Title: We’ve been here before: Engaging in Conversations on Belonging & Community During Our Current Political Climate & Beyond
Presenter(s):
Vernon Wall (he/him)
Room: Prince George’s 1211
Session Block(s): Session III and Session IV
Time: 1:45 p.m. to 2:45 p.m. AND 2:55 p.m. to 3:55 p.m.
Duration: 120 minutes
Program Abstract:
Legislation. Executive Orders. Dear Colleague Letters. Guidance for the Guidance. Oh my! It’s all coming so fast and furious. How do we continue to have conversations on inclusive communities in today's political context? How do we stay true to our commitment to supporting EVERYONE as we navigate this critical time in history? Together we will share learnings, concepts & strategies that can be helpful when engaging the very important work of making sure everyone in our communities feel valued and respected.
Program Description:
In the publication, Leadership Theory: Cultivating Critical Perspectives (2017), author John Dugan reminds readers that there is a difference between “leader” development and “leadership development” (p. 13). “Leader” development involves the “expansion of a person’s capacity to be effective in leadership roles and processes” (van Velsor & McCauley, 2004). “Leadership” development entails “enhancing the capacity of teams and organizations to engage successfully in leadership tasks” (Day, Harrison & Halpin, 2009). Leader development involves building human capital while leadership development cultivates both human and social capital (p. 13). Dugan continues by describing the four domains of leadership development as: leadership capacity, leadership enactment, leadership motivation and leadership efficacy (p. 13). Leadership Capacity reflects an individual or group’s overarching knowledge, skills, and abilities related to the leader role or the group’s leadership process (Day et al., 2009; Dugan, 2011). Leadership enactment is when “capacity is put to action, or the fundamental functional practice of leadership” (p. 14). Motivation to lead is “an individual differences construct that affects a leader or leader-to-be’s decisions to attend leadership training, roles, responsibilities and that affect their intensity of effort at leading and persistence as a leader” (Chan & Drasgow, 2001). Gaps between leadership capacity and leadership enactment can be at least partially explained by motivation to lead (Dugan, 2017). Bandura (1997) states that efficacy reflects “an individual or group’s internal beliefs regarding their likelihood of success with a particular task.” Efficacy serves as a critical determinant of whether or not individuals and groups actually enact behaviors (Dugan, 2017). What is important to note is that one’s identities are in play as students navigate their leadership journey.
Adams & Bell (2016) define social justice as both a process and a goal. “The goal of social justice education is full and equal participation of all groups in society that is mutually shaped to meet their needs. Social justice includes a vision of society that is equitable and all members are physically and psychologically safe and secure.” (p.3)
The focus of critical social theory is on placing “criticism at the center of its knowledge production . . . pushing ideas and frameworks to their limits” (Leonardo, 2004). Critical social theory functions to cultivate students’ ability to question, deconstruct, and then reconstruct knowledge (Leonardo, 2004). This is what having conversations on identity and privilege is all about. Also, these conversations, when framed effectively, can only enhance the college experience for students, faculty and staff.
On March 7, 2024, the United States House of Representatives Committee on Education and the Workforce hosted a hearing titled, “Divisive, Excessive, Ineffective: The Real Impact of DEI on College Campuses.” As faculty become more and more hesitant to talk about diversity, equity and inclusion in the classroom the programs that we as leadership educators can offer has become even more critical. The question then becomes: “How do we continue to provide opportunities for all students to engage in conversations that contribute to a healthy campus community in this current political environment?”