This qualitative study drew on Bronfenbrenner’s ecological models of human development and Moos’ ecology model as the theoretical underpinnings to examine how students cultivated adaptability amidst the transition of changing majors. On the forefront of support as students change majors, this study utilized academic advising to highlight a career advising program designed with an ecological approach to reimagine academic advising support in proactive and responsive ways.
Findings from a grounded theory approach suggested students adapted through a network of support, network of information, and network of self-concept. The career advising program designed to draw upon multiple systems in one’s ecology capitalized on the reciprocal dynamic between an individual and their ecology. Cultivating adaptability addresses economical, societal, and personal goals and needs, economical, societal, and personal needs.
Thesis Launch was a six-week intervention that was designed to provide support for students in the critical early steps of thesis work such as brainstorming topics, examining professors’ research interests, reaching out to professors, preparing for meetings with potential thesis committee members, and writing a thesis prospectus. Thesis Launch offered web-based resources, weekly emails and text message reminders, and was supplemented by in-person advising options.
A mixed methods action research study was conducted to examine: (a) students’ perceptions of barriers that prevented beginning thesis work; (b) self-efficacy towards thesis work; (c) how to scale the intervention using technology; and (d) whether participants began the thesis early. Quantitative data was collected via pre- and post-intervention surveys, journals, and prospectus submissions. Qualitative data came from student interviews, journals, and open-ended questions on the surveys.
Quantitative data showed that after students participated in Thesis Launch, they had higher self-efficacy to work with professors, perceived fewer barriers to thesis work, and greater proportions of students began thesis work early. The qualitative data were complementary and showed that participants overcame barriers to thesis initiation, built self-efficacy, preferred an online intervention, and began thesis work early. Findings also showed that a primarily technology-based intervention was preferred by students and showed promise for scaling to a larger audience.
Thesis Launch provided a framework for students to begin work on the honors thesis and have mastery experiences to build self-efficacy. Strategies that fostered “small wins” and reflective efforts also assisted in this aim. Participants accomplished tasks tied to thesis work and customized their personal thesis timelines based on work begun during Thesis Launch. Finally, a discussion of limitations, implications for practice and research, and personal reflection was included.
Four senior students were positioned as peer-advisors assisting fellow students with academic related matters over one semester as a means of gaining competency and clarity in their pathway toward working in higher education. The results of the study indicate that peer-advising participants attributed program participation to increased career competency and clarity. There were also 64 student-advisee participants who found the program to be beneficial to their overall advising needs, as well as one professional advisor who found the program to be effective in decreasing her advising load during the study. The results of this study align with outcomes of pinnacle research and scholarship on experiential learning, and support the growing acknowledgment of the importance of applied learning experiences in higher education.
The majority of trust research has focused on the benefits trust can have for individual actors, institutions, and organizations. This “optimistic bias” is particularly evident in work focused on institutional trust, where concepts such as procedural justice, shared values, and moral responsibility have gained prominence. But trust in institutions may not be exclusively good. We reveal implications for the “dark side” of institutional trust by reviewing relevant theories and empirical research that can contribute to a more holistic understanding. We frame our discussion by suggesting there may be a “Goldilocks principle” of institutional trust, where trust that is too low (typically the focus) or too high (not usually considered by trust researchers) may be problematic. The chapter focuses on the issue of too-high trust and processes through which such too-high trust might emerge. Specifically, excessive trust might result from external, internal, and intersecting external-internal processes. External processes refer to the actions institutions take that affect public trust, while internal processes refer to intrapersonal factors affecting a trustor’s level of trust. We describe how the beneficial psychological and behavioral outcomes of trust can be mitigated or circumvented through these processes and highlight the implications of a “darkest” side of trust when they intersect. We draw upon research on organizations and legal, governmental, and political systems to demonstrate the dark side of trust in different contexts. The conclusion outlines directions for future research and encourages researchers to consider the ethical nuances of studying how to increase institutional trust.