Alex Holten Source 5

How is a professor expected to connect with generation Y if there is such a huge gap in understanding between professors and students?

Peter, Reilly. "Understanding and Teaching Generation Y." Understanding and Teaching Generation Y (2012): 1-10. ERIC. 2012. Web. 8 Mar. 2016. <http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ971235.pdf>.

With technology being newly implanted into our society, there is a huge ability gap in the use and understanding of technology between professors and students. Our generation is much more technologically intelligent than the preceding generation. Does our tech-savviness impair us from being able to use technology as it was intended in the classroom by older generations? The previous sources have assumed that in order to fix the problem of technology in the classroom, we need to further the use of technology. Why are we adding more technology if our generation is impaired by the use of it? Should we be working backwards? Should professors be the only one in the classroom to have access to technology? If a professor is lecturing, why should students need anything else besides a pen and paper to learn? Technology can be used during time outside of the classroom. Maybe we should be reversing the use of technology in the classroom instead of working so hard to better it by adding more. Generation Y, or the Net Gen, is a generation born into "information technology... prefer to multitask rather than focus on one thing at a time... more attracted to peer or web video than what their professors have to say. (1)" We have not known a world without technology. The failure to look at the subjects was the key fallback in the sources I have already looked at. Are these characteristics basically intrinsic? Is the media dependency we show now in our higher education classrooms a direct result of the generation we were brought up in? On page 2, a question in the source arose: How can teachers compare to the entertainment Generation Y students receive while at home?

This source allowed me to think deeper into the reasoning of our generation. I now think that teachers should not be searching for the answers in measures of student achievement because the entirety of the generation is constant. They should be researching the reverse of technology in the classroom as well as the further integration. The key issue is entertainment in the classroom, so entertain them. Why should students' personal technological devices be allowed in the classroom if all they are doing is causing distraction? At least if devices are banned, students are more conscious when they are sneaking a peek at social media, opposed to the luxury of being able to freely scroll while a professor lectures. A professor has all the tools to entertain a student, but the question is, how do they connect with us if they make us mad by taking away our toys? The answer is visual learning.

The other sources examined the quantitative effects on technology in the classroom compared to other students of the same generation. Yeah, of course technology will improve grades compared to traditional classrooms because the traditional classroom, technology free does not appeal to us. However, this source brings up the idea of the professor "entertaining" the students, while the students remain technology free. I like the way this source thought more critically about the problem than the other sources. All studies these days look for quantitative data instead of observable. The source, however, did have some flaws as it neglected to take into consideration the poor of society and their lack of upbringing in the technological world.

Being my last source, I have a pretty clear understanding of my research and where it has gone, and how it has altered my thinking. Many new ideas have helped me gain a better understanding of technology in higher education. Most of my sources worked together, disagreeing on some concepts, but all working towards the betterment of higher education students. The journals have greatly increased my critical thinking process, and I think it will be easy to map out the exploratory paper.

1. Generation Y (1981–1999). This gen- eration came into being during the last two decades of the 20th century. Its members are identified as confident and technologically advanced, and they come with a sense of entitlement.
   
   

Steven Lotz Source 5

McCardle, Peggy D., and Virginia Wise. Berninger. Narrowing the Achievement Gap for Native American Students: Paying the Educational Debt. New York: Routledge, 2015. Print.

1.) What are some solutions to decreasing this gap between Native Americans and all other minority students?

2.) This book truly outlines how Native Americans have tried to pay the price of higher education for their children. The book tries to raise cultural awareness about Native Americans to make it easier to welcome these marginalized students into higher education. This book intends to illuminate the educational gap that exists between white college students and Native American college students.

3.) This really adds a personal experience to my research. The stories in each of these chapters provides great insight into what it is like trying to get a college education from the point of view of the Native American student. Without any schema about this race of students, this book definitely showed me the true struggle of being a minority student. It brings about the new idea of the Native American struggle of attending college.

4.)Both this source and my fourth source elaborate on how hard it is to be a Native American student and how the United States should assist these students in decreasing the education gap between the white majority and the Native American minority.

5.) My plan, now that I have all my sources, is to develop the key ideas I want to explore to create a well-rounded argument for this topic. Right now, I have a lot of reasons that Native Americans are truly ignored compared to other minorities in the United States.

Daniela Berlinski Source 4

How do the factors that affect academic success within college specifically impact first generation low income college students?

Engle, Jennifer. "Postsecondary access and success for first-generation college students." American Academic 3.1 (2007): 25-48.

            The author begins the paper by stating that students whose parents didn’t attend college are at a disadvantage due to the many resources that they are missing out on and the many challenges they face while applying and staying in college. She begins by listing the characteristics of first generation students, listing that the status of being a first-generation college student in itself is a risk factor. She then notes that first generation college students also at this disadvantage due to the fact that less first generation students apply to graduate school. Which in turn means an increase in the income gap due to the first generations student’s lack of graduate school attendance. The author then comments on factors that affect access to college which include academic preparation, aspirations, planning, and the college decision. She notes that a high school curriculum with a lot of math is beneficial to the improvement and readiness of the student.  In regards to academic preparation for college, Engle notes that first generation students are at a disadvantage due to the fact that their parents lack this experience to help ease their transition or even support it. The article notes studies that found that first generation students have lower desires to get a degree. This also has to do with the lack of support from teachers, counselors, and parents due to the fact that there is an increase in lower levels of academic success. In another study it was found that parent support is the most significant factor that influences whether or not the student is interested and enrolls in college. He mentions that it is more difficult for first generation students to plan for college because it is just as new of an experience to them as it is for their parents. In regards to choosing a college, many first generation students choose a university that is affordable, can be finished in a short amount of time, and has the flexibility where one could work and study. They also noted that students who attend these less selective universities typically have lower graduation rates, even though they control for those certain kind of characteristics. Finally she notes the problems that are associated with success while in college: academic and social integration and cultural adaptation.

            Something that I hadn’t really thought about while analyzing this situation was the impact of cultural adaptation on a first year college student. She notes that many first generation students describe their home life as compared to their college life as “worlds apart.” For many first generation college students, the act of going to college sets them apart from their family. Since they are in a sense “breaking family traditions” it creates a rift between the student and the family. Here we see the impact of family support, because if not the student sees the rift that attending college will cause within the family. I disagree with the text when it states that many students don’t make use of the programs offered through the Student Success Centers. Here at Mizzou if you receive a scholarship through the Academic Retention Services you are required to attend meetings and get points to be able to keep the scholarship. This requirement offers the opportunity of help for those who seek it.

            In Paul Thayer’s article he speaks about the need to make institutional changes that take into account the experiences of first generation low-income students. He speaks of the importance of implementing these new retention strategies to improve the experience of first generation low-income students. In comparison, Eagle comments less on the improvement of these retention strategies but rather on the factors that play into the experience that these first generation low-income students have.

            This article has led me to ask the “what now” question. Since these students have this certain kind of experience, what is the pathway to motivate these students to live successful lives, even if their own family members do not support them? I think it would be interesting to find an article that takes these supposed “negative factors” to make a positive impact on the student.

Braden Rucinski: Source 4

Why are elite Greek organizations composed of almost entirely straight, white, middle-class students?

DeSantis, Alan D. Inside Greek U.: Fraternities, Sororities, and the Pursuit of Pleasure, Power, and Prestige. Lexington: U of Kentucky, 2007. Print.

In his book, Dr. DeSantis explains that there are numerous reasons that Greek organizations remain homogeneous. The first of these factors is self-identification: DeSantis explains that he only thinks of himself as an Italian-American when he is around other Italian-Americans, or when Italian culture is discussed. When students pledge Greek, they are surrounded by others that are straight, white, middle-class and hyper-masculine or hyper-feminine, so they don't have to think of the other identities that they may have, such as poet, helper, working-class, bi-sexual, etc. Therefore, these Greek students think their own race, class, ethnicity is just natural and universal. Another reason is racial nepotism-- white Greek students downright favor whites when they go pledge, and Greek organizations are worried about what having black students will do to their reputation. Finally, some of the xenophobia is not deliberate-- people in general tend to like a person and feel comfortable around them when they feel like they have things in common, be it race, gender, creed, sexual orientation, or religion.

 This book took my argument exploration on a journey in another direction. It dealt with the role of gender in fraternities and sororities, and unfortunately confirmed all of my worst fears about Greek Life-- they are elitist organizations that endorse rape, poor body image, cheating (both kinds), fighting, homophobia, drug abuse and alcoholism. Fraternities are much more negative than sororities, but women typically perform better in college than males anyway. However, while only a small percentage of people every join a Greek organization in college, the majority of politicians and business leaders were involved with Greek life. I wish I could have more of a positive view about Greek organizations, but they largely stand guilty as accused.

This source communicates with Source 1 regarding the stereotypes of Greek Life-- this book holds that they are mostly true. It speaks out against Source 2-- it suggests that the way that Greeks want to portray themselves does not measure up with the xenophobic ways these organizations really act. The book seems to provide evidence against Source 3. Source 3 suggests that men in fraternities develop higher moral capabilities than non-Greeks, but this is clearly not the case. Over half of the respondents in Source 3 did not conduct an exit interview a few years later, so it is likely that the more "moral" respondents of Greek Life felt obligated to complete the exit interview, while the data of the typical sloppy Greek males was never recorded (they ignored the exit interview). Also, level of morality is self-reported, so Greek males, feeling defensive or guilty about their actions in college, may have exaggerated their moral accomplishments.

Unfortunately, I was not able to glean as much useful information about student backgrounds as I wanted from this book. I was able to build up a case that the "rush" process (when freshman are recruited) leads to homogeneous, and negative college environments, but I couldn't find reliable information about what kinds of students successfully join fraternities/sororities. Certainly ones that are attractive, well off, thin/buff, and masculine/feminine get in, but this isn't enough information. Is it possible that Greek Organizations merely uphold the status quo, and nothing else? Surely this is damaging in itself, but do Greek Organizations steer members to become more racist, homophobic, and gender stratified? Finding a direct cause and effect would be useful in developing a convincing argument about the state of Greek life in American universities.

Steven Lotz Source 4

United States. Congress. Senate. Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions. Securing Educational Opportunities for Native American College Students : the Native American Education Act of 2012 : Field Hearing of the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions, United States Senate, One Hundred Twelfth Congress, Second Session, on Examining How We Fund Educational Institutions That Operate under a Mandate to Provide Free Tuition for Native American Students, Focusing on Advancing Educational Opportunities for Native American Students, August 22, 2012 (Denver, CO). Washington :U.S. Government Publishing Office, 2015. Print.

1.) I hope to find out the steps the US government is trying to take to improve the amount of Native Americans in higher education.

2.) This is a hearing about all the many ways the US government can try and improve the number of Native Americans in higher education. The point of this meeting was to try a determine how to improve opportunities for Native Americans in higher education.

3.) This article was great at demonstrating what steps the United States government was taking to improve education access for Native Americans who truly need it. I really learned how the government is actually trying to improve access to higher education by funding programs specifically designed to assist Native Americans

4.) This responds to my first source by giving more examples of how the US government can better help the Native American students that really want to attend college, but they just don't have the funds to get this higher education.

5.) I know want to ask "Do these discussion bring us any closer to a true solution to the crisis of Native Americans being unable to receive a higher education?"

Katie Hanson Source 4

What are the benefits of teacher student interaction?

Hagenauer, Gerda, and Simone E. Volet. "Teacher–student Relationship at University: An Important Yet Under-researched Field." Oxford Review of Education 40.3 (2014): 370-88. Web. 6 Mar. 2016.

In this article the author argues that teacher-student relationships in higher education have not been researched to the extent they should. There is a lot of research in grade school but as students start to get older less and less focused is placed on the relationship. The author believes that actually more research should be focused on teacher-student relationship. He then goes on to give reasons for why it should be investigated more into: investigate if TSRs lead to lower student drop out rates, the relationship also affects teachers making them feel like they belong to the university, and to improve teaching methods to improve academics. The author then goes on to summarize all the research that has been done on the subjects of TSR and explains their limitations and where to expand. There is one important quote though "Furthermore, positive relationships with university teachers not only contribute to the retention of students but also facilitate other factors, such as commitment (Strauss &Volkwein, 2004), effort (Lundberg & Schreiner, 2004), motivation (Rugutt & Chemosit, 2009; Zepke & Leach, 2010), satisfaction (Calvo et al., 2010; Dobranska & Frymier 2004; Trigwell, 2005), engagement (Zepke & Leach, 2010), deep-learning approaches (Trigwell, 2005), achievement, and intellectual development (e.g., critical thinking, learning fundamental principles; Halawah, 2006). Pascarella and Terenzini (2005) empirically show the independent influence of TSR on students’ successful learning, controlling for various personal characteristics (e.g., gender, area of study, achievement orientation)." on page 11. The author also mentions that relationships with teacher leave students with a feeling of belonging to the university that they are enrolled in.

I must admit I was so relieved to have finally found this source. I agree with the authors that there is little research about this topic because I have had such a tough time finding any of it. I thought it was interesting all the effects of a TSR has that aren't simply academic. The sense of belonging to a campus is one that I had never thought about before but it makes sense. I feel like TSR also helps teach students about how to have professional relationships with professors and how to maintain them. I think I do need to read this and other articles again to get another understanding of them. This source does answer questions about benefits but also makes it clear that there still needs to be much more research in the area. There is that to take into mind.

This source responds to the first source and about some of the reasons that students were not satisfied with their courses. I feel like this article would disagree with the guy who talked about the validly of grades because he was all against teacher's emotional feelings. This article is very much about students and teacher developing a relationship and getting to know each other. I feel like I agree with this author much more then the grade guy.

I think I want to still look into this question a bit more. There is another article, (note to self article 2 sent by library) that I want to look into. I am not sure where to go from here though. Maybe looking more into the type of character who is actually taking these classes. I feel like that is an important aspect I haven't yet looked at in detail.

Charlie Clarke Source 5

Thesis Question: How would paying revenue-creating student-athletes influence their academic motivation and performance?

Entry Question: How would paying athletes hurt them academically?

Source: Ross, Theodore. "Cracking the Cartel." New Republic. N.p., 1 Sept. 2015. Web. 07 Mar. 2016.

This article, subtitled "Don't Pay College Athletes" discusses many different topics regarding the wealth distribution among revenue-creating student-athletes. Ross comes from a background in teaching, with specific courses discussing his teachings with college athletes. He uses his knowledge and experience to analytically recollect these moments and build arguments off of them. In the later stages of his article, Ross examines the ramifications of payment and continuously gives reasons not to award student-athletes with money.

I really enjoyed reading this piece. One thing Ross discusses is the clear counterpart, and makes note of it quite often throughout his article, which boosts his credibility. Another thing that makes Ross convincing is his experiences in teaching these athletes and the objectiveness that follows. I think this will be an important source for me to examine in the ladder portion of my essay.

This can be put in synthesis with nearly all of my previous sources, but in particular, the 'Bilas argument' source. Bilas, who is using his logic and common sense, didn't have as quality of resources to examine the issue as Ross did. However, they each still present valid points and would argue with each other. Bilal would argue that money would give student-athletes incentive to stay in school longer. Ross' main point argues that paying college athletes would not increase their motivation to academic perform at a higher level. He argues, in fact, that money de-values the academic portion of the argument. I think these two could go back an forth.

This has forwarded my thinking drastically. I now swing towards the side of not paying college athletes because I believe what Ross is saying, that student athletes don't have extra motivation with compensation, which actually de-values the educational side of college. I think that I am pretty close to finished. I'm going to find one more source that touches on the academic ramifications of paying student-athletes, but I think I'm pretty close to done.

T

\\