Our deepest calling is to grow into 

our own authentic self-hood, whether or 

not it conforms to some image of who we ought to be. As we do so, we will not only 

find the joy that every being seeks - we will also find our path of authentic 

service in the world. 

- Parker Palmer

Meet the students of the Experiential Leadership Institute (ELI) at Gonzaga. 

    They are each unique and passionate about learning and serving others. But, above all they too are searching for their way in the world, and this leadership journey we navigate together is the reason I look forward to coming into work every day. A unique challenge in the program is the project proposal process, so I chose this component of ELI as my culminating leadership project.

Background and intent:

    The Experiential Leadership Institute (ELI) is a yearlong leadership program that engages sophomores in experiences designed to further develop the leadership potential within each student.  This program centers itself on three primary pillars: knowing self, building community, and impacting the world.  This program was founded in fall 2012 and has expanded from 16 students the first year to 70 this year with participation peaking at just over 100 students last year. Founded on the values of inclusion in response to a need for leadership engagement opportunities for sophomore students, the ELI program has a policy of accepting all students, unless they are already overinvolved.

    Students of the ELI program meet once a week as an entire group or in smaller groups led by mentors to learn various leadership topics. As part of the practical application of the program sophomores work on proposing projects for changes on campus and in the Spokane community. With program growth and expansion over the past year, the past year’s project proposals lacked organization, student engagement, and a strong connection to the community they intended to serve.

    Given last year’s challenges with the project proposal process and presentation, I am working with students and colleagues to re-design the project proposal element of the program. Sophomore students will work in in a group on one of 12 projects per year, with junior and senior students to help mentor them through the process. 

Connection to Leadership Theory:

This re-design is supported by rich leadership literature that I have learned over the past two and half years. Organizational structure, community development, and resiliency development have most informed and supported this project:

• Organizational Theory
• Bolman & Deal (2008)
• Helgesen (1995)
  
• Community and Servant Leadership
• Block (2008)
• Greenleaf (2002)
• Palmer (1983)
• Scharmer & Kaufer (2013)
  
• Leadership and Hardiness
• Maddi (2004)
  

Full description of theory connections: Leadership Project Competencies.docx

Desired project outcomes:

• Engagement of students and mentors throughout the process
• Informed, sustainable and creative projects
• Community stakeholders are well informed of the projects
•  Students are able to connect these projects with the content they are learning through the ELI program
• As a results of the projects, students feel a stronger sense of belonging and accountability in their community

Implementation of Project (timeline):

    This project started in March 2016 with a meeting to debrief the project proposal process and begin strategizing for the 2016-17 academic year. This meeting included then junior and senior students responsible for shaping the project proposal process, the Dean of student engagement, and myself. We drafted ideas and an outline based on the needs of students and student development stakeholders. Needs identified included:

• Need: Appropriate notification of university staff regarding the projects
• Solutions: Assigned contact from Dean of Student Engagemen
• Looping PCLD staff in correspondence to GU staff
• Need: Correct information regarding current Gonzaga resources
• Solutions: Required in-person meeting with assigned contact
• Reading of background information from PCLD staff coordinator and student peers to catch potential gaps in background research
• Need: Professionalism of projects in terms of presentation and language
• Solutions: Presentation practice in front of peers at each deadline
• Presentation of projects via power point in themed groups to a professional GU audience
•  Need: Accountability of working on projects throughout the year
• Solutions: Set dates and follow-up from staff and student coordinators
• Presentation to the group with opportunities for peer feedback during each phase deadline
• Need: Guidance and morale-boosting with project progression
• Solutions: Mentors assigned to each group
• Examples shown of past proposals
• Need: Sense of ownership and belonging
• Solutions: Continue having projects be presented to peers in the spring in a space where student traffic is high
• Allow for additional time for sophomores to fully present their ideas before groups are assigned to allow for more understand of what each group will be working on
• Need: Connection of projects to leadership lessons learned throughout the year
• Focus large-group programming on team dynamics and the social change model
• Bring in professional development topics such as public speaking skills and networking

    Given these needs and proposed solutions we drafted a document titled “Project Proposal Revised Plan” in the documents section below. After this meeting, the program spent the rest of the spring selecting the next groups of students for the ELI program.

    During this time, I worked with student coordinators to refine and discuss logistics for implementation during the academic year.

    This fall included the implementation of a number of components of the project. So far, students have outlined the structure, template and timeline of the proposals (see below under documents drafted). Additionally, students have proposed their own ideas, signed up for these ideas and been assigned staff contacts within the university (documents also below). At the end of this month will be the presentations of their initial research (feedback will be uploaded once it is obtained).

    During the months of September, October and November, at least one meeting per month has been designated to projects. Student coordinators continued to meet weekly to work on logistics, clear messaging to students, and brainstorming to the progress of next semester.

    Ending this semester, we are looking to providing feedback from phase 1 and offer options for phase 2. We are also planning out training topics for spring programming and the winter retreat in January.

    During the winter break, students will have the option of continuing to develop their first phase of the project as well as begin the second phase of the project.

    This semester will bring the majority of the work, shifting from planning to implementation. This will require hands-on assistance with projects; trouble-shooting, helping facilitate project meetings, allowing for work time during large group meetings, keeping morale high and providing helpful resources.

•        January - Strategize
•     Review progress from fall semester and create a plan for February and March
• February – Phase 2
• Present Phase 1-2
• Have had at least one meeting campus department
•  Bring in a communications speaker to talk about presentation skills and professionalism 
• Early March – Phase 3
• Present Phases 1-3 internally to prepare
• Mid- March – Department Presentations
• Proposal groups personally invite audience based on the theme of the night
• Tailor the audience to the topics!
• Late March – Project Proposal Night
• Tentatively present in the Hemmingson Rotunda, but have a more tech-friendly presentation or formal format so it can be more easily presented professionally to Directors, Deans and VP’s
• April – May - Reflection
• Follow through with projects, providing encouragement and support
•   Use these last months of ELI to focus on future programming (ie. What is next after ELI for the soon-to-be juniors?

• ELI Project Proposal 2016-17 Plan.docx
• Project Proposal Timeline.docx
• Project Proposals Template.docx
•  Project Proposal Group Breakdown.docx

• Observations of phase 1 presentations
• Phase 1 presentations, given on November 30th, were overall a good initial start. All presentations had a well-developed "why" statement and purpose to their projects. The majority of students identified departments that were tackling a similar issue and had plans to meet with that department. Given that this presentation was a week after Thanksgiving break and groups had just formed earlier in the month, the projects were well on their way. Feedback from mentors and staff will be shared with the groups in December to help them narrow their focus and connect with resources.
• Pre-program Sophomore survey
• Assessment - pre-test.docx
• Results from this survey show the majority of students understand their strengths, feel connected to the GU community, feel confident in their ability to communicate with others, feel confident in their ability to find resources on campus and feel as though they are in a position at GU in which they are able to have a positive impact on others.
• Fall Sophomore survey results
• 2016 Fall Semester Sophomore Feedback.docx
  
• These results in regards to project proposals indicate that sophomores would like more time to work on projects. They also percieve the projects as fun and challenging.
• Progress according to original timeline
• Looking at the progress anticipated verses actual progress, we were able to accomplish all tasks except the group expectations “worksheet”. We allowed students time for their first meeting, but didn’t provide much direction. Additionally, we provided a template e-mail to propose a meeting with a staff contact, but did not brainstorm questions to pose to the supporting departments in November. Those questions will be drafted in December.
• Regarding students studying abroad, they presented their project in October. Given the short timeline, their project was simply developed and we will see if it will be implemented while they are gone next semester.

Future Assessment Planned:

• Mentor focus group comments (December 2016)
• Observation of phase 2 and 3 presentation (January/February 2016)
• Observation of project presentations (March 2016)
• Written documentation of students’ project reports (March 2016)
• End of the year ELI survey (April 2016)
• Student Development staff survey (April 2016)

Discussion of Results and Observations:

    Observations and assessment data from the fall indicate that students are feeling confident in their ability to connect and create changes on campus. Progress according to the original timeline is slightly behind schedule, but may have created an opportunity for students to carefully choose which project they would like to work on. Logistically and regarding communication, there has not been as clear of communication in terms of what role each individual is playing in project proposals. Mentors have expressed some confusion as to their role, as well as sophomores regarding the project expectations. Given this confusion, work will need to be done to clarify communication and roles as well as boosting morale in anticipation of project barriers in the spring. Finally sophomores indicate they would like more time during scheduled ELI meeting times to work on their project.

Future Implications and considerations:

    Implications from the fall suggest that during the winter, we work on a communication strategy with the student coordinators. Having weekly updates about what should progress look like would be helpful. Since students seemed confident in their abilities to connect and make changes, future assessment questions could include open ended questions in which we ask what they are not confident about in their projects. The end of the semester survey will include this question so we can adequately plan for the spring semester. Additionally, after the initial contact with each department by the students, a PCLD staff member will contact the departments to ask how that went and if there needs to be anything that changes regarding future contact. Ideas are also circulating that projects from previous years also be presented in the spring to give the sophomores the idea that making change is a continual progress that does not stop presentation night. Regarding morale, we plan on using mentors to share their experiences with proposals and use constructive and positive feedback to help the sophomores stay engaged.