Course Number: LDRS 302
Course Name: Historical Concepts and Theories of Leadership
Course Date: March 8, 2021 – April 18, 2020
Instructor: Mike Sambrook
Contact Information: e: mike@brackishconsulting.com
Co-requisites or Pre-requisites: Third year standing or permission of instructor.
Semester Hours: 3
Course Description:
An exploration of what leaders can learn from the past to understand contemporary leadership and
to imagine future ways of leading. Students are provided with the opportunity to use the historical
method, including primary sources,
to understand past leaders and leadership thought. Emphasis is
given to the social circumstances and philosophical ideas that led to the Classical and Scientific
Management theories, and subsequent leadership theories emerging through to the 1980s.
Course Learning Outcomes:
1. Knowledge and its application
a. Employ the conceptual language of historical leadership and management discourse;
b. Investigate ancient, pre-industrial, and industrial leadership/management ideas;
c. Compare and contrast historic and contemporary leadership ideas and experiences;
2. Cognitive complexity
d. Evaluate the context of leaders, including thought leaders on leadership, from the past;
e. Explain past changes in leadership/management theory and practice;
5. Spiritual Formation
f. Identify the spiritual foundations of leadership in the historic texts of the Christian tradition;
6. Social responsibility and global engagement
g. Adopt wise practices that respond thoughtfully to the complicated and layered histories of
leadership and management ideas that have shaped contemporary organizations;
7. Leadership
h. Develop meaningful applications of historically informed leadership and management ideas
that are appropriate to a variety of contemporary organizational settings.
T R I N I T Y W E S T E R N U N I V E R S I T Y
Page 2 of 9
Required Texts and Materials:
Northouse, P. G., (2016). Leadership: Theory and Practice (7th Edition). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
Publications.
Taylor, F. W., (2006). The Principles of Scientific Management. New York: Cosimo, Inc.
Online articles accessible within MyCourses.
Course Activities/Requirements:
In Class Dialogue/Participation
Active participation in group exercises, reflection, and critical discourse is an essential component of
this course. You are expected to show respect for all members of the course, both in your speech
and actions. Contribute by actively observing and listening, raising thoughtful questions, examining
relevant issues, building on others’ ideas, analyzing and evaluating the group’s thinking, synthesizing
key points, and expanding the group’s perspectives. Take care not to dominate a conversation,
giving space for others to speak. When in small groups help maintain the focus, flow, and quality of
conversations, and take the initiative to invite others (particularly those who are quiet) to speak.
Grading Rubric
Emerging (0-64%)
Developing (65-89%)
Mastering (90-100%)
Never to almost never: (a)
demonstrates active listening
(as indicated by disengaged
body language and no to rare
comments that build on others’
remarks), (b) initiates any
contributions in class or small
groups, (c) makes insightful or
constructive comments, (d)
helps maintain a supportive
space for others to speak.
Sometimes to fairly often: (a)
demonstrates active listening
(as indicated by somewhat to
often engaged body language
and comments that build on
others’ remarks), (b) initiates a
contribution at least once in a
class or small group discussion;
(c) makes insightful or
constructive comments, (d)
helps maintain a supportive
space for others to speak.
Very often to nearly always: (a)
demonstrates active listening
(as indicated by fully engaged
body language and comments
that build on others’ remarks),
(b) initiates more than one
contribution in a class or small
group discussion, (c) makes
insightful or constructive
comments, (d) creates a space
for others to speak and takes
initiative to include others.
Note: An absence for one class will not result in a loss of participation marks.
Online Dialogue
Online discourse is a conversational form of writing that encourages you to think about your own
thinking and feelings in relation to other’s thinking and feelings. Each week you will post a
thoughtful reflection to a given prompt, and then, make a minimum of two thoughtful reply posts.
• The required posts are substantive, showing depth of knowledge on the topic.
o Substantive posts may include:
▪ Providing a new thought, idea, or perspective;
▪ Citing an experience or example of what we are learning;
▪ Adding a new twist on a perspective;
▪ Questioning or challenging an idea/concept/principle/perspective.
T R I N I T Y W E S T E R N U N I V E R S I T Y
o Substantive posts are NOT:
▪ Very basic comments such as “I agree” or “I disagree;”
▪ Restating what has been said (unless there is a purpose in doing so);
▪ Disrespectfully disagreeing;
▪ Closed answers that do not provoke further thought.
• Replies posts should be made to two different people’s original post.
• References to course or other texts must follow APA citation standards.
• All posts are clearly written and contain no APA/spelling/grammatical errors.
Grading rubric for your initial post (50%)
Emerging (0-32%)
Developing (33-44%)
Mastering (45-50%)
Responds to forum question(s)
with a basic understanding of
the question(s); little to any use
of “they say/I say” writing
pattern; language or APA flaws
in more than two areas.
Demonstrates some to good
understanding of the question,
critical thinking, application of
basic ideas, and use of evidence
(citations and/or personal
examples); makes some use of
the “they say/I say” writing
pattern; language or APA flaws
in no more than two areas.
Demonstrates exemplary
understanding of the question,
advanced use of critical
thinking, application of ideas,
and use of evidence (citations
and/or personal examples);
uses “they say/I say” writing
pattern; no (or few and very
minor) language or APA flaws.
Grading rubric for your replies posts to peers (25% each x 2 replies = 50%):
and does not offer, or minimally
thoughtful feedback.
depth of critical thinking to
