ML792: Syllabus Mark W. Mccloskey, M.Div., Ph.D

ML792: Syllabus Mark W. McCloskey, M.Div., Ph.D. Spring, 2013 Bethel Seminary 3/25-5/31 Office: A206; 651-635-8592 e-mail: [email protected]

ML792 - Senior Integrative Seminar Course Description This final, integrative seminar offers the learner a summative and integrative experience of the formal curriculum, assessments and mentored leadership experience of the Master of Arts in Transformational Leadership program. As such, this course will provide learners the opportunity to review, integrate and reflect on the assessments, curriculum and experiences of the entire program, including each of the eleven previous courses focusing on leadership and personal formation, supplemented by the twelve courses focusing on biblical and theological foundations. This course is intended to not only draw from the full range of MATL course material and experiences. It is also designed to encourage each learner to draw from the collective knowledge and experience of other learners in the cohort. So, while each learner will turn in his or her own work for his or her own grade, learners are encouraged to consult one another in the process of completing each assignment. Preferred Communication Method: Please email me with questions. I will make every effort to respond within 24 hours. You may also call my cell-612-670-6944. The 4R Model of Transformational Leadership provides the framework for this course.

RELATIONSHIPS. In the last two decades the literature has proposed a number of models that identify and operationalize personality constructs germane to (1) growth and development as a healthy, functioning adult, and (2) sustained success in the work of leadership. Based on the assumption that the concrete behaviors of transforming, serving leadership are largely dependent on the expression of the attitudes and behaviors of a healthy, virtuous, Spirit-empowered adult, this dimension of the course will review, reflect, integrate and apply the material on the "Relationship" core of the 4R model to selected case studies.

ROLES. Transformational leadership is practiced in and for a particular community. As such, the community leadership Roles incumbent on serving leaders defines the context and boundaries of the leadership experience in a missional community. This dimension of the course will give the learner the opportunity to review and reflect on the leadership imperative of understanding and shaping the community culture and larger culture(s) in which they lead and serve, and apply this understanding to selected case studies.

RESPONSIBILITIES. Successful and sustained transformational leadership presupposes an action sequence of concrete behaviors grounded in the personal capacities of the leader. These actions define the configuration of competencies required of all transformational servants. This dimension of the course will give the learner the opportunity to review and reflect on the knowledge, skills, and attitudes - the critical "macro-competencies" required of all transformational servants regardless of the leadership setting, and apply what they have learned to selected case studies. ML 792 Spring 2013

RESULTS. Serving leaders make a sustainable and discernable qualitative and/or quantitative difference in the individuals and communities entrusted to their care. As good stewards of the community's resources, transformational servants take an account of the difference they are making, and adjust their leadership input accordingly. This dimension of the course will give the learner the opportunity to review and reflect on the leadership evaluation process, which is at the heart of the Results dimension of the 4-R Model, and apply this to selected case studies.

Course Objectives

Based on (a) an integrated understanding of the MATL curriculum, and (b) a rigorous processing of this content as part of the Mentored Leadership Development sequence (including assessments) the learner will:  Be able to articulate with biblical depth, scholarly insight, conceptual clarity, and passion born of personal experience, an integrated, biblical understanding of the core capacities, community and cultural elements, and critical, "macro competencies" required for effective and sustained transformational leadership.  Manifest a growing self-awareness of her or his present capacity and competence as a transformational leader, with a view toward further formation and development as a follower of Jesus Christ and leader in His Kingdom.  Demonstrate skills in the use of research and reference tools to further life-long learning in the area of leadership formation, development and practice.  Apply the full range of MATL course material, including the Bible, leadership tools, processes and assessments to a wide variety of leadership situations. Course Materials Northouse, P. G. (2007). Leadership: Theory and practice (Fourth Edition). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. 141294161X (paperback). Articles NOTE! The following Harvard Business Review readings can be found clicking here Bennis, W. & Thomas, R. “Crucibles of Leadership” Harvard Business Review, September, 2002. Collins, J. & Porras, J. “Building Your Company’s Vision” Harvard Business Review, September-October, 1996. Coutu, D. “How Resilience Works” Harvard Business Review, May, 2002. Heifetz, R. & Laurie, D. “The Work of Leadership” Harvard Business Review, December 2001. Heifetz, R. & “Linsky, M. A Survival Guide for Leaders” Harvard Business Review, June, 2002 Kellerman, B. “Leadership: Warts and All” Harvard Business Review, January 2004. Lencioni, P. “Make Your Values Mean Something” Harvard Business Review, July, 2002.

: ML 792 Spring 2013

Maccoby, M. “Narcissistic Leaders: The Incredible Pros, the Inevitable Cons” Harvard Business Review, January, 2004. Manville, B. & Ober, A. Beyond Empowerment: Building a Company of Citizens. Harvard Business Review, January 2003. Peters, T. “Leadership: Sad Facts and Silver Lining” Harvard Business Review, December, 2001.

Additional Course Documents  Case Study # 1  Case Study # 2  Case Study # 3  Preliminary Case Study Response Form (for all case studies)  Final Case Study Response Form # 1  Final Case Study Response Form # 2  Final Case Study Response Form # 3  Journal Article Response Form  “The 4R Model of Leadership: A Virtue Based Curricular Model”  “How to Pick a President”  “Virtue as the Foundational Element in Global Business Education” Course Assignments 1. Discussion Forum: Learners will participate in one discussion forum. This forum invites learners to respond to a question posed by the instructor and respond at least once to the response of a classmate. While these responses will not be graded, it is expected that each learner will participate in this forum. Points may be subtracted from the learner's grade if they do not fully participate.

2. Journal Reviews: Learners will select two "high quality" journal articles and defend their selection of each. This assignment asks learners to choose an article to address two of the following four subjects. (1) Leadership capacity and/or formation (Relationships). (2) Leadership in community and cultural context (Roles). (3) Leadership competence (Responsibilities). (4) Leadership Results. The learner will email the professor a completed Journal Article Response Form for each article (see Course Documents). Learners are encouraged to consult one another and view one another's work, but are also asked to submit assignments which reflect his or her own work in his or her own words and reflecting his or her unique perspective.

3. Leadership Case Studies: Based on your summative and integrative understanding of the material presented in the MATL program, including readings, assignments, assessments, the MLD sequence, and lessons learned in your ministry context, as well as your review and reflection in this class, complete four Case Study Response Forms. Each form will be about 1,500-2,000 words.

The rather short length of each case study response suggests that you will need to be to the point, clear, integrative and succinct in your responses. Again, learners are encouraged to consult one another and view one another's work, but are also asked to submit assignments, which reflect his or her unique reflections and experiences in ministry over the last three years. Each Final Case Study Response Form will be graded according to the following criteria. (1) The learner’s demonstrated level of understanding and processing of the sum total of the Master of Arts in Transformational Leadership curriculum, psychometric assessments, MLD sequence and experience in ministry over the last three years. (2) The learner's demonstrated level of integration of this material into the questions posed by the case study. (3) The learner’s demonstrated degree of biblical depth and scholarly rigor with which he or she processes the issues and challenges associated with each case study. In other words, the learner's written work should clearly demonstrate that he or she has personally grappled with the leadership issues raised by the case study and done so in a manner that reflects an integrative understanding and deep, personal processing of the total curriculum and experience of the MATL, including one's ministry experience over the last three years. See the "Criteria for Grading Papers and Assignments" section at the end of this syllabus for more information on grading standards for all course work.  Case Study # 1, 2, & 3 will ask the learner to follow this process. After carefully reviewing the case study the learner will complete a Preliminary Case Study Response Form (see Course Documents). The learner will submit this form to his or her case study partner(s) for review. Based on input from the case study partner(s) the learner will appropriately revise his or her Preliminary Case Study Form. Based on the learner’s work on the Preliminary Case Study Form, the learner will complete a first draft of the Final Case Study Response form (see Course Documents) and submit this draft to his or her case study partner(s). Based on input from the case study partner(s) the learner will complete his or her final draft of the Final Case Study Response Form and submit it to the instructor for a grade. Only the last draft of the Final Case Study Form needs to be submitted to the instructor.

Course Grading

Two Journal Article Reviews (5 points each) 10%

Three Case Study Responses Forms (30 points each) 90%

Discussion Forums (while no points will be given for participation, points

may be deducted for missed forums or insufficient participation)

Attendance at the intensive week and participation in class discussions is

expected of all learners.

Total 100%

Late Policy Late work is excused only for reasons of illness or family emergency. Travel, a busy schedule and “things that came up” will not excuse late work. If you have reason to believe your work will be late, please contact me. Points will be deducted from your grade at the discretion of the instructor. Grading Philosophy A total of 100 points are possible. Each assignment/grading category reflects both the percentage of the class grade, as well as the number of points possible for the assignment/category. A final grade of 'A' is reflective of an extremely high demonstrated quality level for graduate studies with reference to the areas of (a) class preparation-participation, and (b) accomplishment of the course assignments according to the stated criteria for each assignment. A final grade of 'B' is reflective of an average demonstrated quality level for graduate studies for these categories. A final grade of 'C' is reflective of a below average demonstrated quality level for graduate studies for these categories.

The learner’s course grade will be the total of all assignments, based on the scale below: A ..... 95-100 C ..... 75-77 A- .... 92-94 C- .... 72-74 B+ ... 88-91 D+ .... 68-71 B ..... 85-87 D ..... 65-67 B- .... 82-84 D- .... 62-64 C+ ... 78-81 F ..... Below 62

Grading Criteria for Papers & Assignments Admittedly, the assignments of grades can be a highly subjective process for the instructor and consequently, a frustrating experience for the learner. I offer these "objective" criteria to guide you in your work, as well as to communicate my standards for assigning grades.

1. Quality of Writing: This is a graduate course. As such, my assignments of a grade to your work will reflect appropriately high standards for (a) clarity of language, (b) the development of well-informed arguments, and (c) the documentation of evidence cited for your arguments or position. While this is not a class on writing, it is nonetheless important for you to effectively articulate, develop and defend your ideas and conclusions.

While there are no specific format requirements, please observe the following. a. Your papers should be word processed, double-spaced, and reasonably free from errors of spelling and grammar. b. Begin each paper with a title page stating your name and the title of the assignment.

2. Quality of Content: Your papers will be evaluated on the following content-oriented criteria:

a. The level of analysis of the concerns, problems and questions addressed in your work. For instance, a simple and surface (even though accurate) articulation and application of information learned in class will not meet the standards for an "A" on the assignment. An "A" assignment will vigorously process the information learned in class through the framework of the Bible, expert content, and personal values and experience such that issues critical to the assignment are addressed. An "A" paper will demonstrate that you have deeply thought about the issues and questions identified in the assignment. b. The level of synthesis of course material evidenced by your work. Did you make use of the full range of course material relevant to the assignments, appropriately differentiating, combining, integrating, and applying the material to the issue at hand? Does your work reflect that you have carefully read and actively integrated all course material, including class sessions? c. The level of evaluation and critical reflection evidenced in your work. Did you employ appropriate (e.g., the Bible, personal values, personal experience, expert opinion) for making critical judgments and for arriving at considered conclusions with reference to the issues at hand? After being informed by the Bible, expert opinion, class reading and discussions, and personal experience, did you come to a set of biblically-based, well reasoned, and well defended conclusions?

3. Last but not least: DID YOU SPECIFICALLY ENGAGE THE ASSIGNMENT! DID YOU ADDRESS THE QUESTIONS AND/OR PARTICULARS OF THE ASSIGNMENT AS THEY ARE POSED? DID YOU DO WHAT THE ASSIGNMENT ASKED? DID YOU SUBMIT YOUR WORK IN A DOC or DOCX FORMAT? NO PDF’s please. Academic Course Policies: Please familiarize yourself with the catalog requirements as specified in Academic Course Policies document found on the Registrar's website at: https://bethelnet.bethel.edu/ureg/bssp/acp/. You are responsible for this information, and any academic violations, such as plagiarism, will not be tolerated.

ML792 Course Schedule

Spring 2013

Notation: "DUE" means that the assignment is to be turned in to a fellow student or for a grade that week. The assignment must be submitted via the Assignment Link no later than Saturday at midnight CST of that particular week. Late work, both for coursework submitted to the instructor, or work submitted to a case study partner may result in a reduced grade at the discretion of the instructor.

Week 1: March 25-29  READ: o CAREFULLY READ THE SYLLABUS o Northouse, chapters 1-2 o Bennis, W. & Thomas, R. “Crucibles of Leadership” Harvard Business Review, September, 2002. o Heifetz, R. & Laurie, D. “The Work of Leadership” Harvard Business Review, December, 2001. o Kellerman, B. “Leadership: Warts and All” Harvard Business Review, January, 2004. o Peters, T. “Leadership: Sad Facts and Silver Lining” Harvard Business Review, December, 2001. o I & II Timothy   DUE: By midnight (CST), Saturday, on the Discussion Forum, post your response to the readings for Week # 1 and submit your written reflections to the posting of at least one other student.   BEGIN: Read Case Study # 1; Identify your case study partner; Read Case Study # 2 and # 3; Identify two journal articles. Week 2: April 1-5  READ: o 2 Timothy o Coutu, D. “How Resilience Works” Harvard Business Review, May, 2002. o Northouse, chapters 3-7 o Titus (all) o  CONTINUE: Search for journal articles as per assignment   DUE: By midnight Saturday on the Discussion Forum or via email, submit your Preliminary Case Study Response Form for Case Study # 1 to your case study partner.   DUE: Give written input to your Case Study partner on his or her Preliminary Case Study Response Form for Case Study # 1.

Week 3: April 8-12  READ: o Northouse, chapters 8-12 o Lencioni, P. “Make Your Values Mean Something” Harvard Business Review, July, 2002. o Manville, B. & Ober, A. Beyond Empowerment: Building a Company of Citizens, Harvard Business Review, January, 2003. o  DUE: First draft of Final Case Study Response Form for Case Study # 1—submit by Blackboard or email to your case study partner by Saturday at midnight CST.   DUE: Respond tin writing to your case study partner's first draft of the Final Case Study Form for Case Study # 1.   CONTINUE Reading Case Study # 2 and 3 and complete Preliminary Case Study Response Form for each (to be turned in to the instructor—but not graded—at the end of the first day of intensives, Monday). Week 4: April 15-19  READ o Northouse, chapters 13-14 o Collins, J. & Porras, J. “Building Your Company’s Vision” Harvard Business Review, September-October, 1996. o Heifetz, R. & “Linsky, M. A Survival Guide for Leaders” Harvard Business Review, June, 2002. o Maccoby, M. “Narcissistic Leaders: The Incredible Pros, the Inevitable Cons” Harvard Business Review, January, 2004. DUE: Final Case Study Response Form # 1 submitted to instructor by Saturday at midnight (CST). Submit via Assignment Link using the following file naming format for submitting your paper: ML792_Last Name_Case1. No PDF’s please.   DUE: Friday, peer-evaluated, Preliminary Case Study Response Forms for Case Study # 2 and # 3 (Significant class time will be devoted to each case study during the intensive week) Week 5: April 22-26

Intensive Week for ML 792  DUE: By 5 p. m. Friday, turn in both your Journal Article Forms to the instructor.  DUE: Submit two Journal Article Forms to instructor.  DUE: By Saturday at midnight, turn in your first draft of your Final Case Study Response Form for Case Study # 2 and respond to the same of your case study partner (class time will be allotted).   BEGIN: Work on Case Study # 3 Final Case Study Response Forms (class time will be allotted).

Week 6: April 29-May 3  No Assignments Week 7: May 6-10

DUE: Final Case Study Response Form for Case Study # 2—submit to instructor for grade by email by Saturday at midnight (CST) Friday. -- Submit via Assignment Link using the following file naming format for submitting your paper: ML792_Last Name_Case2. No PDF’s please.  CONTINUE: Work on Case Study # 3 Final Case Study Response Form Week 8: May 13-17  DUE: By 5 p.m. Friday, post your first draft of your Final Case Study Response Form for Case Study # 3 and respond to the posting of the same to your case study partner. Week 9: May 20-24

DUE: Final Case Study Response Form for Case Study # 3—submit to instructor by email by 5 p. m. (CT) Friday. -- Submit via Assignment Link using the following file naming format for submitting your paper: ML792_Last Name_Case3. No PDF’s please

Week 10: May 27-31

SUBMIT: Course Evaluation

CONGRATULATIONS!