I'm glad that "The Batten Leadership Institute: A Troubling Way of "Forming" Leadership" was written for the Quadrangle. I think it's always good to examine and re-examine a program before spending more money and time on it. I would like to see more research on Batten. How many students on campus are opposed to it, or don't know enough about it? How many faculty are 'historically opposed to it'? If 25% of the faculty or student body have problems with Batten, then we should consider those concerns and make changes immediately. I, for one, do have a suggestion for Batten: along with learning about gender dynamics in leadership, we should learn about ethnic/cultural dynamics. So far Batten has been quite blind about this. We also need some more time for discussion of the teachings. My suggestion is to have more productive discussions in Communication Skills, rather than talk the whole time about feelings. But behold, for this was not what I understood from the previous Batten-critique/rant article! And that's why I have to write a response. A little background info: as a Biomedical Science/WS double major and one of the 'very liberal' and 'feminist' students on campus (yes, I'm claiming those labels), I could not be further away from the 'boy's club' or big corporate brainwashing. Yet, I'm opposed to the article on many grounds:

1) In my Batten experience, I've never been told even implicitly to fit one model of leadership. I know many of the examples used in Batten relate to corporate jobs, but I've never felt that there's one way to be a leader. In fact, the Batten directors did not draw any conclusions. We only learn about leadership qualities, and research findings, which are helpful no matter what career you're going into. I, for one, want to be a doctor and a social activist, which is no where near big corporations. But I need to know about transformation, transaction, micro-managing, etc, to lead well. We also learn quite a bit about gender dynamics in leadership. What I am taking away from Batten is that I must gain membership in the 'boy's club', only to convince them of my ideas. Collaboration and negotiation are vital to changing the norms.

2) We are not under a 'guise' of embracing our personalities. In Batten, I truly have embraced some of my good qualities, while learning good qualities from others. I haven't been taught to embrace any corporate values either. What I have learned, is to continue checking myself on my leadership, and ask whether it is effective. What I have learned is the importance of negotiations and motivations. Here's the reality: most Hollins students will enter the corporate world or interact with corporations in their career. It's a good thing that we learn about dealing in corporations and make better choices and practical moves about changing society. What I have learned in Batten, I can apply ANYWHERE, from personal relationships, to buying houses, or current campus leadership. Batten is not meant to be a liberal arts course. It is a supplement to teach us how to use our liberal arts education. Learning about organizations, corporations and leadership challenges is essential to using our liberal arts education effectively. Without practicality, any creative ideas are going to fall flat or remain as angry rants without bringing about any creative change.

3) "Students are being taught that it’s important to be aware of how others view them in order to ensure their own success."  Well duh. It's very important to be aware of how others view us as leaders, to be successful as leaders. To not do that is to have our heads buried in the sand pretending that everything is okay (George W. Bush, anyone?). I am glad to be aware of my own faults, because in that way I almost never judge others. If I am being perceived as bossy, unpleasant, ineffective or lazy, then I should be aware of that and be better. I know this has helped me in campus leadership. In personal experience, I know someone else who wasn't aware that she was being perceived as hypocritical, racist, lazy and useless by most people. Her leadership did not improve, and she simply couldn't continue. While in another case, a person is still in a leadership position, but very few people have any liking or respect for her. Surprisingly, this person is in Batten, but obviously hasn't learned from the leadership theories, which only means that Batten changes you only to the extent that you want. We have to and should 'fix' our characters to be better leaders. As for the filming of [fake interviews and speeches], it was very helpful. I saw gestures which I myself found awkward, and I improved them. Most importantly, nobody told any of us that we have to change, we did it if we wanted to.

4) Batten is not marketed as the only way to lead. It is not marketed as any 'way to lead'. It is a learning process where we can try to understand how each of us can lead. I don't believe Batten is superficial at all. It's a practical supplement to our liberal arts education. Of the leaders on campus whom I know and respect, there is an equal mix of Batten and non-Batten people. This only implies that Batten is what you make it. I don't respect all the students in Batten. Neither do I think Batten is a measure of leadership. But the teachings have helped me and others be a better leader. In conclusion, Batten DOES NOT cite professionalism before creativity. Batten let's you find ways to professionalize your creativity. I don't see anything wrong with that. My creativity is not limited to making some crafts or writing poetry in my room. My creativity is about changing the society for better. I'm glad I have some leadership guidance to help me do that.