OPINION: The Bastardization of Student Leadership

It was the first weeks of my undergraduate degree, that familiar time when student-led organizations eagerly recruit fresh faces and seek their next generation of leaders.

I joined my school's campus publication, SCHEMA, armed with nothing but my high school publication writing skills and the knowledge that my friends were joining too—the bare minimum.

Young, inexperienced, but hungry for new adventures, I saw this as my chance to make a name for myself.

When we're young, the bare minimum can be acceptable, it's part of the learning journey. But as we mature, that same bare minimum becomes something closer to outright disrespect.

Over the years in my undergrad, I've observed a disturbing transformation: student leadership has become a shadow of its name and has created a generation of leaders that thrive on social validation and resume fillers.

Clout is Currency

True leadership involves accepting responsibility for others' welfare, not just collecting positions.

Yet our educational institutions have, perhaps unintentionally, fostered a culture that prioritizes resume building over genuine service and growth.

Leadership positions have devolved into mere line items on a resume, with little character development to match the roles students eagerly fill.

In their desperate quest to appear as "leaders" on paper, these students miss the profound opportunity to develop authentic leadership capabilities.

They never truly learn to inspire others toward a common vision, to handle criticism constructively, or to create meaningful dialogues with the underrepresented—precisely the qualities that employers and society desperately need when they ask for "leadership experience."

This resume-centric approach to leadership has birthed a new generation of student politicians with minimal interest in creating meaningful change, yet armed with all the social media tools necessary to project an image of saintly dedication.

I once encountered a fellow undergraduate who proudly displayed over a dozen leadership positions across student council commissions and various organizations, all meticulously listed on their Facebook profile.

Whether any of this involvement yielded substantial impact remains questionable, but witnessing this obsession with quantity over quality left me deeply concerned about the future of leadership.

These students collect titles like trophies, often spreading themselves impossibly thin across multiple organizations, rendering them unable to properly serve any single one.

Their focus shifts entirely from action to acquisition, from execution to election.

This pattern becomes particularly alarming when we consider that many of these same student leaders may one day stand as elected officials in legislative bodies or local government positions.

Miniature Politics

“But it’s just a school election, why are you so serious about it?”

I've said this before and will continue to hold the same opinion: Student politics offers a toned down preview of real-world politics.

Campaign promises transform into recycled slogans for the next election cycle. Every impassioned chant for change becomes just another performance designed to secure re-election.

Contemporary student leadership has begun to mirror the worst side of real-world politics.

Campaign seasons on campuses have evolved into exercises in popularity rather than platforms, in larger than life promises rather than proven service records.

During my college years as a student journalist, I witnessed firsthand student council positions dominated by the same names and political parties, with some candidates running entirely unopposed.

I overheard younger students admitting they voted for candidates simply because they were popular on campus or because their friends are part of the party.

This environment creates the worst possible training ground for future leaders—one where elections lack substantive meaning, positions lack genuine purpose, and the entire leadership structure exists primarily as ceremonial window dressing rather than as meaningful governance.

Jose Rizal famously said, "Ang kabataan ang pag-asa ng bayan" (The youth are the hope of the nation). But what happens when our hope merely mirrors the ego we saw in our adults?

True leadership begins with genuine service, but we've created a culture that teaches students that authentic leadership ends after the campaign (sound familiar?)

Every leadership position, no matter how small it may seem, is practice for something greater.

Treating these roles casually doesn't just reveal immaturity; it disrespects the very concept of leadership that countless people depend on.

Apathy Starts Early

Perhaps the most telling symptom of this bastardization is the widespread student apathy toward their own elections.

When leadership positions are perceived as primarily self-serving, apathy naturally follows. The majority correctly sense that their participation in a fundamentally flawed system makes little difference.

During my undergraduate years, we had to fight tooth and nail to reach the minimum voter turnout of 25% of the student body required to validate an election.

Actual participation rates typically hovered just above that threshold—just enough but is it really enough?

Rather than teaching young people that leadership begins with service, we've created a system that teaches them that leadership is about personal advancement. What can I get if I ran for leadership?

Leadership positions become commodities to be acquired rather than responsibilities to be fulfilled.

We need to shift our collective understanding of leadership from accumulation to contribution, from self-promotion to selfless service.

Only then can we begin to reclaim the true essence of leadership and prepare a generation of leaders who understand that their worth is measured not by the positions they hold, but by the positive impact they create.

Maybe then, we can experience an electorate that cares not about popularity but about platforms, qualifications, and character.

Conclusion

The leaders of tomorrow are being shaped by the leadership cultures we create today. When we allow mediocrity in student leadership, we're teaching our young people that the bar for leadership is low.

Despite being in a university setting, the constituents are real people with real needs and concerns.

True impact isn't granted by rank—it's earned through purpose.

The question isn't whether you need a position to lead, but whether your pursuit of leadership stems from something greater than yourself.

Will we continue to perpetuate a system that rewards the appearance of leadership while neglecting its substance?

Or will we have the courage to demand more from our student leaders, and ultimately, from ourselves?

Because a resume filled with leadership titles means nothing if those experiences haven't transformed you into someone who genuinely cares about leading others toward a better future even if it means all you’ll get is a simple “Thank you for your service.”