Taking the perspective that leadership education is similar to art education created a bridge connecting the leadership education literature with the large and rich body of literature on art education and art history. A survey of the more prominent Renaissance art academies was employed to illuminate the education practices of that extraordinary time, and then consider whether these practices had application to modern day leadership education. Results directly challenged the efficacy of the skills approach to leadership education, affirmed the importance of the mentoring method, supported the communities of practice method as a powerful tool for leadership education, argued for the idea of a talent for leadership, proposed designing leadership games and simulations that included positive and negative consequences, and stressed the importance of creating college and university based leadership academies.

The purpose of this study was to describe student learning in executive leadership core competencies after being engaged in a two-semester leadership education sequence. The researchers used evaluative research techniques to compare perceived and actual growth in learning of executive leadership competencies. Data collection consisted of a post-then (or Before-After) self-assessment instrument and an evaluation rubric that was designed to score the final exam. The results were reported as average learning scores based upon (Before-After) measures, narrative verifications, and comparisons of perceived versus actual growth. Students varied in their perception of their competencies using only the behavioral anchors. Based on the findings of this study, new competency-based behavioral benchmarks were developed, at the near novice, proficiency, and near expert levels of competence. Recommendations to insure the fidelity of students' self-assessment and appropriateness of the behavioral benchmarks were provided.

In a non-equivalent control group design 280 student volunteers participated in a an examination of the impact of a leadership training on the development of leadership self-efficacy perceptions among trainees. The training was designed to present multiple exposures to four kinds of efficacy information Bandura (1997) proposes influences the self-efficacy estimate. One-half of the group completed a 15-week undergraduate leadership class while the other half completed various undergraduate psychology classes. Pre- and post-training measures were collected. The results showed the training group perceived having experienced more leadership related efficacy information than the control group. A test for main effects of training indicated no significant change in LSE. Those participants’ low in initial LSE showed a significant increase in post-training LSE. The greater plasticity of individuals low in LSE suggests the practical utility of leadership training on trainees’ LSE is influenced by their pre-training LSE.

This study used qualitative research procedures to evaluate the learning impact of a long term (3 ½ years) leadership education program on participants’ cognitive models of leadership. Situated learning theory (Lave & Wenger, 1991) and communities of practice principles (Wenger, McDermott, & Snyder, 2002) were used to develop research questions, frame the analysis, and interpret the findings. Participants were drawn from a long established collegiate student organization that has as its objective the development of the leadership capabilities of its members. As members, these students have experienced a military academy type life style while also pursuing their undergraduate studies within a large university setting. Researchers content analyzed 200 to 300 word leadership essays written by 50 student-cadets to determine their cognitive models of leadership. Three models were identified. Leading through relationships was the most frequently discussed in participants’ essays (80%), followed by leading by example (70%), and finally leading by influence (5%). Implications for findings for both practice and research are discussed.

In this paper we propose a leadership model that combines Bandura's (1997) social cognitive theory with the causal reasoning perspective (Martinko, 2002). The model suggests that leader causal reasoning processes affect leader perceptions of goals, self-efficacy, and leadership task schema that, in turn, affect the leader's selection of strategies and enactment of behaviors. Each leader social cognition is conceptually defined and developed. Particular emphasis is given to describing how the understanding of attributional explanations, dimensions, and biases can aid in the description of the causal reasoning processes that precede self-and member-regulation.

In this study Bandura’s (1986) self-efficacy concept was extended to the leadership studies domain. The literature was reviewed to support the proposition that high leadership self-efficacy was a necessary, though not sufficient, factor contributing to leadership performance. Also, antecedents of leadership self-efficacy were identified based upon self-efficacy theory. Leadership self-efficacy was found to predict leadership behavior and distinguish leaders from non-leaders. Further, prior leadership experiences predicted leadership self-efficacy judgments. Finally, women reported significantly lower leadership self-efficacy than men. Implications for leadership education practices and future research are discussed.

Executive Summary One of the most frequently reported findings in the leadership literature is the relationship between a leader's self-confidence and successful leadership. Yet, absent from the literature is a theoretical explanation for this long recognized association. A new leadership approach is proposed based on Bandura's (1986) social cognitive theory that posits leadership self-efficacy as the key cognitive variable regulating leader functioning in a dynamic environment. The full model considers leader cognitions in addition to leader behaviors and the situation resulting in a broader view of the leadership process. Implications and propositions for leadership research are discussed.