<p>I’ve taken two Leadership courses (in freshman and junior year), and I thoroughly enjoyed both and expected to enjoy neither. Contrary to what many here think, it was a class that required quite a bit of thinking.</p>
<p>We took a mostly historical approach in the freshman class. We studied approaches leadership from Plato, Aristotle, W.E.B Dubois, Machiavelli, Gandhi etc. from various essays and books they had written. At the same time we practiced speech-making and improved our vocabularies.</p>
<p>In the junior year class, we read other approaches to leadership and ethics (Lao Tzu, Tolstoy, Thomas Cronin, Robert Greenleaf, Carlyle, etc) but this time we applied them to problems within the school. We were given projects that pushed us to take an initiative in improving the school and the community. Everything was up to the students for these projects; the teacher took a totally hands-off approach. We coordinated a volunteer fair and a blood drive, and our final exam was to put on a presentation defining leadership for our friends and family. We were expected to come up with our own definitions of leadership, and explain them. We also worked on resume portfolios, interviews, and recommendation letters.</p>
<p>For both each of these classes, I was required to do at least 50 hours of volunteer work. (I ended up doing about 350 total). The people who took these courses ended up at the top of the class, and they’re some of my best friends. Couldn’t imagine high school without them.</p>
<p>But then again, I had an extremely optimistic and motivated teacher for both years. She believes that if she tries hard enough she can work herself out of a job as a Leadership teacher.</p>