What I’m learning from student leadership advisors

Last week, I shared some of the first findings from Teen Exec’s student leadership survey. That analysis helped me understand what student leaders experience, including what helps them stay organized, where responsibilities become difficult, and how preparation and support vary.

I’ve now finished reviewing the numerical results from a second survey answered by 37 advisors, coaches, and other adults who work with student leaders.

The students and advisors didn’t come from matching organizations, and the student sample was much larger, with about 270 respondents. I can’t use the results to say how an advisor and student from the same organization viewed each other. I can look at the broader patterns each group described.

Putting the results next to each other helped me see where students and advisors had similar views and where they placed slightly different emphasis.

Both groups described a strong starting point

The first thing that caught my attention was how closely students and advisors agreed about role clarity.

Ninety-three percent of student leaders said they understood what was expected of them. Among advisors, 94% agreed that student leaders understood those expectations.

The results were just as close for organizational goals. Ninety percent of students said their group had clear goals, compared with 89% of advisors.

Students and advisors also reported the same result for meeting structure. Eighty-one percent of both groups said meetings or practices were structured and productive.

Those numbers were encouraging. Most students felt that they understood their roles, and the adults working with student leaders generally agreed. Both groups also described clear goals and productive meetings in many organizations.

I began wondering what happens after those expectations are explained and the meeting ends.

Follow-through was less consistent

The largest shared concern involved tasks falling through the cracks.

Forty-two percent of student leaders said this sometimes happened in their organizations. Among advisors, the number was 51%.

The surveys came from separate groups, so the difference between 42% and 51% should be interpreted carefully. The overall pattern still caught my attention. Both percentages were much higher than I expected after seeing how many respondents reported clear roles, goals, and meeting structures.

A student can understand a role. A group can agree on a goal. A meeting can feel productive. The work still has to continue after everyone leaves.

Students have to identify the next steps, divide the work, set deadlines, remember their other commitments, and check whether everything was finished. A task can get lost at any point in that process.

The numbers don’t show exactly where that happens. That’s something I want to explore more closely in the written responses.

Advisors reported somewhat more overwhelm

Students and advisors showed a similar pattern when asked about workload.

Twenty-nine percent of student leaders said they often felt overwhelmed by their leadership responsibilities. Thirty-eight percent of advisors believed student leaders often felt overwhelmed.

Students were describing their own experiences, while advisors were reporting what they observed. Even with that difference, both surveys show that overwhelm affects a noticeable number of student leaders.

Leadership has helped me build confidence, develop relationships, and contribute to my school and community. I want students to continue having those opportunities. I’m interested in how schools and organizations can help students manage the responsibilities that come with them.

One question seems especially important: How can students take responsibility for meaningful work without reaching the point where they feel that every task depends on them?

Most organizations use tools to stay organized

Students and advisors generally reported having access to organizational tools.

Seventy-nine percent of students and 87% of advisors said their organizations used group communication tools. Shared documents and agendas were also common.

Written task lists and project-management apps were less common. Thirty-six percent of students said their organizations used them, compared with 32% of advisors.

Most respondents viewed their existing systems positively. Ninety-seven percent of students and 94% of advisors rated their organization’s systems as at least somewhat helpful.

Seeing those numbers alongside the follow-through results raised another question for me: If most groups have useful tools, why are tasks still being missed?

The way a group uses a tool may matter as much as the tool itself. An agenda can record what the group discussed without identifying who agreed to do each task. A group chat can make communication easy while allowing an important assignment to disappear between messages. A shared document helps only when people know where it is and remember to check it.

The surveys didn’t examine those habits individually. The results did make me think more carefully about what a useful organizational system actually needs to accomplish.

Students enter leadership with different preparation

The surveys also asked about leadership training and guidance.

Among students, 23% said they had received no training or guidance. Advisors reported that 89% of their organizations provided either formal training or informal guidance.

Those questions measured slightly different things. Advisors described what their organizations offered, while students described what they personally received. The advisors who participated may also work with organizations that have more established support.

The responses reminded me how many different meanings “leadership training” can have. It could be a formal workshop, a conference, an introduction from an outgoing leader, or an ongoing conversation with an advisor.

The advisor survey also showed the difference between receiving some guidance and attending formal training. Eighty-nine percent reported some form of preparation, while 50% reported formal training.

An experienced advisor or coach can sometimes provide exactly the guidance a student needs. I began wondering whether schools could identify a few things every new leader should learn, then provide that foundation through whichever approach works best for the school and organization.

That foundation might include understanding the role, knowing how decisions are made, using the group’s planning systems, asking for help, delegating work, and learning from the students who held the role before.

The surveys point toward a shared question

When I look at the two surveys together, I see more agreement than disagreement.

Students and advisors generally described clear roles, clear goals, productive meetings, and helpful organizational systems. Both groups also reported missed tasks and student leaders who sometimes became overwhelmed.

Seeing those results together changed how I thought about the problem. Explaining a role gives students an important starting point. They also need ways to use that information when schedules become crowded, plans change, and several people share responsibility for a project.

My next step is to analyze what students and advisors wrote in their open-ended responses. I’ll be looking more closely at how they describe planning, communication, delegation, accountability, training, and the everyday experience of leading other students.

The numbers have left me with a question I want to keep exploring: What helps student leaders turn clear expectations and good ideas into work that actually gets done?