The purpose of the present study is to empirically examine how traditional and nontraditional students vary in their perceptions of and appreciation for "Transformational Leadership" Styles verses "Transactional Leadership" Styles as indicated by their survey responses. The importance of such a study is found in the fact that traditional college classroom settings have traditionally employed a transactional approach to teaching and learning. For example, in the transactional leadership model, goals and objectives are set, measured, evaluated, and modified by the professors typically without any, or very little, input from the students. Incentives (i.e., grades and Honor's Day Recognition) are set to ensure that students would work diligently, if not efficiently, to make sure they pass the course and do it an exemplary manner. Of course, most students work feverously to get the job done because his or her grade depends on how they do on a paper-and-pencil test. Little emphasis is placed on whether the course information serves to stimulate and transform the student. It is assumed that the amount of learning that took place can be directly reflected in a student's letter grade. Under the transformational model, students are allowed to give input without fear of repercussion. In fact, students are strongly encouraged to verbalize their agreements and disagreements with the goals and objectives set forth on the syllabus. In this model, exchange is viewed from a more lateral position than from a vertical position. In doing so, students may accept more ownership toward the learning process. In order for performance to be impacted by either "transformation leadership" or "transactional leadership", it is assumed that one must appreciate the efforts and leadership style used by the professors.