| Course | LDR-3240 Leaders in History |
|---|---|
| Module | Module 1 |
| Paper type | Module 1 application paper: leaders in history |
| Length | About 540 words, 4 pages |
| Format | APA 7 student paper |
| School | Thomas Edison State University |
| Program | Bachelor of Science in Organizational Leadership |
| Updated | October 2026 |
Free sample paper for LDR 3240 Module 1
Shared Goals Under Danger: Harriet Tubman and Ernest Shackleton as Leaders of Followers
Student Name
Bachelor of Science in Organizational Leadership, Thomas Edison State University
LDR-3240: Leaders in History
Mentor Name
Month Day, Year
Shared Goals Under Danger: Harriet Tubman and Ernest Shackleton as Leaders of Followers
Introduction
Wills (1995) argues that leadership cannot be understood by studying leaders alone. A leader, in his definition, is one who mobilizes others toward a goal shared by leader and followers, so every account of leadership must include the followers and the goal. This paper tests that definition against two leaders who faced extreme danger in different centuries and settings: Harriet Tubman in the American South before and during the Civil War, and Ernest Shackleton in the Antarctic from 1914 to 1916.
Harriet Tubman
After escaping slavery in Maryland in 1849, Tubman returned repeatedly to guide family members and others north along the Underground Railroad. Larson (2004) documents the risks: Tubman traveled at night, used disguises and relied on a network of free Black and white helpers. During the Civil War she scouted for the Union Army and helped lead the Combahee River raid in South Carolina in June 1863, which freed more than 700 enslaved people. Tubman had no formal authority over the people she led. They followed her because they shared her goal of freedom and trusted her judgment. Wills's definition fits closely: the goal was the followers' own, and Tubman's role was to make it achievable.
Ernest Shackleton
Shackleton's expedition aimed to cross Antarctica on foot. When the ship Endurance was trapped and crushed by pack ice in 1915, the goal changed to survival. Shackleton (1919) describes months on drifting ice, an open-boat voyage to Elephant Island and then an 800-mile journey in a small boat to South Georgia to bring rescue. Every member of the party on Elephant Island survived. Shackleton kept the men together by sharing hardship, keeping routines and moving quickly to quell signs of despair. When the original goal became impossible, he redefined it as one every man could share: everyone goes home.
What the Two Have in Common
Neither leader relied mainly on position. Tubman had none; Shackleton's authority as expedition leader meant little once the ship was lost. Both earned followers' trust through competence and by taking the same risks they asked of others. And both made the goal concrete and shared. Wills (1995) emphasizes that leaders must understand their followers' wants; Tubman knew that freedom was worth the danger to her passengers, and Shackleton knew his men would endure almost anything if they believed he would get them home.
Lessons for Leaders Today
I work as a dispatcher for a composite county paratransit service in New Jersey, coordinating drivers who take elderly and disabled riders to medical appointments. Three lessons apply. First, my authority on paper matters less than drivers' trust in my judgment, especially when a route goes wrong. Second, when a goal becomes impossible, such as a schedule broken by a snowstorm, I should redefine it in terms everyone shares: every rider gets home safely. Third, I should not ask drivers to take risks I would not take or understand myself.
Conclusion
Tubman and Shackleton led in different centuries and settings, but both fit Wills's definition: they mobilized followers toward goals the followers shared. Their stories show that leadership depends less on title than on trust, shared risk and a goal followers can believe in.
References
Larson, K. C. (2004). Bound for the promised land: Harriet Tubman, portrait of an American hero. Ballantine Books.
Shackleton, E. (1919). South: The story of Shackleton's last expedition, 1914-1917. Heinemann.
Wills, G. (1995). Certain trumpets: The nature of leadership. Simon & Schuster.
LDR 3240 Module 1 instructions, in plain terms
LDR-3240 has five application papers, worth 25 percent of the grade together, each asking you to synthesize and apply leadership concepts in two to three pages, alongside five shorter reflection papers, five discussions and a final project. The first module focuses on leaders in history. Expect a prompt asking you to compare leaders from different eras or contexts using the course's definition of leadership. Choose leaders whose stories are well documented, rely on biographies and primary accounts rather than websites and apply the concepts directly rather than retelling the lives. Finish with lessons for your own setting. Name the concept you will use at the start and apply it to each leader in turn.
How this LDR 3240 Module 1 example is built
The paper opens with Wills's definition and its emphasis on followers and a shared goal. A section on each leader summarizes the documented facts briefly and then applies the definition, using a biography for Tubman and Shackleton's own account. A comparison section identifies three features the two leaders share. A final section applies the lessons to the writer's work as a paratransit dispatcher, and the conclusion restates the main finding in a single paragraph that ties back to the definition. Facts about each leader come from a biography or a firsthand account, which the reader can check, and each section ends by applying the definition rather than adding more history.
LDR 3240 Module 1 rubric: what earns full marks
Application papers in LDR-3240 earn credit for a sound grasp of the readings, effective synthesis and application of concepts, adequate answers to the questions and clear, cited writing in APA style. In this first paper, choosing two leaders from contrasting contexts, and applying the course definition to both, shows synthesis rather than summary. Accurate historical facts drawn from reliable sources matter, since errors undermine the analysis. Lessons tied to the writer's own work demonstrate application, which the assignment explicitly asks for. Papers that notice what the two leaders share despite their different settings, and explain why, show the kind of synthesis the course is built to develop. Clear organization with headings helps the reader follow the comparison.
Common LDR 3240 Module 1 mistakes, and how to avoid them
Students lose points by retelling a leader's life without analysis, by choosing leaders without explaining what the comparison shows or by relying on unsourced websites for historical facts. Others never connect the analysis to the present. Keep the biography short and the analysis long. Use one concept, such as Wills's definition, consistently across both leaders. Check dates and numbers against a reliable biography. End with lessons you can apply. Choose leaders you can describe accurately in a paragraph each, so most of your space goes to analysis. Cite page numbers for any direct quotation. A free first sample on your own LDR-3240 Module 1 paper is available on request.
Write yours, or have the desk draft it
This paper is an original model document written by our desk, not a submitted student paper and not an official Thomas Edison State University document. Read it for the moves, then write your own to the instructions in your classroom. If you want one built to your exact prompt and rubric, the first custom sample is free and arrives in 24 to 48 hours.
More LDR 3240 and Bachelor of Science in Organizational Leadership sample papers
- LDR 3240 Module 2: Application Paper: Frances Perkins and Henry Ford, Reform and Business Leadership
- LDR 3240 Module 3: Application Paper: Machiavelli, Burns and a Leader's Moral Choices
- LDR 3240 Module 4: Application Paper: Legitimate Authority and the Followers Who Grant It
- LDR 3240 Module 5: Final Paper: Challenging the Status Quo as a Leader Who Learns From the Past
- MAN 4150 Module 3: Implementation Written Assignment
- PSY 3600 Module 2: Written Assignment: Theory X, Theory Y and the Shape of a Moving Company
- LDR 3050 Module 11: Reflection Paper: Clearing the Path for New Hires
- LDR 4350 Module 3: Final Project Paper: The Onboarding Project, Its Results and What It Taught
LDR 3240 Module 1 questions, answered
Where can I find a free LDR 3240 Module 1 sample paper?
Harriet Tubman and Ernest Shackleton, compared through Wills's definition of leadership, are the subject of the application paper above.
How does Garry Wills define a leader?
As one who mobilizes others toward a goal shared by leader and followers.
What textbook does LDR-3240 use?
Garry Wills's Certain Trumpets: The Nature of Leadership, published by Simon & Schuster in 1995.
Why do followers matter in Wills's view?
Because leadership exists only when followers share the goal and choose to follow.
How long are LDR-3240 application papers?
Two to three pages, with five application papers worth 25 percent of the grade.