s stages of reflection: –Description; –Analysis; –Judgment; –Planning. Yancey’s types of reflection: –constructive reflection; –reflection-in-presentation.

7. Program Design: Semester-long portfolio development experience; Three face-to-face, day-long meetings; Faculty, staff & mentors Students who self-identify as leaders & those who don’t. Sequenced use OSP tools with r-smart CLE: –Hierarchical wizards; –Matrixes; –Portfolios.

8. Beginning of the Semester: Expanding thinking about evidence; Reflective writing in response to selections from a large number of prompts; Organized around identity, relationships, community; Hierarchical matrix.

9. Mid-semester: Re-conceptualizing as leadership. Organizing evidence & reflections in relationship to shared conceptual framework: –Matrix thinking. Matrix.

10. End of the Semester: Presentation portfolio for an audience of peers; Identity, relationships, community, future directions; Portfolio using template.

11. Very Preliminary Findings: First iteration ended in May 2007. Analyzed so far: –Evaluation surveys; –Selected final portfolios. Coding of additional portfolios, video data & conducting interviews with students through December 2007. Key themes in leadership identity, rather than impact of portfolio process.

12. Evidence, Audience & Mentoring: Broader conception of & new value placed in evidence in relationship to leadership-related activities; Strong sense of pride in final product. Peer mentoring invaluable: –Mirrors research as LaGuardia and other I/NCEPR campuses.

13. Strong Perceived Impact Strengthened ability to connect learning experiences inside and outside of the classroom 73% Stronger sense of self as a leader87% Stronger awareness of my leadership potential88% Enhanced awareness of how to present ideas to different audiences 75% More confident in ability to use reflective practice for self-discovery and learning 82% More confident in my ability to use electronic environments for my learning 87% Greater awareness of how to select evidence that demonstrates my learning 100%

14. From Position to Integration - Students see their identities to be inseparable from multiple kinds of relationships & community memberships: –Family relationships, friendships, academic & professional community memberships; –Navigation between cultures & putting them into conversations; –Portfolios as a sight of integration. Shift from positional definition of leadership to grounding in this integrated network. Mirrors findings of research in eFolio Minnesota & LaGuardia CC; LI, NY.

15. Academics as Test of Self: We intended for curricular content to be an central source of evidence, ideas & strategies, but it didn’t show up this way. Class work functioned as: –A demonstration of character virtues; –An experience; –A goal putting aspiration towards those virtues in action.

16. Steadfastness - Consistency of commitment over time seen as a central leadership virtue: –Tenacity, perseverance, patience, follow through; –Standing up to opposition & peer pressure; –Essential to ability to create change! Much more prominent than persuasiveness. Spirituality & family are key arenas for demonstrating steadfastness.

17. Change: While steadfastness is central, so is change! Leadership requires growth. Students universally embraced change as both a personal & societal goal. Local & global, with very little in between.

18. Evidence: Primarily reproductions & attestations; Symbolic rather than persuasive; Heuristics for reflection.

19. Questions Moving Forward: How do students who self-identify as leaders & those who don’t differ? Why is course content not see as relevant; how might we change that? Do the ways students use evidence match the expectations of their intended audiences? In terms of developing leadership competence, how important is self-identification? Does it matter when we call it leadership? How well do the different OSP tools support the development process?