Search results

Using a panel of over 433,000 college students from over 600 institutions of higher education in the USA, we investigate students’ opinions of leadership skill development during their undergraduate tenure.

The data used in this analysis come from the Higher Education Research Institute, which runs the Cooperative Institutional Research Program (CIRP) housed at the University of California, Los Angeles. Among others, the CIRP administers two surveys known as The Freshman Survey (TFS) and the College Senior Survey (CSS).

The present research supports the extant literature and conventional wisdom of academic and student affairs professionals with regards to engagement in leadership classes or training where students have an opportunity to increase their knowledge bases through course content, and when there are opportunities for them to apply leadership principles, the students are more likely to report an increase in leadership capacity upon completion of their collegiate degree.

If colleges and universities are serious about fulfilling their espoused visions, then it is essential that awareness of leadership courses and applied opportunities be heightened and made a strategic priority to ensure resources are allocated in appropriate places to support these key efforts. It also suggests greater collaboration between academic and student affairs, as well as other departments (e.g. athletics and centers), is needed, as well as prioritizing experiential learning.

Covert research has a mixed reputation within the scientific community. Some are unsure of its moral worth, others would proscribe it entirely. This reputation stems largely from a lack of knowledge about the reasons for choosing the covert method. In this chapter, these reasons will be reconstructed in detail and all the elements that will allow one to judge the level of ethicality of covert research will be laid out for the reader. In particular, the chapter will answer the following questions: What harms can result from covert research to the subjects participating in the research? Is covert research necessarily deceptive? In which cases is it ethically permissible for a researcher to deceive? What is the scientific added value of the covert research, that is, what does covert research discover that overt research does not? What are the risks to researchers acting undercover? Finally, some suggestions will be offered to research ethics reviewers to help in their appraisal of covert research.