Matching Items (4)
Filtering by

Clear all filters

150332-Thumbnail Image.png
Description
Barrett, The Honors College at Arizona State University (ASU) serves as a universal role model for organizing the resources of an institution to support highly motivated and prepared students. In 2009, Barrett, The Honors College (Barrett) opened the nation's first purposefully designed undergraduate honors residential college campus. Given the current

Barrett, The Honors College at Arizona State University (ASU) serves as a universal role model for organizing the resources of an institution to support highly motivated and prepared students. In 2009, Barrett, The Honors College (Barrett) opened the nation's first purposefully designed undergraduate honors residential college campus. Given the current demand by other American higher education institutions who wish to better understand how Barrett emerged as a distinct and singular model for an honors residential college experience, this action research study explores the effectiveness of the decisions, execution and outcomes central to Barrett's development. Five senior administrators of college units or universities were interviewed and provided insight for constructing a design for how other honors programs and colleges can learn from the challenges and accomplishments presented in developing an honors college for the 21st century while replicating Barrett's success. The study is framed in the overall context of how Barrett actualizes the New American University at ASU in meeting the demand for producing students that can compete in a global marketplace.
ContributorsHermann, Kristen (Author) / Ewing, Kris M (Thesis advisor) / Rund, James (Committee member) / Hesse, Marian (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2011
150937-Thumbnail Image.png
Description
This study provides an understanding of how administrative leaders make decisions regarding enrollment management within academic units at a major research university in the southwestern United States. Key enrollment management functions of recruiting, admissions, marketing, orientation, financial aid/scholarships, academic advising, student engagement, retention and career services were identified from the

This study provides an understanding of how administrative leaders make decisions regarding enrollment management within academic units at a major research university in the southwestern United States. Key enrollment management functions of recruiting, admissions, marketing, orientation, financial aid/scholarships, academic advising, student engagement, retention and career services were identified from the literature. Typically applied at the institutional level, this study provides an understanding of how leaders in academic units decide to implement enrollment management. A case study was conducted using qualitative data collection methods which emphasized interviews. Senior administrators, such as associate deans within academic units who have responsibility for enrollment management, served as the sample. Three main theoretical constructs were derived after analysis of the data: Theoretical Construct 1: To meet enrollment and retention goals, leaders strategically plan structures and manage resources for enrollment management functions in their academic units. Theoretical Construct 2: To increase retention, leaders intentionally strive to develop a sense of community through customized programs and services for students in their academic units. Theoretical Construct 3: To achieve enrollment objectives within a school-centric model, leaders build relationships with centralized enrollment management functions and other academic units. The discussion and analysis of the study suggests that academic units follow a similar evolutionary model to institutions as they develop enrollment management functions. Five recommendations on how leaders in academic units can more strategically utilize enrollment management principles in decision making are offered.
ContributorsDeBiaso, Nick (Author) / Mcintyre, Lisa (Thesis advisor) / Hesse, Marian (Committee member) / Faris, Kay (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2012
168439-Thumbnail Image.png
Description
Although knowledge about effective teaching and learning exists, and theories of change strategies are considered, the lack of the understanding of the behavior of engineering faculty during curricular change remains a major contributor against robust efforts for change. In this work, faculty adaptability is conceptualized as self-regulation during curricular change.

Although knowledge about effective teaching and learning exists, and theories of change strategies are considered, the lack of the understanding of the behavior of engineering faculty during curricular change remains a major contributor against robust efforts for change. In this work, faculty adaptability is conceptualized as self-regulation during curricular change. Faculty participants were recruited from two divergent curricular change contexts: one that is prescribed with interdependence while the other is emergent with uncertainty. In this study, attitude toward context’s strength is conceptualized along the four dimensions of clarity, consistency, constraints, and consequences of the context, while faculty’s self-efficacy and willingness for adaptability are conceptualized along the three dimensions of planning, reflecting, and adjusting. This study uses a mixed method, quantitative-qualitative, sequential explanatory research design. The quantitative phase addresses the question of “How does faculty group in the first context differ from faculty group in the second context in terms of self-efficacy and willingness for planning, adjusting, and reflecting?” The qualitative phase addresses the question of “How do faculty respond to curricular change, as exhibited in their activities of planning, adjusting, and reflecting during change?” Findings point to differences in patterns of correlations between attitude toward context with both self-efficacy and willingness across the two contexts, even though analysis showed no significant differences between attitude toward context, self-efficacy, and willingness across the two contexts. Moreover, faculty participants’ willingness for adjusting, in both contexts, was not correlated with neither attitude toward context’s clarity nor constraints. Furthermore, in the prescribed context, Group A faculty (self-identified as Lecturers, Senior Lecturers, or Adjunct Faculty) showed higher willingness for planning, adjusting, and reflecting activities, compared to Group B faculty (self-identified as Assistant, Associate or Full Professors). Also, in the prescribed context, Group A faculty showed no overall significant correlation with attitude toward context. This study has implications on the way change is conceived of, designed, and implemented, when special attention is given to faculty as key change agents. Without the comprehensive understanding of the adaptability of faculty as key change agents in the educational system, the effective enacting of curricular change initiatives will remain unfulfilled.
ContributorsAli, Hadi (Author) / McKenna, Ann (Thesis advisor) / Bekki, Jennifer (Committee member) / Roscoe, Rod (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2021
Description

The cost of education is increasing, and the use of mandatory fees to offset costs is increasingly becoming more prevalent. Mandatory fees in higher education are not a new occurrence and have been associated with higher education institutions since their inception. However, the use and number of mandatory fees have

The cost of education is increasing, and the use of mandatory fees to offset costs is increasingly becoming more prevalent. Mandatory fees in higher education are not a new occurrence and have been associated with higher education institutions since their inception. However, the use and number of mandatory fees have grown, especially within the last decade, to include more fees that support core initiatives that were once covered by higher education institutions. Despite the vast amount of research concerning costs associated with attendance at higher education institutions, there is less research on how undergraduate students understand these costs, and how understanding of educational expenses may influence students’ behavior. Moreover, there is a dearth of research that explores students' engagement in services and programs supported by mandatory fees at higher education institutions.

This investigation fills the gaps, as it studies undergraduate students’ understandings of and attitudes toward mandatory fees while addressing their engagement in fee-supported services and programs. The data collection process utilizes a survey given to undergraduate students at a large research institution in the southwest United States. The survey uses multiple formats (i.e., Likert-scale, open-ended questions, multiple choice), to measure students’ understandings of costs and information about mandatory fees, frequency of use of services, and students’ prior knowledge about higher education institutions before enrollment.

Students’ perceptions of costs differ by individual and family, and the costs associated with fees can be a surprise for many students entering institutions of higher education. While fees are utilized to help retain and graduate all students, increasing fees change the total price for students. There are relatively few studies that measure the extent to which students engage in services or programs funded by the mandatory fees. While price is at the forefront for many federal and state policymakers, the need to make college more affordable for everyone without losing quality services and programs, must be addressed.

ContributorsIkegwuonu, Emeka (Author) / Dorn, Sherman J (Thesis advisor) / Glasper, Rufus (Committee member) / Kim, Jeongeun (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2020