My case study focused on the message communicated through the university’s fundraising campaign titled For the Bold and sought to determine if the campaign messaging influenced decision-making of first-generation sophomores (FGS) attending William & Mary as they selected majors and formed career choices. The campaign message emphasized the benefits of boldness, and, for FGS, the campaign’s message could have shaped their self-efficacy beliefs as they pursued majors and professional aspirations. The study applied Bandura’s (1986) social cognitive theory to determine how self-efficacy contributed to the decisions made by participants. Additionally, the use of Bronfenbrenner’s (1993) developmental ecology model helped situate the participants’ motivations tied to the backgrounds and surroundings of FGS as they progressed through their second-year experience of higher education. An online survey was administered in Fall 2020 to all 149 FGS at William & Mary to determine the levels of self-efficacy beliefs among the group. A total of 42 students responded (28% response rate), and 30 volunteered to participate in a follow-up interview. Ultimately, 12 students participated in individual virtual interviews. Most of the 12 participants came into college with a major in mind or decided on a major in their first year after taking a series of courses. Findings from these interviews determined a high awareness of the For the Bold campaign among participants yet scant influence of the branded fundraising campaign on the decisions the participants made regarding their choice of major or career paths.

Graduate school may be the first time in a student’s higher education career where they apply ethical practices in a real-world study. Yet the problem of misconduct in graduate education has existed for decades. Specifically, students in graduate programs in business, pharmacy, and dentistry are the highest graduate student populations to admit to doing some form of cheating in their graduate program. This policy evaluation used Stufflebeam and Coryn’s (2014) context, input, processes, and products (CIPP) model of evaluation to examine the activities and processes of a scholarly ethics and integrity requirement for graduate students at a large rural land-grant institution. A mixed methods study was used to evaluate the ways in which randomly selected graduate programs articulate how they planned to meet the required topics of the scholarly ethics and integrity requirement, and how scholarly ethics and integrity are reflected in those plans. A content analysis was used for the first evaluation question on how the programs will meet the requirement and yielded quantitative data. A qualitative analysis using a priori coding was used to answer the second evaluation question on how scholarly ethics and integrity are reflected in the plans. The findings from this evaluation showed that the required topics of the scholarly ethics and integrity requirement are being met, yet further analysis indicated that how scholarly ethics and integrity are addressed differ by programs and disciplines. Programs relied heavily on program courses to meet the policy requirements. Additionally, the findings highlight a lack of evaluation of policy or process for assuring graduate students are well versed in ethics and integrity. While this study found that the requirements of the institution’s Scholarly Ethics and Integrity requirement were met, the institution has not conducted an evaluation of the policy in practice to learn if students have acquired the skills to conduct scholarly work using standards of ethics and integrity.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.