As more institutions of higher education engage in the practice of leadership education, the effective assessment of these efforts lags behind due to a variety of factors. Without an intentional assessment plan, leadership educators are liable to make one or more of several common errors in assessing their programs and activities. This article reviews some of the most common errors in assessing leadership programs, including failing to consider what the authors describe as the Honeymoon, Horizon, Hollywood, Halo, and Hallmark effects (otherwise known as recency, response-shift, socially desirable, and respondent biases). Suggestions for minimizing these potential issues in assessment are also included along with suggestions for practitioners and areas for future related research.

The development of effective leadership capacity involves multiple factors including increasing students' leadership self-efficacy, motivation to lead, and leadership skills. This study of 165 undergraduate students enrolled in an introductory leadership theory course explores the degree to which students report changes in these three areas of leadership from the beginning to the end of the course. Our analysis showed two important findings. First, students report significant gains in leadership self-efficacy, transformational and transactional leadership skill, and each measured form of motivation to lead at the conclusion of the course. Second, a closer examination shows that student learning is not across-the-board but, rather, differentiated. Students experience significantly different outcomes depending on their levels of self-efficacy and motivation to lead when they enter the course. These findings not only have broad implications for the way colleges and universities structure curricula around leadership development, but they also inform theoretical model-building regarding the process of student leadership development.

This exploratory study examined the motivation to lead of a random sample of 1,338 undergraduate students to determine the degree to which motivation to lead can predict leadership behaviors. Results suggested that students’ internal self-identity as a leader positively predicted behavior, while their “social normative” motivation to lead (i.e stemming from the groups to which they belong) served as a negative predictor. These effects emerged even when controlling for self-identified leadership skill and confidence in leading. While no gender differences in motivation levels emerged, students identifying as Asian and Asian American reported lower degrees of motivation to lead compared to their peers, indicating a need to more deeply examine the unique pathways to leadership among students with regard to racial identity.

Research involving students (N=612) at a large, research-extensive university who participated in voluntary short-term leadership programs showed an increase in leadership capacity, even when measured three months later. A popular assessment tool, the Socially Responsible Leadership Scale (SRLS), was used. Not all leadership competency scores showed significant increase after training, which may indicate that some leadership capacities may be more amenable than others to development through short-term programs. However, most competency scores displayed stronger relationships with each other after training, suggesting that training fostered a more integrated understanding of leadership. In addition, the analysis suggested the need for further study of the SRLS.

In response to the growing field of Leadership Studies, the International Leadership Association appointed a task force to explore questions concerning formalized program review systems, such as a peer review process, accreditation, and/or certification. The inquiry involved questions regarding the value of a formalized program review process to advance the field of leadership studies and discover important patterns emerging in areas such as content, teaching, outcomes, and assessment. This article provides a summary of the work completed by the International Leadership Association's Formalized Program Review task force from 2011–2012 to explore and recommend options related to formalized program review for curricular based leadership studies programs.