This discussion analyzes study findings and serves to explain how these findings extend current literature about how African American students lead, and the ways micro- organizational racial climates influence their leadership. In this chapter, I examine the findings by answering the guiding research questions and discussing the four themes within the context of the existing literature. I highlight implications and recommendations for student affairs professionals and practitioners in order to inform their work with African American student leaders who are attending predominantly White institutions seeking degree attainment. Additionally, I offer institutional policy and practice
suggestions that directly facilitate the involvement of higher education administrators in the development of African American student leaders. Finally, I propose directions for future research related to African American student leadership involvement, development and close with a reflexive offering to bring the dissertation full circle.
Discussion of research questions
The discussion of this study’s findings is framed by the following guiding research questions:
1) What motivates African American students to join historically Black and predominantly White organizations?
2) How do African American students experience being leaders in both historically Black and predominantly White organizations?
3) How are African American students’ leader efficacies influenced by
participating in leadership roles within historically Black and predominantly White organizations?
What motivates African American students to join historically Black and predominantly White organizations?
Participants were motivated to join contextually different types of organizations for distinctly different reasons. In historically Black organizations, there was a desire to experience cultural validation, give back to their communities, help other African American students navigate the campus and find a sense of belonging. In predominantly White organizations, there was an effort to build networks for the purpose of utilizing connections beneficial in securing employment upon graduating, to diversify their leadership experiences and interactions with a variety of students and to disrupt racial stereotypes while integrating. Participants’ decisions to join each type of organization grew from a desire to be involved in something other than academic, in-class activities. The majority of participants involved held leadership roles throughout their high school years, in church, cultural entities, and sports teams or by learning from parental
examples. This precollege leadership exposure gave participants a sense of responsibility and challenged them to be involved in college organizations.
Having developed a desire to lead, participants became involved by attempting to transform their organizations and campus climates, and through being invested in the leadership development of their African American peers. Because the majority of their African American peers were also leaders in historically Black organizations, participants took it upon themselves to be involved outside of Black leadership circles with the
purpose of discovering additional campus resources not necessarily readily available to historically Black organizations. Participants realized that institutional resources would never be accessed for the greater good of African American students, unless someone was aware of the processes by which to acquire those resources.
How do African American students experience being leaders in both historically Black and predominantly White organizations?
The ways participants experienced leadership in both historically Black and predominantly White organizations varied drastically, yet subtly, when considering how the achievement of goals influenced their leader efficacy. Participants’ leadership experiences were highly contextualized and included the following: 1) how they
presented their “Blackness” publically versus during meetings; 2) investments they made in the leadership development of peer members; 3) utilization of organizations to serve African American communities away from campus; and 4) the degree to which they mentored others and their rationale for doing so.
In predominantly White organizations participants felt they had to tone down or mute their cultural expressions of “Blackness,” based on the presence of their White
colleagues; which I interpreted as partly influenced by participants’ racial “double consciousness” (Du Bois, 1903) and awareness of the normative gaze of Whiteness. In fact, some participants perceived themselves as under racial hypersurveillance, which they attributed to stereotypical notions of Black students never being “as good as Whites” (Yssis). This perception contributed to participants’ focus on transforming predominantly White organizational norms, practices and policies in effort to increase inclusivity. Conversely, participants also found that predominantly White organizations encouraged their voices pertaining to social justice issues while simultaneously challenging their diversity-minded ways of thinking.
In contrast, participants defended the authenticity of their “Blackness,” which was questioned at times, while leading in historically Black organizations. Specifically, their “Blackness” was questioned because of their desire to engage in cooperative
opportunities with predominantly White organizations or racially diversify the
membership of historically Black organizations. Despite this, participants remained in leadership roles in historically Black organizations because these ethnic enclaves still acted as semisafe spaces by shielding participants from the racism experienced on campus. For the most part, participants experienced being involved in both types of organizations as challenging for a variety of reasons: 1) learning to juggle organizational and academic commitments; 2) dealing with the stress of leadership; and 3) balancing their lives socially and with leadership roles. However, participants also perceived both historically Black and predominantly White organizations as places where leadership development was encouraged, nurtured and allowed.
differently in historically Black (servant leadership) and predominantly White
(transformational leadership) organizations. These differences were primarily based on the race of constituents and double consciousness awareness (Du Bois, 1903), but also were influenced by how members responded to their leadership, and the level of support and resistance received from members. These factors affected participants’ leadership behaviors and how they perceived themselves as empowered to lead within each organization, which in turn contributed to their leadership development and identity. Subsequently, the ways they engaged their leadership were based on the micro- organizational climates that influenced how they perceived each organization (psychologically) and how they responded (behaved) as a result of experiencing the formal and informal interactions therein. In short, they joined historically Black organizations because of the organizational histories of support for African American students and the structural dimensions that were culturally congruent with their
“Blackness.” They joined predominantly White organizations for the perceived benefit of building professional networks that would lead to employment or the graduate school of their choice.
How are African American students’ leader efficacies influenced by participating in leadership roles within historically Black and predominantly White organizations?
Participants’ leader efficacy was positively affected regardless of the
organizational context. However, participants attached a racially influenced value to leader efficacy when their leadership actions benefitted African American students or communities. Specifically, they felt sense of racial pride when the outcome of their work positively advanced the lives of Black people. Otherwise, in predominantly White and