Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Measuring Leadership
in Children
and Youth
by Elizabeth Shaunessy
and Frances A. Karnes
Table 1
Teacher-Scored Leadership Measures
Instrument Author/Year Ages Grade Leadership Admin. Response Who may Publisher
Measured Levels Items Time mode complete
The Scales for Renzulli, Children K12 7 N/A 95 items; Teachers Creative
Rating Behavioral Smith, and 10 sub- and other Learning
Characteristics White, adolescents scales school Press
of Superior Callahan, personnel
Students Hartman, &
Revised Westburg,
(SRBCSS-R) 2002
The Gifted McCarney K12 K12 10-Item 20 min. 5-point Teacher, Hawthorne
Evaluation Scale & Anderson, Leadership Likert- school Educational
(GES-2) 1998 Subscale type scale; personnel, Services, Inc.
48 items clinical
personnel
The Eby Gifted Eby, 1983 All Ages K12 20 items in the N/A Checklist Teacher D. O. K.
Behavior Index Social Leadership Publishers
Checklist
The Pfeiffer- Pfeiffer & 613.11 in press in press in press Checklist Teacher The
Jarosewich Gifted Jarosewich, (School of 5 Psychological
Rating Scale in press form) Likert- Corporation
(GRS) (School type sub-
form) scales
(MBTI; Myers & McCaulley, 1985) pro- self-rating measure for students in grades than for other characteristics on the
vides psychological type information to 512. Respondents rate themselves on a scale.
explain the nature of differences among five-point scale of the frequency of each Similar to the MBTI, the Murphy-
leaders (Karnes & Bean, 1996) based on of the leadership behaviors listed Meisgeier Type Indicator for Children
Ju n gs theory of observable differences in (always, almost always, sometimes, (Meisgeier & Murphy, 1987) also classi-
mental functioning. This self-assessment r a re l y, never). The instrument was fies personality types based on the same
i n s t rument for adolescents and adults administered to over 1,000 students in formula as the MBTI. This measure was
classifies personality types by combining public and private U.S. schools (Karnes developed to assess children in grades
attitude (including extrove rt / i n t rove rt & Bean, 1996). High correlations have 28, and it has been standardized using
and judging/perceiving) with function been established between this scale and over 4,000 students. Concurrent and
(including sensing/intuition and think- two other measures, and a moderate cor- content validity have been established, as
ing/feeling). A personality type is gener- relation with the SRBCSS has been has internal consistency reliability
ated based on the responses give n . reported (Karnes & Bean). Chan (2000) (Meisgeier & Murphy).
Internal consistency and reliability have used this scale with 163 gifted Chinese The Student Talent and Risk
been established over time. secondary students, and findings indi- (STAR) Profile (Institute for Behavioral
The Rating Scale for Leadership cated higher self-ratings relating to lead- Research in Creativity, 1990) measures
(Roets, 1986) is a 26-item Likert-type ership, achievement, and level of energy seven areas of performance, including
Myers-Briggs Myers & Adolescents 912 All 166 relate 4560 166 multiple-choice Consulting
Type Indicator McCaulley, to adults to ones lead- min. items measure how an Psychologists
(MBTI) 1985 ership style individual best perceives Press
and processes informa-
tion and how the individ-
ual interacts socially and
behaviorally with others.
The Rating Scale Roets, 1986 Ages 818 312 26 N/A 26 Likert-type questions Lois Roets
for Leadership on a five-point scale:
almost always, quite
often, sometimes, not
very often, and never.
Murphy- Meisgeier & Ages 712 28 All 70 relate 30 min. 70-item instrument simi- Consulting
Meisgeier Type Murphy, to ones lead- lar to the MBTI, but for Psychologists
Indicator for 1987 ership style children. Press
Children
Student Talent Institute for Ages 1018 512 25 1 class 150 multiple-choice Institute for
and Risk Profile Behavioral period items are answered based Behavior
Research in on the statements that Research in
Creativity, the student perceives are Creativity
1990 most representative of
him- or herself.
Computer-based.
Khatena-Morse Khatena & Elementary 412 Form A: 4 3045 Student identifies multi- Scholastic
Multitalent Morse, 1994 through items min. ple-choice items per- Testing
Perception adulthood Form B: 6 ceived to be most like Service, Inc.
Inventory items him- or herself.
academics, creativity, artistic potential, computer that provides information self-assessment for students in grades
leadership, emotional maturity, educa- about the student and group in each of 512 that measures artistry, musical
tional orientation, and at risk (Karnes & the seven performance areas by per- ability, creative imagination, initiative,
Bean, 1996). The student responds to centile scores (Karnes & Bean). Twenty- and leadership (Khatena & Mo r s e ,
the 150-item questionnaire by identify- five of the items pertain to leadership. 1994). Howe ve r, only four items in
ing the answer that he or she perceives is This instrument has been standardized Form A and six items in Form B pertain
most like him- or herself. Following the and studied for validity and reliability. to leadership. Individuals respond by
completion of the questionnaire, analy- The Khatena-Morse Multitalent marking items that best represent their
sis of the respondent is generated by Perception Inventory (KMMPT) is a i n t e rest and self-perceptions. Raw
scores, percentile ranks, standard scores, vantaged youth, Riley and Karnes found as the sole assessment specifically
and stanine forms are included in the that, for cluster score three (high-level designed to measure leadership in youth
technical manual for interpretation. The participator in group activities), the and children (Oakland, Falkenberg, &
instrument has been studied for stan- mean scores for each gender were signif- Oakland, 1996). Furthermore, content
d a rdization, va l i d i t y, and reliability icantly different, with boys having a validity (Karnes & Chauvin, 1985),
(Karnes & Bean, 1996). higher mean; no other significant mean concurrent validity (Edmunds &
Leadership: A Skill and Behavior differences between clusters or in the Yewchuk, 1996), and construct validity
Scale (Sisk & Roselli, 1987) is a 33-item total scores were found. The results are (Edmunds, 1998) have all been estab-
self-rating scale that measures positive intended to be the basis of discussion lished in the literature. Criterion and
self-concept, communication skills, during leadership training activities. content validity studies have been con-
decision-making skills, problem-solving Reliability and validity of the Leadership ducted (Karnes & Dllio, 1989).
skills, group dynamics, organizing, plan- Strengths Indicator is provided in the Analysis of several measures used to
ning, implementing skills, and discern- technical manual. identify leadership in both children and
ing opportunities. The students evaluate The Leadership Skills In ve n t o ry (LSI; adults has indicated more development
themselves based on the frequency of Karnes & Chauvin, 2000a) is a self-rating, is needed in the design of screening and
these skills, including neve r, seldom, self-scoring diagnostic/prescriptive instru- identification instruments for youth
sometimes, often, and always. No infor- ment across the nine areas necessary for (Oakland, Falkenberg, & Oakland,
mation about reliability and validity are leadership in the adult world. They 1996). Currently, no instruments mea-
provided in the technical manual include fundamentals of leadership, writ- sure leadership as power and influence
(Karnes & Bean, 1996). ten communication, speech communica- or as skillful management of behavior
tion, character building, decision making, (Oakland, Falkenberg, & Oakland, p.
Beyond Screening group dynamics, problem solving, per- 145). Current instruments rely mostly
sonal development, and planning. The on measuring leadership traits. On e
and Identification: rating is on four dimensions: almost instrument, the Campbell Leadership
Other Leadership always, on many occasions, once in a Index (Campbell & Kraut, 1991),
Assessment Practices while, and almost never. After the student designed for use with adults, is recog-
completes all items, he or she can then nized as unique in its design as a mea-
Alternate measures of leadership plot the scores on the Leadership Skills sure that enables one to conceptualize
have also been developed, but are Profile Sheet to determine areas of leader- leadership as an interaction between per-
intended for purposes other than screen- ship to be strengthened. The accompany- sonal and environmental qualities
ing and identification. The Leadership ing instructional manual contains one or (Oakland, Falkenberg, & Oakland, p.
Strengths Indicator (Ellis, 1990) is a self- more instructional strategies for eve ry 145); development of this instrument
assessment for adolescents ages 1118 item on the LSI (Karnes & Chauvin, into a measure for children and youth is
that is designed to serve as a discussion 2000b). After completion of the instru c- strongly encouraged by Oakland,
reference point for counselors and teach- tional program, each student develops a Falkenberg, and Oakland. Hence, the
ers in developing leadership in youth. plan for leadership based on something he evolution of instruments for screening
The instrument is a 40-item question- or she wants to initiate or change in his or and identifying gifted children is in a
naire designed to obtain students eval- her school, community, or religious affili- developmental stage, and more work on
uations of their leadership traits and ation (Karnes & Meriweather, 1989). creating and testing these instruments is
abilities through a total score that The LSI has been used extensively as still a priority in gifted education.
reflects the components of leadership a self-rating/self-scoring instrument for
(Riley & Karnes, 1994, p. 15). The eight students in programs affiliated with the References
cluster scales are representative of facets Leadership Studies Program offered dur-
of leadership: (1) enjoys group activities, ing the summer at The University of Addison, L. (1985). Leadership skills
(2) key individual in group activities, (3) Southern Mississippi, as well as in other among the gifted and talented. (ERIC
high-level participator in group activi- studies (Karnes & Meriweather, 1989; Document Re p roduction Service
ties, (4) journalistic, (5) sympathetic, (6) Karnes, Meriweather, & DLlio, 1987; No. 262511)
courageous, (7) conscientious, and (8) Schack, 1988). Of the few instruments Barth, J. L. (1984). Secondary social
self-confident. In a study of 89 disad- developed, the LSI has been recognized studies curriculum activities, and