Search results

In 2014–2015, a group of first-time freshman students participated in the Education as the Practice of Freedom Project. The project pedagogy and curriculum were inspired by Critical Pedagogy, Critical Race Theory of Education, and Anti-Colonial Schooling; they incorporated a series of social-psychological reflective assignments and activities (stereo-type threat, growth mindset, and relevance interventions) developed to transform the way students perceive, experience, and transition to higher education. This research seeks to explore as up to what extent the aforementioned pedagogical frameworks amends social-psychological academic stressors that affect how the students of the Historically Black Colleges and Universities perceive, experience, and transition to higher education, with a particular focus on what this pedagogical framework in first year seminar looks like in practice. A transformative research design was employed for this research project that triangulates qualitative and quantitative data (auto-ethnographic case-study), with in-depth interviews of faculty, focus groups with students, and a document analysis of syllabi, lesson plans, assignments, a formative experiment, and institutional data analysis. This research is praxis driven with an intent to influence educators, administrators, stakeholders, and anyone who is about that life.

Findings within the last decade reveal a core set of activities that have been correlated to student success metrics such as persistence, retention, and graduation (Kuh, 2008). These research-based activities are called high-impact practices (HIPs). Students who have participated in HIPs have shown gains in retention, in persistence, intellectually and in an overall positive college experience. This chapter provides an overview of 10 HIPs and their importance and benefits to underserved students, that is, first-generation college students, low-income college students, and underrepresented students of color such as African American, Latino/a, and Native American. Findings within the chapter also recognize how HIPs can be extremely beneficial for historically Black colleges and universities to build capacity and to ensure student success, particularly in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM).

Fundamental theories of power and status have developed sufficiently to apply in educational and organizational contexts. The path from basic theory to program development is neither simple nor direct. We trace the application of theoretical principles taken from network exchange theories of power as well as status characteristics and expectation states theories through the interdisciplinary field of leadership studies to applications that interrelate basic research, applied research, undergraduate educational programs, and organizational development. Two proposals result (1) a leadership training program that will produce university graduates with effective leadership skills, while also bringing diverse high school students to participate in a university program and (2) basic status characteristics research to explain the glass ceiling phenomenon.

In the United States, rights-based laws have opened major social institutions to previously marginalized groups, altering the terrain on which social movements act, creating opportunities for disruption, and expanding the forms protest takes. This research is an attempt to add to our understanding of contemporary protest. I use data from 50 open-ended, loosely structured interviews with women feminist PhD sociologists working at U.S. (and 1 Canadian) colleges and universities as a lens through which to examine contemporary protest. These in-depth interviews reveal that the demand-making and discursive protest of feminists in academia is rooted in the empowering intersections of their collective feminist identities and disrupts hegemonic practices in the academy and beyond. My findings indicate that social movement theory must move beyond restrictive notions of potential movement targets, activist locations, and strategies; and past narrow conceptualizations of collective action and movement goals.

Purpose – Indiana University Purdue University Indianapolis (IUPUI) developed learning communities incorporating a first year seminar to serve all entering students in their first semesters of university study to increase student academic achievement and persistence.

Methodology/approach – The first year seminars are taught by an instructional team of faculty member, academic advisor, student mentor, and librarian. There is an instructional template for the more than 150 sections of the seminar taught each fall across – academic units rather than a common syllabus. The seminar is often coupled with writing, communication, psychology, or other general education course with students in a cohort group learning together across courses.

Findings – Program evaluation results consistently show a 9% positive impact on retention when comparing student outcomes for participants vs. nonparticipants, controlling for background characteristics.

Research limitations/implications – This structured approach serving nearly all entering students as a required course reinforces the importance of mandating interventions on a large scale, in a context of planning and improvement.

Practical implications – The institution developed the program over 20 years, and revisions to the program have been based on program evaluation. Careful attention to experiences before the learning communities (orientation programs in the summer and bridge programs just before the beginning of the academic year) and after the learning communities when the students move to their second semesters of study is critical.

Social implications – Approximately half the students in the learning communities are first generation college students and approximately half are low income students. This intervention has been central to the university's context of widening participation in higher education.

Alvin Hansen and John Williams’ Fiscal Policy Seminar at Harvard University is widely regarded as a key mechanism for the spread of Keynesianism in the United States. An original and regular participant, Richard A. Musgrave was invited to prepare remarks for the fiftieth anniversary of the seminar in 1988. These were never published, though a copy was filed with Musgrave’s papers at Princeton University. Their reproduction here is important for several reasons. First, it is one of the last reminiscences of the original participants. Second, the remarks make an important contribution to our understanding of the Harvard School of macro-fiscal policy. Third, the remarks provide interesting insights into Musgrave’s views on national economic policymaking as well as the intersection between theory and practice. The reminiscence demonstrates the importance of the seminar in shifting Musgrave’s research focus and moving him to a more pragmatic approach to public finance.

In this paper, we take up an autoethnographic review of literature on doctoral programs in order to engage notions of doctoral subjects. While the paper basically proceeds by taking up and entwining these methods, it is neither/both an autoethnography nor/and a literature review. Rather, this work – like many spaces of a doctoral seminar – emerges as an uncontainable, unpredictable monster. We have also placed a kind of “I” at the center of this project, and yet use a posthuman reading of what this “I” might be. We search for a preconfigured “I” in the literature and create an “I/we” of doctoral experiences that never quite exists and yet moves and haunts us. We take up a tentative (post-)monstrous position that recognizes our cruel attachment to the “good” doctoral student, a subject that remains the inevitable (im)possibility of graduate school. Reviewing literature as an ethnographic practice and looking at ethnography as textual helps us smash these methods together. Yet, at any moment, we defy our methods – ignoring findings in the literature and possibly making up autoethnographic stories that never happened to us. Rather than sloppy academic work, this move intends to focus on thinkable and intelligible experiences as those belonging to doctoral students/studies/school instead of focusing on “authentic” experiences of well defined “researchers.” We hope our project provides space to question the very categories and credentials built into doctoral studies by decentering the “doctoral student” subject.

Purpose – Through a description of changes in institutional approaches to academic advising, this case study provides strategies for improving retention rates of first-year students deemed ‘at-risk’ of leaving university before second-year enrolment.

Methodology/approach – The study targets first-years who have been identified as ‘at-risk’ in the College of Liberal Arts (CLA) at Temple University in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. Temple is a large public research institution in the United States, home to approximately 35,000 full-time equivalent (FTE) students, of whom, 6,000 are enrolled in the CLA. The current case study focuses on the systematic and intentional processes developed by academic advisors or tutors in CLA to ensure students' progression from their first to second year. Project 2013, named for the intended graduation year of the initial target population, is a proactive retention initiative, and this study delineates the evolution of the innovation, development of the target group, project objectives, implementation of retention strategies, outcomes of the project, successes, limitations and future considerations.

Findings – Through sustained highly personalised interventions with first-year ‘at-risk’ students, the retention rate for this population improved by nearly 7% over the University's average for similar students and met the overall retention rate of the University's general student population.

Practical implications – The outcomes of this project suggest that with careful, strategic planning, clear execution by facilitators and ongoing assessment of such interventions, student retention and, by extension, persistence to graduation should improve significantly enough to warrant strong, ongoing institutional commitment.

Films, besides serving as an important instructive means to deliver sociological content, have also recently made their way into more structured courses on Media Sociology. It becomes particularly pertinent for cultivating global sociological imagination in the classroom. This chapter is a pedagogical reflection discussing the potentials of integrating Bollywood films into a first-year seminar, the content of which at many levels is comparable to basic sociology classes. The reflection is based out of the experience of teaching a freshmen class on Bollywood to a body of students with little past exposure, or knowledge of this movie industry. The chapter will initiate a dialogue on strategies of introducing the content, encouraging engagement and critical thinking, how to build on essential global sociological imagination along with a summary of what works and what does not. For this chapter, I will detail on the three contemporary Bollywood films (Ishaqzaade, Monsoon Wedding, and Dor), which I use to engage in a dialogue on family, class, and gender. Next, I will apply Sutherland and Fetley’s (2013) framework to explore the sociological relevance of these films (thus validating my choice of these works for pedagogical purposes) and also demonstrate possible hegemonic versus oppositional ways of reading these texts, which students are supposed to decipher and apply. Contemporary Bollywood films in many ways mirror aspects of the life course experienced in the United States and can be instrumental in encouraging a diverse undergraduate curriculum.

Students enter college with the desire to make a positive impact on the world. They are also likely to enter higher education with literacy skills that need nurturing and support if students are to succeed in college and positively contribute to the world. Combining academic content and reading instruction in a service learning framework provides the focus for reading and action and uses students’ energy to solve problems. This chapter describes an educational approach that places reading and content learning in the service of the community. This approach includes explicit reading instruction, focused on introducing students to information literacy and reading strategies for common forms of texts aligned with the stages of service learning.