Matching Items (5)
Filtering by
- All Subjects: Higher Education Administration
- Creators: Bozeman, Barry
- Creators: Hesse, Marian
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 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
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 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
Description
The three essays in this dissertation each examine how aspects of contemporary administrative structure within American research universities affect faculty outcomes. Specific aspects of administrative structure tested in this dissertation include the introduction of new administrative roles, administrative intensity (i.e. relative size of university administration), and competing roles between faculty, administrators, and staff. Using quantitative statistical methods these aspects of administrative structure are tested for their effects on academic grant productivity, faculty job stress, and faculty job satisfaction. Administrative datasets and large scale national surveys make up the data for these studies and quantitative statistical methods confirm most of the hypothesized relationships.
In the first essay, findings from statistical modeling using instrumental variables suggest that academic researchers who receive administrative support for grant writing and management obtain fewer grants and have a lower success rate. However, the findings also suggest that the grants these researchers do receive are much larger in terms of dollars. The results indicate that administrative support is particularly beneficial in academic grant situations of high-risk, high-reward. In the second essay, ordered logit models reveal a statistically significant and stronger relationship between staff intensity (i.e., the ratio of faculty to staff workers) and faculty stress than the relationship between executive intensity (i.e., the ratio faculty to executive and managerial workers) and faculty job stress. These findings confirm theory that the work of faculty is more loosely coupled with the work of executives than it is with staff workers. A possible explanation is the increase in administrative work faculty must take on as there are fewer staff workers to take on administrative tasks. And finally, in the third essay results from multi-level modeling confirm that both role clarity and institutional support positively affect both a global measure of faculty job satisfaction and faculty satisfaction with how their work time is allocated. Understanding the effects that administrative structure has on faculty outcomes will aid universities as faculty administrative burdens ebb and flow in reaction to macro trends in higher education, such as unbundling of faculty roles, unbundling of services, neoliberalism, liberal arts decline, and administrative bloat.
In the first essay, findings from statistical modeling using instrumental variables suggest that academic researchers who receive administrative support for grant writing and management obtain fewer grants and have a lower success rate. However, the findings also suggest that the grants these researchers do receive are much larger in terms of dollars. The results indicate that administrative support is particularly beneficial in academic grant situations of high-risk, high-reward. In the second essay, ordered logit models reveal a statistically significant and stronger relationship between staff intensity (i.e., the ratio of faculty to staff workers) and faculty stress than the relationship between executive intensity (i.e., the ratio faculty to executive and managerial workers) and faculty job stress. These findings confirm theory that the work of faculty is more loosely coupled with the work of executives than it is with staff workers. A possible explanation is the increase in administrative work faculty must take on as there are fewer staff workers to take on administrative tasks. And finally, in the third essay results from multi-level modeling confirm that both role clarity and institutional support positively affect both a global measure of faculty job satisfaction and faculty satisfaction with how their work time is allocated. Understanding the effects that administrative structure has on faculty outcomes will aid universities as faculty administrative burdens ebb and flow in reaction to macro trends in higher education, such as unbundling of faculty roles, unbundling of services, neoliberalism, liberal arts decline, and administrative bloat.
ContributorsTaggart, Gabel (Author) / Welch, Eric (Thesis advisor) / Bozeman, Barry (Committee member) / Ott, Molly (Committee member) / Stritch, Justin (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2017
Description
The amount of time and effort that university researchers spend writing grants and executing grant administration responsibilities is one of the biggest challenges for science policy. This study aims to explore the complexity of the phenomenon of burdens in the administrative procedure for principal investigators (PIs) in sponsored research. The findings make a theoretical contribution to the study of burdens and red tape by closely examining the processes in which the burdens emerge, increase, and decrease; in doing so, this research will lay the groundwork for future studies of burdens and sponsored research systems. This study assumes that burdens are embedded in the social process, not merely in the number of required documentation or time spent on the procedure. The two overarching research questions are as follows: (1) What do researchers perceive or experience as a burden in grant proposal preparation and submission in sponsored research? (2) What are the possible factors or hypotheses to explain the generation, increase, and decrease of burdens? This single case study of a large research university examines the burdens faced by university researchers as they prepare and submit grant proposals. Primary data comes from semi-structured interviews with thirty-one PIs in science and engineering schools, and four interviews with research administration staff. Based on the interview data and theoretical arguments, this study illustrates the burdens in two categories: Burdens related to the proposal system, rules, and requirements; and burdens PIs experience with pre-award staff and relations. In addition, this study assesses each PI’s burden level in terms of the number of tasks in the proposal process, and the quality of the pre-award staff and services the PI experiences. This study further examines possible contributing factors and tentative hypotheses of burdens. In the discussion, this study develops theoretical arguments about the nature and consequences of burdens and fundamental issues in the grant system, and discuss prescriptions for PIs, universities, and sponsored research systems.
ContributorsFukumoto, Eriko (Author) / Bozeman, Barry (Thesis advisor) / Welch, Eric (Committee member) / Anderson, Derrick M (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2018
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 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