Learning Outcomes in Academic Disciplines: Identifying Common Ground

Sharp, Marybeth Drechsler; Komives, Susan R.; Fincher, Justin

doi:10.2202/1949-6605.6246

Cited by 19 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…, 2005; McAdams, 2001; Peterson and Stewart, 1990, 1993; Ryff and Heincke, 1983; Ryff and Migdal, 1984). Notably, generativity has been empirically identified as the strongest predictor of social responsibility (Rossi, 2001) and a significant predictor of socially responsible leadership among young adults (Hastings and Sunderman, 2019), a desired outcome of higher education (Association of American Colleges & Universities and National Leadership Council, 2007; Council for the Advancement of Standards in Higher Education [CAS], 2015; Dreschsler Sharp et al. , 2011; National Association of Colleges and Employers, 2016).…”

Section: Framework and Significancementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Stemming from generativity's origins as a midlife construct, young adults are not deemed highly generative (McAdams et al, 1993;McAdams and Logan, 2004), despite several studies documenting the presence of generativity in emerging adulthood (Espin et al, 1990;Keyes and Ryff, 1998;Lawford et al, 2005;McAdams, 2001;Stewart, 1990, 1993;Ryff and Heincke, 1983;Ryff and Migdal, 1984). Notably, generativity has been empirically identified as the strongest predictor of social responsibility (Rossi, 2001) and a significant predictor of socially responsible leadership among young adults (Hastings and Sunderman, 2019), a desired outcome of higher education (Association of American Colleges & Universities and National Leadership Council, 2007; Council for the Advancement of Standards in Higher Education [CAS], 2015; Dreschsler Sharp et al, 2011;National Association of Colleges and Employers, 2016).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Applying methodological innovation to explore generativity development among collegiate leadership mentors

Hastings,

Sunderman,

Sellon

2023

IJMCE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeBuilding upon a larger mixed-methods research agenda, the purpose of this research study was to explore the growth of generativity (i.e. care for the next generation) among college student leaders who mentor, answering the central question “What changes in generativity do college student leaders who mentor associate with their mentoring experience, and why?” and associated sub-question “How does generativity develop among college student leaders who mentor?”Design/methodology/approachApplying methodological innovation to a phenomenological design, semi-structured interviews were conducted and triangulated with pictorial degree-of-change graphs among 33 collegiate leadership mentors at a large Midwestern USA land-grant university.FindingsThe findings indicated that senior collegiate leadership mentors overwhelmingly acknowledged sustained generativity increases as a result of mentoring a younger student when given the tools, environment to process and time needed to develop trusting investment relationships. These increases in generativity were associated with changes in their understanding of generativity, the desire to pass on the knowledge given to them and growth in both mentor and mentee.Originality/valueFindings from the current study advance mentoring research and practice by providing a deeper understanding of mentoring as a developmental intervention, informing antecedents of generativity and utilizing innovative qualitative methodological techniques.

show abstract

Section: Framework and Significancementioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Applying methodological innovation to explore generativity development among collegiate leadership mentors

Hastings,

Sunderman,

Sellon

2023

IJMCE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Being a mentor to someone of a different cultural background has been correlated with enhanced cultural competence (Osula & Irvin, 2009), behavioral cultural intelligence, empathic concern (Young et al., 2018), and knowledge and skills related to interacting with diversity (Ragins, 1997). The development of these diversity skills is particularly salient for leadership educators and institutions of higher education given that diversity and inclusion are critical student learning outcomes (AAC&U & NLC, 2007; Dreschsler Sharp, Komives, & Fincher, 2011).…”

Section: Critical Perspectives On Mentorshipmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evidence‐Based Practices in Mentoring for Leadership Development

Hastings

Sunderman

2020

New Drctns Student Lead

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Mentoring is recognized as one of the most promising practices for both leader and leadership development because of its effectiveness at facilitating development (Day, 2001). Mentoring embeds leadership development within the ongoing experiences of a developing leader-an increasingly desired feature of leadership development interventions (Day & Liu, 2019). Each mentoring opportunity generates unique leadership development experiences and outcomes. An effective mentoring relationship satisfies the need to develop and sustain positive relationships; linking mentoring to positive affective, cognitive, and behavioral outcomes (Allen & Eby, 2010). Mentoring develops intrapersonal and interpersonal competence in the mentee, expanding their understanding of organizations and achieving greater social capital (Day, Fleenor, Atwater, Sturm, & McKee, 2014). Mentorship also positively influences outcomes like leadership self-efficacy, political skills, and socially responsible leadership (Chopin, Danish, Seers, & Hook, 2013; Dugan & Komives, 2010). Mentors themselves also benefit from increased pride and satisfaction, refined leadership competencies, stronger confidence, improved job performance, and higher levels of generativity (Hastings et al., 2015).

show abstract

“…Impact evidence of leadership education has not been prioritized (Rosch & Schwartz, 2009), despite higher education's recognition of leadership as a desired college outcome (Adelman et al., 2011; AAC&U & NLC, 2007; CAS, 2009; Dreschsler Sharp et al., 2011; Keeling, 2004; NACE, 2016). Demand for accountability and results in higher education continues to be high (Russon & Reinelt, 2004), yet the resources, tools, and approaches are perhaps still lagging (Piatt & Woodruff, 2016).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%