Microdose Leadership Development: Enhancing Leadership Identity and Self-Efficacy Through Short-Term Active Learning
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Educational settings often operate in resource-constrained environments, limiting opportunities for leadership development. Most research focuses on long-term, resource-intensive programs (e.g., mentoring, coaching, leadership development courses), which restrict accessibility and scalability. This study evaluates a short-duration, student-centered leadership development initiative—the “Learning with Leaders” program—that engages higher education students in structured, 1-hr sessions with experienced leaders. Using qualitative data from 72 participant feedback surveys and testimonials, we examined the program’s impact on leadership knowledge, self-efficacy, and identity formation. Findings indicate that these microdose interventions enhance leadership knowledge, strengthen leader self-efficacy, and support identity formation through active social learning and reflective practices. These results suggest that short-term, active learning can complement traditional leadership development approaches by offering a scalable and resource-efficient alternative to long-term programs. This study contributes to leadership development theory by introducing the concept of microdose interventions and demonstrating their effectiveness in fostering leadership identity and self-efficacy.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".