1. Social Change Leaders at PSU: The Multi-Institutional Study of Leadership 5 th Annual Student Leadership Conference January 26, 2007 Wendy Endress & Shela Perrin Sponsored by the University of Maryland, National Clearinghouse for Leadership Programs, ACPA Educational Leadership Foundation, & NASPA Foundation  MSL/ NCLP, 2006

2. P resentation O utline Background & Purpose Frameworks for the Study Methodology –Instrument –Participating Institutions Our Institution’s Findings: –Random v. Comparative Samples –Demographic Results –Environmental Results Q&A/Discussion

3. B ackground of the MSL Rationale #1: “Leadership is one of the most observed and least understood phenomena on earth.” - James MacGregor Burns Leadership (1978), p. 2

4. B ackground of the MSL Rationale #2: “In every dimension of contemporary society – church, government, business, and education – we face a crisis of leadership.” - Jeffrey G. Reed & Mary C. Klein, 2005 Concepts & Connections, 13(2), p. 4

5. B ackground of the MSL Rationale #3: “Higher education plays a major part in shaping the quality of leadership in modern American society.” - Alexander W. Astin & Helen S. Astin Leadership Reconsidered (2000), p. 2

6. P urpose of the MSL To examine student leadership values at both the institutional and national levels with specific attention to the environmental factors that influence leadership development in college students.

7. F ramework of the MSL Theoretical Framework: Social Change Model of Leadership Development (HERI, 1996) Conceptual Framework: I-E-O College Impact Model (Inputs-Environment-Outcomes) (Astin, 1993, 2001)

8. T he S ocial C hange M odel Change

9. S ocial C hange M odel: 8 C ’s Individual Values: –Consciousness of Self –Commitment –Congruence Community Value: –Citizenship Group Values: –Collaboration –Common Purpose –Controversy with Civility Central Value: –Change

10. I-E-O M odel Inputs: students' pre-college characteristics –e.g., demographics, high school achievement Environment: programs, experiences, relationships, and other factors in the collegiate environment –e.g., co-curricular involvement, mentoring Outcomes: students' characteristics after exposure to the college environment –e.g., the eight C’s of the Social Change Model

11. K ey R esearch Q uestions How do college students score on the eight leadership values associated with the Social Change Model? How do scores compare across particular demographic factors, such as gender, race/ethnicity, and class-standing? What environmental factors (e.g., co-curricular involvement, study abroad) contribute to higher scores on the leadership outcomes?

12. M ethodology The Survey Instrument: –Web-based (link sent via e-mail) –Average completion time of about 20 minutes –Schools could also ask up to 10 institution- specific custom questions –Pilot tested at the University of Maryland, College Park

13. M ethodology 54 Participating Institutions: –Geographically diverse –Variety of institutional types and classifications e.g.: community colleges, women’s colleges, research universities, liberal arts schools, HBCU’s and HSI’s –Differing levels of leadership programming (extensive at some, nascent at others)

14. Methodology Random Samples: –A random selection of undergraduate students from each institution (3,000 for most) was invited to participate Comparative Sample: –Each institution was allowed to identify a second population (up to 500) to serve as a comparison e.g., Resident Assistants, Leadership Majors & Minors

15. Methodology Data Collection & Results –Standard data cleaning techniques were employed –Findings were generated using descriptive and inferential statistical methods and summarized in final report for each institution –Raw data was provided to schools for additional analyses

16. F indings

17. R esponse R ates Portland State Univ.Random Sample: Responses / Invited: 839 / 6000 Response rate: 14% Portland State Univ. Comparative Sample: Responses / Invited: 122 / 358 Response rate: 34% Overall National Sample: Responses / Invited: 63,085 / 165,701 Response rate: 38 %

18. D emographics Portland State Univ. Gender: Male: 42.2% Female: 57.7% Transgender: n/a Class Standing: Freshman: 13.3 % Sophomore: 16.7 % Junior: 29.7 % Senior: 40.3 % NATIONAL Gender: Male: 38.3 % Female: 61.5 % Transgender: 0.1 % Class Standing: Freshman: 23.3 % Sophomore: 21.7 % Junior: 26.3 % Senior: 28.8 %

19. D emographics Portland State Univ. Race/Ethnicity: White: 68.5 % Black / African American: 2.3 % Asian / Asian American: 11 % Latino/a: 3.2 % Amer. Indian:. 6 % Multiracial: 10.5 % Not Included: 4.0 % NATIONAL Race/Ethnicity: White: 71.8 % Black / African American: 5.2 % Asian / Asian American: 7.9 % Latino/a: 4.4 % Amer. Indian: 0.3 % Multiracial: 8.2 % Not Included: 2.3 %

20. SCM Scores & Statistical Significance Data highlighted reflects average mean scores of respondents’ responses to statements scored on a 5-point likert scale in Section 18 of the survey While average scores can be higher or lower they may not infer anything unless there is a “significant” difference in the score “Significance” means that there is a relationship between two or more variables that statistical analysis indicates is not likely a chance occurrence

21. O verall R esults Portland State Institution Type Above 10,000 National Sample Self 3.943.95 Congru 4.164.17 Commit 4.214.23 Collab 3.953.973.98 Common 4.014.034.04 Civility 3.893.83 Citizen 3.853.833.84 Change 3.803.763.75

22. R andom v. C omparative RandomComparative Self 3.94 4.13 Congru 4.16 4.31 Commit 4.21 4.36 Collab 3.95 4.24 Common 4.01 4.23 Civility 3.89 4.12 Citizen 3.85 4.12 Change 3.80 3.99 Our comparative sample included: Ambassadors, ASPSU Elected and Appointed Leaders, Orientation Leaders, Resident Assistants, SALP Peer Advisors, Student Leaders for Service, Student Organization Leaders, UNST Mentors.

23. R esults by C lass S tanding First Yr.Soph.JuniorSenior Self 3.843.923.943.99 Congru 4.054.114.184.20 Commit 4.134.144.204.28 Collab 3.853.933.944.00 Common 3.933.994.014.04 Civility 3.803.853.903.91 Citizen 3.743.823.853.90 Change 3.733.803.813.83

24. R esults by G ender MaleFemale Self 3.953.94 Congru 4.154.17 Commit 4.184.24 Collab 3.933.97 Common 3.994.02 Civility 3.863.91 Citizen 3.853.86 Change 3.833.79

25. R esults by S exual i dentity Hetero- sexual Gay or Bisexual “Rather Not Say” Self 3.953.943.92 Congru 4.174.144.08 Commit 4.224.214.13 Collab 3.963.923.84 Common 4.023.983.92 Civility 3.883.973.89 Citizen 3.863.903.77 Change 3.803.823.83

26. R esults by R ace /E thnicity WhiteBlackAsianLatinoNativeMultiOther Self 3.964.163.73*3.904.03 Congru 4.194.233.99*4.104.20 Commit 4.234.264.144.214.23 Collab 3.944.134.024.063.94 Common 4.014.113.984.014.04 Civility 3.903.833.77*3.814.02 Citizen 3.853.953.813.893.93 Change 3.803.853.773.733.91

27. S tudy A broad E xperience Studied Abroad Did Not Study Abroad Self 3.94 Congru 4.134.16 Commit 4.304.21 Collab 4.053.94 Common 4.034.01 Civility 3.953.88 Citizen 3.923.84 Change 3.813.80

28. I nternship E xperience Did Have Internship Did Not Have Internship Self 3.993.92 Congru 4.184.15 Commit 4.284.18 Collab 4.033.92 Common 4.063.97 Civility 3.943.86 Citizen 3.933.82 Change 3.843.79

29. S enior C apstone No Senior Capstone Self 4.003.92 Congru 4.204.14 Commit 4.294.18 Collab 3.993.94 Common 4.044.00 Civility 3.913.87 Citizen 3.913.83 Change 3.813.80

30. R esults by R esidence Parent/ Family Resid. Other Private Resid. Resid. Hall Other Campus Resid. Frat./ Sorority House Other Self 3.83*4.023.82*3.913.96 Congru 4.08*4.224.07*4.124.10 Commit 4.15*4.274.11*4.214.15 Collab 3.944.003.903.78*3.84 Common 3.97*4.053.943.96 Civility 3.78*3.953.883.813.85 Citizen 3.77*3.923.813.763.83 Change 3.71*3.873.743.713.89

31. O rganizational I nvolvement Much of the Time Many Times Some- times One TimeNever Self 4.133.993.963.86*3.92* Congru 4.364.194.16*4.05*4.16* Commit 4.414.23 4.16*4.19* Collab 4.224.11#4.01@*3.39*#3.85*#@ Common 4.224.074.04*3.39*3.97* Civility 4.064.02#3.893.84*# Citizen 4.114.02#3.92*@3.79*#3.76*#@ Change 4.013.913.81*3.75*3.76*

32. H olding a L eadership P osition Much of the Time Many Times Some- times One TimeNever Self 4.193.944.033.943.92* Congru 4.364.144.224.124.15* Commit 4.404.254.294.284.19 Collab 4.214.094.134.053.90* Common 4.234.084.154.033.97* Civility 3.973.994.003.903.86* Citizen 4.09 4.043.933.79* Change 3.973.903.883.823.78

33. Short-Term Leadership Development Experience Many Times Several Times One Time Never Self 4.183.993.91* Congru 4.414.16*4.15*4.14* Commit 4.414.22 4.18* Collab 4.274.03*4.00*3.86* Common 4.274.084.003.95* Civility 4.123.94*3.91*3.83* Citizen 4.203.98*3.85*3.75* Change 4.203.85*3.81*3.74*

34. Moderate-Term Leadership Development Experience Many Times Several Times One Time Never Self 4.113.983.993.91 Congru 4.364.144.214.14 Commit 4.374.184.254.20 Collab 4.224.054.023.89* Common 4.254.064.093.95* Civility 4.083.953.903.85 Citizen 4.183.963.953.77* Change 4.063.883.823.76*

35. Long-Term Leadership Development Experience Many Times Several Times One Time Never Self 4.163.964.013.93 Congru 4.364.184.174.15 Commit 4.384.214.204.21 Collab 4.224.044.033.93 Common 4.254.004.113.99 Civility 4.043.803.903.88 Citizen 4.163.954.003.82* Change 4.023.833.863.79

36. Q&A/Discussion What does this data tell us about... –Our school’s students? –Our school’s leadership programs? –Our school’s culture? –Our school’s values and mission? –Our schools’ strengths and weaknesses? –Our school’s future strategies?

37. For more information Wendy Endress Dean of Students Office of Student Affairs endress@pdx.edu 503.725.4422