Wow - this is an eye opener! How many of us have worked with students whom we deem "leaders" who have really shown little or no leadership action? In the name of student development, are we calling students who get involved "leaders" so they will begin to think they are a leader and then start acting like one? Or do we see the simple act of involvement evidence of their leadership capacity?
I will need to reflect on this more, but at this moment, I am still an advocate of calling involved students "leaders." So many students don't get involved at all, and the simple act of seeking out the opportunity to create change is the first stage of leadership.