Thesis Question: How should college athletes be rewarded for their revenue creation?
Entry Question: Should Student Athletes be categorized as employees?
Source: Sims, Tyler, "Student-Athletes are not "Employees" Under the National Labor Relations Act: "The Consequences of the Right to Unionize" (2015). Law School Student Scholarship. Paper 696
This work was an in-depth exploration of 'employee status' among student athletes at American Universities. Written by Sims, who is a former athlete himself, this article displayed high levels of objectivity through the first two sections. The first section provided an introduction to the topic at hand. He studied unionization among athletes closely, diving into two separate court cases. He laid out the basics of those cases in his second section. He moved on to develop his argument, which he labeled 'part 3.' Here, Sims argued that athletes shouldn't be considered employees, and as a result, shouldn't be paid. His argument revolved around three different topics; Revisiting court issues, congress' stance on student-athlete employment, and the consequences of student-athletes becoming employees. Those consequences include costs to institutions and players, such as decreased value of academics and financial harm. Sims' conclusion rounded out his argument and his piece.
Prior to reading this essay, I stood on the side of paying certain college athletes because they produce revenue for the university. However, looking at his evidence, while it may seem like the right idea to call these athletes 'employed,' there would be negative consequences as a result to this action. Sims expanded on my entry question extensively. While he points out that by definition, college athletes can be considered employees, that definition has been overwritten in the past. With the substantial amount of evidence he provides on the topic of employment, Sims brought my thoughts over towards his side throughout my reading of the piece. Once I finished, however, I thought further about how student-athletes fit into the definition of 'employed.'
This has led me to ask, what actually constitutes the meaning of 'employed?' And how strictly does that definition apply to determining employment? I think once I find my stance on the leeway of that definition, I can further evaluate the issue of paid/not paid. Additionally, I'd like to explore Kain Colter and Northwestern football's court case further, so I can figure out the legal issues when it comes to unionization of student-athletes. Overall, this article opened my eyes to the other side of the spectrum and brought me to the question of employment.
Monday, February 29, 2016
Matt Bowman Source 1
Do students know the details of their student loans?
Andruska, Emily A., et al. "Do You Know What You Owe? Students' Understanding of Their Student Loans." Journal of Student Financial Aid 44.2 (2014): 24. ProQuest. Web. 1 Mar. 2016.
This article delves into students’ financial literacy on their student debts. Using a student survey and administrative records from the Iowa State University Office of Financial Aid, the authors questioned if students knew they had student loans and, then, if they knew how much they owed on them. By using logistic and ordered logit regressions, the source was able to answer these questions quite thoroughly. The final results propose that most students realize they owe money on student loans but many underestimate the exact amount unpaid. Specifically, one-eighth of the students in the study stated they had zero student debt when they actually had an outstanding loan. Continuing, it was found that over a quarter of the subjects underestimated their owed amount by less than $10,000, and approximately one-tenth underestimated the amount by more than $10,000. The article then goes on to discuss the roles that administrators and educators have in making students understand the status of their loan debt.
This source really got me thinking about why students aren’t more aware of the details of their student loans. My overarching question on what should be done about student default rates is narrowed down slightly in the fact that I think the first plan of action should be educating students on loans before they take them out. I wasn’t aware that so many students were this naïve on how people, themselves included, were paying for college. I was actually very shocked when I read that so many people didn’t even realize they had outstanding loans, let alone the details on how and when to pay them. Going into my research, I assumed that higher default rates would come from another reason, such as inability to pay, rather than students simply now knowing they still had payments to make. The article ends with proposing some solutions to the problematic financial illiteracy of students and I most agree with the regular financial counseling. I will look further into the possible costs and benefits of setting aside time to meet with all students to discuss their current and projected financial well being while paying for college. It seems reasonable, especially with the extensive research done by the authors, that more financial education and maintenance is necessary and worth our effort. After reading this article, I definitely want to pursue more research on the student side of the issue of rising debt, rather than just focusing on the side dealing with the governmental policies themselves. My question that led me to this source (Do students know the details of their student loans?) was answered with a resounding “no.” This alarms me but sparks an interest in asking, “Why?” With this article in my back pocket, I feel as if I am better prepared to narrow down my larger, overarching question in upcoming research.
After reading this piece, I am left wondering why educating students on their financial status has fallen off the agenda of those in charge of administering loans. In research, I feel I will either be led to an answer or move to pursue the other question of, “Why have students neglected to pay attention to their own financial status in obtaining loans?” I am currently unaware which path I should devote more time to, but I am almost certain I will figure it out while questioning current policies in higher education on the topics of rising costs and default rates. My questions are still fairly broad. However, this article alone caused me to think more narrowly and look at other possibilities I hadn’t thought of that might be causing higher default rates.
Rachel Whitaker Source 1
A)Who is the "bad guy" in the war on finances in Higher Education?
B) Longanecker, David. "A Tale of Two Pities: The Story of Public Higher Education Finance in America." Change: The Magazine of Higher Learning 38.1 (2006): 14-25. ERIC. Web. 29 Feb. 2016.
In "A Tale of Two Pities" we see the different sides of the financial story of higher education. On one side, you have the administration of higher education blaming policymakers for budget cuts and other cuts to student aide. On the other side, you have policymakers defending their decisions saying that they have done the best they can but at some point the state has no money left to give. Not only that, but they find it hypocritical that they are being called out for not helping the lower class students, when it is the institution itself that keeps rising tuition costs even above inflation. They both have flaws, however if they worked together, everyone would win.
Hearing each side made it really easy to make the institution and the policymakers bad guys. In the end, I found however, that the policymakers are the lesser of the two because they do as much with what they have. Institutions on the other hand just raise tuition and use policymakers as a scapegoat. This has allowed me to sharpen my focus on the institution and their use of government funds and tuition rather than focus on the role policymakers play in finances. It is easy, especially with the help of the institution's guidance to blame policymakers and budget cuts for the need for higher tuition and other sources of funding, however, this article has made it clear that policymakers are not the ones to have the finger pointed at them. It is the institution that needs to be checked. I agree that both sides have work to do, but I believe that the institution itself has more to answer for than policymakers.
Some new questions I have would be: Why is tuition rising at a higher rate than inflation? Why is the institution using policymakers as a distraction from their true reasons of raising tuition? What exactly is tuition buying us? How are the little guys being helped if it's not coming from the Pell Grant? The point of this exploration is to find out why universities cost so much and where all of that money is going if tuition rates need to increase every year.
B) Longanecker, David. "A Tale of Two Pities: The Story of Public Higher Education Finance in America." Change: The Magazine of Higher Learning 38.1 (2006): 14-25. ERIC. Web. 29 Feb. 2016.
In "A Tale of Two Pities" we see the different sides of the financial story of higher education. On one side, you have the administration of higher education blaming policymakers for budget cuts and other cuts to student aide. On the other side, you have policymakers defending their decisions saying that they have done the best they can but at some point the state has no money left to give. Not only that, but they find it hypocritical that they are being called out for not helping the lower class students, when it is the institution itself that keeps rising tuition costs even above inflation. They both have flaws, however if they worked together, everyone would win.
Hearing each side made it really easy to make the institution and the policymakers bad guys. In the end, I found however, that the policymakers are the lesser of the two because they do as much with what they have. Institutions on the other hand just raise tuition and use policymakers as a scapegoat. This has allowed me to sharpen my focus on the institution and their use of government funds and tuition rather than focus on the role policymakers play in finances. It is easy, especially with the help of the institution's guidance to blame policymakers and budget cuts for the need for higher tuition and other sources of funding, however, this article has made it clear that policymakers are not the ones to have the finger pointed at them. It is the institution that needs to be checked. I agree that both sides have work to do, but I believe that the institution itself has more to answer for than policymakers.
Some new questions I have would be: Why is tuition rising at a higher rate than inflation? Why is the institution using policymakers as a distraction from their true reasons of raising tuition? What exactly is tuition buying us? How are the little guys being helped if it's not coming from the Pell Grant? The point of this exploration is to find out why universities cost so much and where all of that money is going if tuition rates need to increase every year.
Natalie Boone - Source 1
Overall Thesis Question - How should the U.S. address the issue regarding the rising costs of higher education?
Question for this journal entry - How does Bernie Sanders plan to provide free college?
Source Citation - "Bernie Sanders." Bernie Sanders RSS. Web. 29 Feb. 2016. <https://berniesanders.com/?nosplash=true%2F>
This source outlines Senator Bernie Sanders plans for eliminating college costs. This source is more informative than argumentative, but makes its point clear that Bernie Sanders strongly believes that tuition free college should be in the future of the U.S.. In addition, it offers numerous statistics to support its claims. In summary, Sanders plans to relieve the burden of financing a college education that students across the country are experiencing by eliminating tuition costs, stopping the government from profiting on student loans, cutting loan interest rates, and allowing loan refinancing. He plans to fund this grand endeavor by imposing a tax on Wall Street speculators. He estimates the costs of these plans to be about $75 billion. This plan for restructuring the student loan system has gained Bernie Sanders the support of thousands of young people burdened with enormous student loan debt.
This source really made me think about how Sanders is going to make his promises a reality if he were to be elected president. For me, this source brought about some new ideas. I have heard Sanders promise free college educations for everyone for months now, but this article made me realize that he is only going to offer free tuition. Students will still be required to pay for their textbooks and room and board. This poses a big issue because room and board cost just as much as tuition. I think that this is a big issue for this source as it doesn't come out and say that room and board will not be included in the "free college" promise. There is no way that I am the only person that assumed that room and board would be included in his promise. I had to do additional research to confirm the brief mention of it found in this article. I think that this leads to the claim that this source is biased. It does not provide the whole truth because its purpose is to give enough information to persuade potential voters into supporting Sanders. It describes the positive aspects of his plans without mentioning the down sides. As for his opinions regarding the restructuring of the higher education system. I agree that the government should not profit off of our student loans, interest rates should be cut, and that we should be able to refinance our loans. However, I do not agree with the belief that "free college" is the best path for our country in regards to this issue as there are numerous downsides to making college free. I think that his plan requires further research into the "fine print" in order to get a better grasp of exactly how he plans to fund this endeavor. This source does help me answer the question I posed in this blog post as it allows me to gain a general understanding of his plans. However, it does not cover the specific plans which are a key component of such a promise.
This source has made me ask a few additional research questions. The first being my main question of "What is the "fine print" to his promises?". Secondly, I need to research the question of "Is this financially feasible and reasonable for our government?" I am also interested in researching the fact that only tuition will be covered and how he plans for students to fund expenses such as room and board and textbooks. From this source, I gained a general understanding of his plan, but I have more research to do to find out exactly how it will work.
As mentioned above, a few of my assumptions were proven wrong during my research of this source. I had assumed that "free college" meant free tuition and free room and board. However, it strictly means free tuition. That means that students will still have to come up with enough money to cover living expense which could equal or exceed the cost of tuition. This creates a major issue for underprivileged students and could prevent some students from attending. This prevents Sanders from achieving his goal of making a college degree accessible to everyone because he is essentially only footing half of the bill and leaving a large bill in the hands of the students.
As for my research trajectory, after this I will research the fine print associated with Bernie Sander's promises. I will do so in order to find out how he actually plans to keep his promises. This is valuable because it will be information that is not constantly being thrown at the public in hopes of attracting potential voters. I will then see what questions that the research poses and conduct additional research accordingly.
Question for this journal entry - How does Bernie Sanders plan to provide free college?
Source Citation - "Bernie Sanders." Bernie Sanders RSS. Web. 29 Feb. 2016. <https://berniesanders.com/?nosplash=true%2F>
This source outlines Senator Bernie Sanders plans for eliminating college costs. This source is more informative than argumentative, but makes its point clear that Bernie Sanders strongly believes that tuition free college should be in the future of the U.S.. In addition, it offers numerous statistics to support its claims. In summary, Sanders plans to relieve the burden of financing a college education that students across the country are experiencing by eliminating tuition costs, stopping the government from profiting on student loans, cutting loan interest rates, and allowing loan refinancing. He plans to fund this grand endeavor by imposing a tax on Wall Street speculators. He estimates the costs of these plans to be about $75 billion. This plan for restructuring the student loan system has gained Bernie Sanders the support of thousands of young people burdened with enormous student loan debt.
This source really made me think about how Sanders is going to make his promises a reality if he were to be elected president. For me, this source brought about some new ideas. I have heard Sanders promise free college educations for everyone for months now, but this article made me realize that he is only going to offer free tuition. Students will still be required to pay for their textbooks and room and board. This poses a big issue because room and board cost just as much as tuition. I think that this is a big issue for this source as it doesn't come out and say that room and board will not be included in the "free college" promise. There is no way that I am the only person that assumed that room and board would be included in his promise. I had to do additional research to confirm the brief mention of it found in this article. I think that this leads to the claim that this source is biased. It does not provide the whole truth because its purpose is to give enough information to persuade potential voters into supporting Sanders. It describes the positive aspects of his plans without mentioning the down sides. As for his opinions regarding the restructuring of the higher education system. I agree that the government should not profit off of our student loans, interest rates should be cut, and that we should be able to refinance our loans. However, I do not agree with the belief that "free college" is the best path for our country in regards to this issue as there are numerous downsides to making college free. I think that his plan requires further research into the "fine print" in order to get a better grasp of exactly how he plans to fund this endeavor. This source does help me answer the question I posed in this blog post as it allows me to gain a general understanding of his plans. However, it does not cover the specific plans which are a key component of such a promise.
This source has made me ask a few additional research questions. The first being my main question of "What is the "fine print" to his promises?". Secondly, I need to research the question of "Is this financially feasible and reasonable for our government?" I am also interested in researching the fact that only tuition will be covered and how he plans for students to fund expenses such as room and board and textbooks. From this source, I gained a general understanding of his plan, but I have more research to do to find out exactly how it will work.
As mentioned above, a few of my assumptions were proven wrong during my research of this source. I had assumed that "free college" meant free tuition and free room and board. However, it strictly means free tuition. That means that students will still have to come up with enough money to cover living expense which could equal or exceed the cost of tuition. This creates a major issue for underprivileged students and could prevent some students from attending. This prevents Sanders from achieving his goal of making a college degree accessible to everyone because he is essentially only footing half of the bill and leaving a large bill in the hands of the students.
As for my research trajectory, after this I will research the fine print associated with Bernie Sander's promises. I will do so in order to find out how he actually plans to keep his promises. This is valuable because it will be information that is not constantly being thrown at the public in hopes of attracting potential voters. I will then see what questions that the research poses and conduct additional research accordingly.
Michael Murphy Source 1
Documentation:
How does a university's athletic success influence the public's perception of its academic quality?
Goidel, Robert Kirby, and John Maxwell Hamilton. “Strengthening Higher Education Through
Gridiron Success? Public Perceptions Of
The Impact Of National Football Championships On Academic Quality.” Social
Science Quarterly (Wiley-Blackwell) 87.4 (2006): 851-862. Academic
Search Elite. Web. 29 Feb. 2016.
Exploration:
The intent of this article was to explore how the public connects athletic success with the academic quality of a particular university. This study was conducted through two statewide surveys consisting of randomly selected Louisiana residents. One was conducted in February 2004 and the other was conducted in January 2005. LSU won the BCS Championship in January 2004. Through previous knowledge, the researchers were able to come up with four hypotheses. Additionally, to measure the results and accuracy of the study, the researchers arranged data into a bunch of different categories depending on the respondent's income, education, age, attentiveness to public affairs, gender, and race. Respondents were also asked to rate colleges and universities relative to other states in the south and how they would change spending in specific government services like education, roads, environment, etc. These questions were to consider the public's view of universities. After explaining the background to the experiment, the results were announced. The majority of the public connects athletic success to academic quality. Although this is true, there was no support that the success of one season impacts the magnitude that the public connects academics and sports because both surveys provided similar results (LSU was not as good at football in the 2005 season). Also, it was found that a less educated person is more likely to believe in the connection between athletic and academic success through the results. The surveys for the differing years offered slightly different results, because people who were less attentive to public affairs were more likely to connect the two in 2005 but not 2004. In the next part, it was found that generally, people who saw a link between academics and athletics rated Louisiana schools more favorably. Also it seems that people who were older, more educated, and received a higher income evaluated Louisiana schools more negatively, but this was not very consistent. A final finding in 2005 was that respondents who strongly disagree that athletics affects academics are less likely to support increased spending on higher education, however this is not the case for 2004. Overall results seemed very inconsistent. However, it seems universities get public relations benefits from athletics because they gain support through members who would generally not care about higher education. Also the research was conducted in an area where the football team had two successful years, which could have influenced the results.
This article did not prove to me that the public actually sees a connection between athletic success and academic quality. Basically every single result from the study had an asterisk by it figuratively because the results were not consistent. The 2004 survey and the 2005 survey were getting opposing results very frequently. I originally thought that the athletic success would influence the public's perception. When I was younger, I would see a team playing a sport and if I became a fan of them, I would be interested in attending their school. This could be because I am a sports fan so I value athletics but also because I was young and did not know anything. Once I became at least a middle schooler, I realized that a school's athletic success did not translate to academics. Because everyone who was in the study was at least voting age, most of them also probably had this realization when they were still very young. This source does not completely alter my thinking. I think the conclusion of this article was interesting because it mentioned how the school's athletics tailors to the public that would not be interested in higher education originally. This is a way to try to spread a positive reputation through an observational and less educated path. I agree with the source that there is not complete correlation between athletics and academic success. This source definitely helps me answer my original research question because it provided a credible study that did not have consistent results to prove a correlation. But because this study was very regional, I do still question this answer. Although it does not seem likely, on a more national scale, a school's sports team's coverage could prove influential in at least attracting potential students to the school. Although athletics success does not correlate to academics, I think it is very possible that the schools still profit indirectly through sports. Schools probably get students whose first exposure was an athletic event, which provides many small benefits. Although about half of the people surveyed stated that they agree that college athletics make for a better academic university, these people were generally less educated so they will support the university no matter what. This shows that although people see a correlation, that does not mean that a school is academically worse if it is bad at sports, because of the lack of evidence from this study. Overall, this source has helped me affirm the belief that although certain people may see a school as academically better because of athletic results, this does not cause influential negative effects on the school.
I now must further research if the athletic public perception influences a school's academic function. If a school is looked at negatively because of sports, they might attract less students or faculty and will perform worse academically. My overall topic is about sports' influence on schools so I must keep exploring on a school's reputation through sports. Aside from this, I still need to research the social influences of sports and certain fiscal situations at schools because of sports. I now know that athletics mainly influence public relations, not actual academics of schools. The actual academic influences from the source were very limited.
Gabrielle Hesse Source 1
How does depression manifest itself in college students?
Gilchrist, Leigh Z. "Personal and Psychological Problems of College Students." Encyclopedia of Education. Ed. James W. Guthrie. 2nd ed. Vol. 5. New York: Macmillan Reference USA, 2002. 1871-1874. Gale Virtual Reference Library. Web. 28 Feb. 2016.
In this source, Leigh Z. Gilchrist discusses the many outcomes that college students are plagued with as a result of the stress and newness of higher education, and among depression, Gilchrist also discusses broken family dynamics, eating disorders, substance abuse, and a variety of other psychological disorders. Regarding depression, Gilchrist mentions that around 17% of the general American population undergoes, at some point, an episode of depression - however, she is also sure to point out that studies have shown that within the age group of 18-24, college students are twice as likely to develop clinical depression when compared to peers solely in the work force (not in college). She states that "depression manifests itself in varying degree from general symptomology to clinical disorder" and that the symptoms may impair cognitive, emotional, physical, and behavioral functioning. In this sense, Gilchrist argues that depression manifests itself in nearly every form possible in the lives of college students who suffer from it, and that this illness can cause detrimental effects in potential for success in higher education.
In reflecting on my initial research question for this blog post, exploring how depression may manifest itself in college students, I'm wondering if my question was narrow enough. Though research has shown that depression is much more common and invasive than many realize, depression can manifest itself in a large variety of different ways for different people. While many may experience similar themes of mood disorders, changes in sleeping and eating habits, and overall functionality in daily life, I feel it was unfair of me to assume that depression takes the same form for any college student; some experience severe symptoms, others mild, and this first source I chose did an effective job in helping me recognize that. I've become more aware of the potential "types" of depression, whether it be chronic, mild, or situational, and in this sense, I feel my source was also effective in answering my original question while helping spur me on to additional questions. Also, my thinking about my exploratory thesis has been re-shaped; since there is such a variety of different ways that depression can manifest itself in college students, I want to begin exploring the many different options for antidepressants there are and what, if any, differences there are between them. In addition to my exploratory thesis, I want to tie the antidepressants further into higher education itself. Since Gilchrist points out that college students are twice as likely to suffer from depression than non-college students, I've begun to wonder why exactly this is. I plan to begin researching what fundamental differences higher education offers that causes this shift in likelihood as well.
Throughout my analysis of this piece, my further questions circle around the idea of depression inside higher education versus depression outside higher education - what constitutes the difference? Why are college students twice as likely to develop clinical depression than their non-college student peers? How does higher education as a whole contribute to the likelihood of developing depression? I also want to further explore the many different ways that depression can manifest - what do extreme situations of depression look like in college students when compared to milder cases? What kind of negative, long-lasting effects can depression create for a struggling college student? I feel that these are all the important questions to be asking at this stage of my research because they will help me gain not only a better understanding of the role depression plays in higher education, but also the role higher education plays in depression. The best answers I've gained from my research so far include a better understanding of depression itself, the varying levels of severity, and just how prevalent it is on a typical college campus. These clarifications have enabled me to dig deeper in my continuing research and have taken me one step closer to arguing for or against the antidepressants themselves later.
Gilchrist, Leigh Z. "Personal and Psychological Problems of College Students." Encyclopedia of Education. Ed. James W. Guthrie. 2nd ed. Vol. 5. New York: Macmillan Reference USA, 2002. 1871-1874. Gale Virtual Reference Library. Web. 28 Feb. 2016.
In this source, Leigh Z. Gilchrist discusses the many outcomes that college students are plagued with as a result of the stress and newness of higher education, and among depression, Gilchrist also discusses broken family dynamics, eating disorders, substance abuse, and a variety of other psychological disorders. Regarding depression, Gilchrist mentions that around 17% of the general American population undergoes, at some point, an episode of depression - however, she is also sure to point out that studies have shown that within the age group of 18-24, college students are twice as likely to develop clinical depression when compared to peers solely in the work force (not in college). She states that "depression manifests itself in varying degree from general symptomology to clinical disorder" and that the symptoms may impair cognitive, emotional, physical, and behavioral functioning. In this sense, Gilchrist argues that depression manifests itself in nearly every form possible in the lives of college students who suffer from it, and that this illness can cause detrimental effects in potential for success in higher education.
In reflecting on my initial research question for this blog post, exploring how depression may manifest itself in college students, I'm wondering if my question was narrow enough. Though research has shown that depression is much more common and invasive than many realize, depression can manifest itself in a large variety of different ways for different people. While many may experience similar themes of mood disorders, changes in sleeping and eating habits, and overall functionality in daily life, I feel it was unfair of me to assume that depression takes the same form for any college student; some experience severe symptoms, others mild, and this first source I chose did an effective job in helping me recognize that. I've become more aware of the potential "types" of depression, whether it be chronic, mild, or situational, and in this sense, I feel my source was also effective in answering my original question while helping spur me on to additional questions. Also, my thinking about my exploratory thesis has been re-shaped; since there is such a variety of different ways that depression can manifest itself in college students, I want to begin exploring the many different options for antidepressants there are and what, if any, differences there are between them. In addition to my exploratory thesis, I want to tie the antidepressants further into higher education itself. Since Gilchrist points out that college students are twice as likely to suffer from depression than non-college students, I've begun to wonder why exactly this is. I plan to begin researching what fundamental differences higher education offers that causes this shift in likelihood as well.
Throughout my analysis of this piece, my further questions circle around the idea of depression inside higher education versus depression outside higher education - what constitutes the difference? Why are college students twice as likely to develop clinical depression than their non-college student peers? How does higher education as a whole contribute to the likelihood of developing depression? I also want to further explore the many different ways that depression can manifest - what do extreme situations of depression look like in college students when compared to milder cases? What kind of negative, long-lasting effects can depression create for a struggling college student? I feel that these are all the important questions to be asking at this stage of my research because they will help me gain not only a better understanding of the role depression plays in higher education, but also the role higher education plays in depression. The best answers I've gained from my research so far include a better understanding of depression itself, the varying levels of severity, and just how prevalent it is on a typical college campus. These clarifications have enabled me to dig deeper in my continuing research and have taken me one step closer to arguing for or against the antidepressants themselves later.
Lindsey Pascoe Source 1
Are higher education institutions themselves responsible for the increase in STEM field majors?
Hegerfeld-Baker, J., et al. "Factors Influencing Choosing Food and Agriculture Related STEM Majors." NACTA Journal 59.1 (2015): 34-40. ProQuest. Web. 29 Feb. 2016.
This article discusses a research study conducted on the factors that influence students' choosing of STEM field majors at higher education institutions. Because of the predicted increased need for professionals in the STEM field of 10% from 2010 to 2020, this study was conducted to see how universities can successfully recruit students to major in the STEM fields, particularly in food and agriculture. The sample population for this study included students in their first semester of college with majors in the STEM fields who completed this survey completely online. The survey was retrospective and prospective and included numerical values of self-perceived level of influence of different factors on choosing a major. Two influential factors in choosing a STEM field major found in this study were related to career ambitions. Students who valued financial gain and stability had an even greater likelihood of choosing a STEM field major. In conclusion, predictors relating to financial gain and security will have a higher odds ratio for students choosing a STEM major than those choosing a non-STEM major. Ultimately, colleges should use job satisfaction/enjoyment as well as financial stability factors to recruit students into the STEM field majors, because these were found to be the most influential predictors of major.
This article makes me question higher education institutions' intentions for recruiting students into STEM field majors. Is it for their own gain or to ensure students with the most career options possible after graduation? Are these universities interested at all in the passion of their students, or simply filling the future job quota? In addition, why are students so concerned about financial stability at such a young age. In my life, I chose my major based solely on the passion I have for science. If it means getting to do something I love, financial stability doesn't even come into my mind. I wonder what has caused students to be so financially concerned in choosing their major. Is it due to societies demands for financial success, their parents demands for financial stability, the universities demands for financially successful graduates? This source enhances my beliefs that the universities are responsible for the increase in STEM field majors because they are conducting research studies such as this just so they can better recruit students into these fields. Are students successful in regards to job satisfaction in the STEM fields when recruited by these universities? Or is the reverse happening? I thought originally that students would choose majors only based on what would make them happy in the future, but now I see that students also care greatly about financial stability, even when job satisfaction is still very important. I wonder how these factors compare against each other and which is more influential in choosing major. Is there a perceived sense that students will have job satisfaction if they are financially stable? Does financial stability equal job satisfaction in today's society? How has that changed over time?
This source has led me to ask the new questions "What intentions do universities have in recruiting students?", "How are outside influential factors responsible for students choosing STEM field majors over non-STEM field majors?", and "Are students more concerned with financial stability than job satisfaction or vice versa in today's society?". My research will now dive further into what other factors influence choosing majors and what intentions students have for choosing majors, and whether or not student autonomy is upheld in choosing majors. So far, I know that there are in fact many outside influences students face when choosing majors and that universities are looking to recruit students into STEM fields.
Hegerfeld-Baker, J., et al. "Factors Influencing Choosing Food and Agriculture Related STEM Majors." NACTA Journal 59.1 (2015): 34-40. ProQuest. Web. 29 Feb. 2016.
This article discusses a research study conducted on the factors that influence students' choosing of STEM field majors at higher education institutions. Because of the predicted increased need for professionals in the STEM field of 10% from 2010 to 2020, this study was conducted to see how universities can successfully recruit students to major in the STEM fields, particularly in food and agriculture. The sample population for this study included students in their first semester of college with majors in the STEM fields who completed this survey completely online. The survey was retrospective and prospective and included numerical values of self-perceived level of influence of different factors on choosing a major. Two influential factors in choosing a STEM field major found in this study were related to career ambitions. Students who valued financial gain and stability had an even greater likelihood of choosing a STEM field major. In conclusion, predictors relating to financial gain and security will have a higher odds ratio for students choosing a STEM major than those choosing a non-STEM major. Ultimately, colleges should use job satisfaction/enjoyment as well as financial stability factors to recruit students into the STEM field majors, because these were found to be the most influential predictors of major.
This article makes me question higher education institutions' intentions for recruiting students into STEM field majors. Is it for their own gain or to ensure students with the most career options possible after graduation? Are these universities interested at all in the passion of their students, or simply filling the future job quota? In addition, why are students so concerned about financial stability at such a young age. In my life, I chose my major based solely on the passion I have for science. If it means getting to do something I love, financial stability doesn't even come into my mind. I wonder what has caused students to be so financially concerned in choosing their major. Is it due to societies demands for financial success, their parents demands for financial stability, the universities demands for financially successful graduates? This source enhances my beliefs that the universities are responsible for the increase in STEM field majors because they are conducting research studies such as this just so they can better recruit students into these fields. Are students successful in regards to job satisfaction in the STEM fields when recruited by these universities? Or is the reverse happening? I thought originally that students would choose majors only based on what would make them happy in the future, but now I see that students also care greatly about financial stability, even when job satisfaction is still very important. I wonder how these factors compare against each other and which is more influential in choosing major. Is there a perceived sense that students will have job satisfaction if they are financially stable? Does financial stability equal job satisfaction in today's society? How has that changed over time?
This source has led me to ask the new questions "What intentions do universities have in recruiting students?", "How are outside influential factors responsible for students choosing STEM field majors over non-STEM field majors?", and "Are students more concerned with financial stability than job satisfaction or vice versa in today's society?". My research will now dive further into what other factors influence choosing majors and what intentions students have for choosing majors, and whether or not student autonomy is upheld in choosing majors. So far, I know that there are in fact many outside influences students face when choosing majors and that universities are looking to recruit students into STEM fields.
Brian King Source 1
Brian King Source 1
What is the worth of fraternity / sorority life?
Havel, Michael S., Georgianna L. Martin, Dustin D. Weeden, and Ernest T. Pascarella. "The Effects of Fraternity and Sorority Membership in the Fourth Year of College: A Detrimental or Value-Added Component of Undergraduate Education?" (2015). Web. 29 Feb. 2016.This article explores various studies on Fraternity and Sorority life and the effect that membership has on academic success, morality, social life, and many other aspects of life. Some studies concluded negative effects from greek life membership; "In the senior year of college, fraternity men’s GPA significantly lower than unaffiliated men’s, but no difference between sorority women and unaffiliated women," and "fraternity membership was responsible for lower-than-expected critical thinking skills compared to unaffiliated men at the end of the first year of college." Some other studies conducted and reviewed in this article, however, pointed to some positive effects of fraternity and sorority life; "senior fraternity/sorority members demonstrated more academic effort, more involvement in departmental clubs and professional organizations, and higher ability to function in groups." There were also numerous tests given on morality, reasoning, comprehension, etc. to members of fraternities and sororities. In the end, the article finds no direct effects, but some condition effects that leaves greek life with few positives and many criticisms.
In the beginning, I designed my question with the preconcieved notion that greek life was detrimental to academic success, hoping to be proven wrong throughout my research by finding sources that proved the worth of fraternities and sororities. This article, however, furthered my suspicions that greek life is harmful rather than helpful during a student's academic career. This article did, however, add aspects that I had not thought about before, such as how fraternities and sororities affect morality.
The article also covers direct effects and conditional effects, which has affected how I will view my research from now on. I do not have a complete answer, but I now have a clearer view with solid research and numerous studies to come closer to a conclusion. Some questions remain that the article brought up but did not answer; is there correlation between greek life membership and sexual assault? Is there a correlation between greek life membership and drug abuse?
Sunday, February 28, 2016
Daniela Berlinski Source 1
What are challenges faced
by low-income students and how do those challenges differ within the two
sectors described of low-income students?
Corrigan, Melanie E. "Beyond Access:
Persistence Challenges and the Diversity of Low-Income Students." New
Directions for Higher Education 2003.121 (2003): 25-34. Wiley
Periodicals. Web. 26 Feb. 2016.
Corrigan begins the article by
stating the difference between the different sectors in low-income students.
Her chapter examines two sectors: students that are dependent low-income
students and students who are independent low-income students. Dependent
students are just what it sounds—those who typically rely on their parents.
Independent students are usually older, married, veterans, or have children
where the income comes from the student or the spouse. She states that due to
public policy, access to higher education for low-income students has
increased. Her main argument is that low-income students face increasingly more
challenges on their journey to obtain a degree. The challenges she highlights are academic
background, family circumstances, institutional choice, attendance patterns,
and hours worked while enrolled. She
uses statistics to back her thought process. In regards to academic background
she notes that with many low-income dependent students, their parents didn’t
attend college giving them a disadvantage in experience and lack of personal
resources on information regarding higher education. Many low-income
independent students earned an alternative credential for their secondary
education degree. In regards to family circumstances she notes that low-income
students are more likely to be supporting a family, whether dependent or
independent. Due to the diverse sectors within the low-income population,
Corrigan notes that a homogeneous approach to the issue wouldn’t be effective.
In regards to institutional choice, she notes that many independent low-income
people choose short termed and lower priced programs, as many are eager to begin
their pathway to obtain economic rewards from their education. In regards to
attendance patterns, independent low-income students are more likely to solely
attend school part time where as dependent low-income students resemble middle
and upper income students in that they regularly attend school due to the
campus services offered. In regards to work, low-income independent students
were more likely to support a family and attend classes. She noted that since
low-income students worked longer hours, they were less likely to attain their
degrees after three years.
When
choosing to write about this topic I didn’t really think of low income in
different sectors, I just thought of it as a whole thing to analyze. What are
the different influences that each sector of low-income students has? There
must be more than two sectors within the topic. This source altered my
thinking, offering the idea of the open endedness of the term “low income
students.” She mentions in the text, “this diversity among the low income
population suggests that a homogeneous approach to support persistence of low
income students will not be effective.” I disagree with this point; yes not one
approach will benefit every single aspect of every single sector. However,
there are some risk factors that they have in common. The U.S. Department of
Education’s National Center for Education Statistics noted risk factors that
are associated with reduced likelihood of degree attainment: being independent,
attending part-time, working full time when enrolled, having dependents, being
a single parent, delaying entry to college, and not having a traditional high
school diploma. From these statistics, I began to disagree with her point, I
think that low income students share so many of these risks, it is possible to
create a plan to effectively combat some risk factors associated with low
income. This article answered my research question and showed not only where
these sectors differ but also where they intertwine.
This source
has led me to question the differences between independent low-income students
and middle and upper income students and dependent low-income students and
middle and upper income students. Do these risk factors affect acceptance into
higher education institutions or does it affect academic retention? It would be
interesting to find more information entailing acceptance and low-income
students. I think it also would be interesting to find in which sector is low
income more impactful, meaning where do the risk factors more closely affect
the opportunities to receive an education?
Ashley Yong Source 1
Should colleges consider race in admissions?
Jost, Kenneth. "Affirmative Action in Undergraduate Admissions." CQ Researcher 21 Sept. 2001: 737-60. Web. 28 Feb. 2016.
The article looks at affirmative action from the view of its
progression history, starting with the Gratz v. Bollinger case the
University of Michigan flagship Ann Arbor campus. The case set a precedent for
how federal judges evaluated affirmative action cases based on how similar
college's admission processes were to quota systems. While NAACP Legal Defense
Fund associate director-counsel Theodore Shaw says, “The overwhelming
majority of students who apply to highly selective institutions are still
white. If we are not conscious of selecting minority students, they're not
going to be there,” while Roger Clegg Center for Equal Opportunity general
counsel says, “It's immoral. It's illegal. It stigmatizes the beneficiary.
It encourages hypocrisy. It lowers standards. It encourages the use of
stereotypes.” The article also has a timeline of affirmative action's growth
and how certain politicians, court cases and universities handled it and
details public reaction to the implementation of affirmative action in the late
1900s, which was generally negative both politically and legally. But, with any
poll, results were fickle. People responded well to words like
"affirmative action" but not to "racial preferences."
This source makes me think of when I visited my high school during winter break of 2015. I talked to my former Word Processing teacher, a white woman in her 70s, and she brought up the Concerned Student 1950 movement at Mizzou complaining specifically about their demands of affirmative action in hiring. Before I had talked to her, I had been a strong advocate of affirmative action. But, she brought up a point that I found interesting and made me question my beliefs. She said, "If we choose minority students over more qualified white students in the college admissions process, why don't we do the same for white students in college athletics?" After winter break, I brought up what she said to students on my floor. One white student said, "But, black people, who heavily dominate sports like basketball, never did anything to white people to be better at them skill-wise. White people are not just inherently smarter than minorities. It all depends on what opportunities they were presented with in their education, which can largely be based on socioeconomic factors." So this made me question, how is affirmative action "hypocrisy" as Clegg says? Is acknowledging race racist and "immoral"? It makes me think that while some think affirmative action is not legal, about which I have not developed a clear opinion, is it not the moral thing to do? It makes me wonder how people would react to affirmative action/racial preferences if they knew exactly what it entailed. The new idea it makes me question is how can we gauge an unbiased public opinion poll to truly see how the general public feels about affirmative action and, whichever way it swings, should lawmakers take that into account when making decisions? I agree with Shaw as he asserts that diversity in higher education is crucial because not only does it give minority students opportunities they may not have had earlier, but it can give white students a different perspective of the world through different culture and meeting diverse people. It does not lead me to an answer for the research question because it actually poses more questions than it answers and makes me realize the number of different facets of affirmative action and how many things we need to consider when establishing a system, such as public opinion, law, morality, etc.
The new questions this source has led me to ask include, "Should colleges use race-based admissions policies to remedy discrimination against minorities?" "Should colleges use race-based admissions policies to promote diversity in their student populations?" and "Should colleges adopt other policies to try to increase minority enrollment? If so, what system works best and is most fair?" These are important to explore and attempt to answer before we can assess the overarching question/thesis of "What does affirmative action tell us about the stake of minority students in higher education?" Next, I will explore an article on racial preferences, also from CQ Researcher.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)