Energizer with Clay! (be sure you're doing the post-energizer reflections!)
Today's Goal: Challenge America's obsession with Leadership (because Ashley likes challenging assumptions and mainstream ideologies and seeing to what extent they make sense when critically examined)
Starter prompt-- choose one of the questions below to answer.
1. Do you think it is more important to be a good leader than a good follower when it comes to getting into college or getting a competitive job? Why?
2. Why is America so obsessed with "leadership"? What is it about our history, society, mainstream ideology, culture that praises good leaders so much?
Jigsaw reading activity! I'll assign you one of the three articles shown below. Read it and be ready to summarize the article and answer the corresponding questions with a group.
AFTER READING: I'll put you into mixed-groups.
As a group, elect a facilitator and then take turns share out your summaries and answers to your assigned questions,
Then discuss the essential question: Is our obsession with leadership harmful, helpful or necessary? How might our obsession with leadership be problematic especially in certain environments or for certain individuals? In other words, have you fully drunk the American leadership kool-aid or are you skeptical?
Another food for thought-- What matters more? The quality of mark you make on the world and on others' lives OR the quality of work you produce/create/do?
What does the Lan Liu mean when she says, “Leadership is culture-specific. Unfortunately, this theme has been unduly overshadowed by the bias, which is often an American one, toward the pursuit of a universal model of leadership.”? What is the "American bias" and how might other cultures view leadership differently or perhaps have different values around leadership vs. followership?
What does this quote mean: "The implicit message behind the rhetoric of leadership is that learning for learning's sake is not enough."? Why would the obsession with leadership suggest that learning for learning's sake isn't enough?
Within the broader context of this article, what does the following quote mean: "But it's worth investigating the assumption that to be a “good leader” and to be a “desirable student” are the same thing"?
What exactly does it mean for the Army to teach followership? What skills, behaviors, attitudes does this article suggest be taught?
How might the ideas in this article apply to non-military related professions?
"Chaleff ’s followership model emphasizes that selective rule breaking is a key attribute of a courageous follower: 'It is not ethical to break rules for simple convenience or personal gain, but neither is it ethical to comply with or enforce rules if they impede the accomplishment of the organization’s purpose, the organization’s values, or basic human decency.' Followers must have the courage to oppose the boss when events require dissent for the good of the organization. "