First-generation students are estimated to comprise nearly 25 percent of the current national undergraduate college population. First-generation student status is defined as students for whom neither parent attended college (Choy, 2001; Chen & Carroll, 2005; Engle, 2007; Nunez & Cuccaro-Alamin, 1998; Pryor et al., 2006; Ross et al., 2012) or neither parent graduated from college (Mehta, Newbold, & O'Rourke, 2011; Pike & Kuh, 2005). It may take these students longer to earn the bachelor's degree, they may be less prepared for the academic and social environment of college, many could drop out before graduation, and the majority will enroll only on a part-time basis because they work more hours per week than they attend class (Choy, 2001; Terenzini, Springer, Yaeger, & Pascarella, 1996). And yet, many persist to earn the bachelor's degree, and some will persevere to enroll in a master's degree program. The purpose of this phenomenological research study was to explore the influences of academic self-efficacy and motivational factors that adult first-generation master's students enrolled in a public, preeminent research university ascribe to their academic persistence. The first-generation master's students' experience was discovered through one-on-one interviews and journaling exercises, revealing the essence of these adult learners who pursue graduate work and the elements that informed their decision to return to school. The current study also explored whether any of the first-generation undergraduate student experiences influenced how the participants experienced graduate school. Implications of this research will provide insight for college and university faculty, staff, and administrators who work with first-generation master's students. The significance of this study will contribute to an understudied area of research about a distinct student population: the adult first-generation student at the master's level.

This comparative case study examined the development, design, and evolution of two student affairs fundraising programs, each led by a full-time development officer, at public research universities in the Southeastern region of the United States. The purpose of the study was to identify practices and strategies for higher education administrators exploring, creating, or reframing student affairs fundraising programs that traverse advancement and student affairs divisions. The research is timely given the increased role of philanthropy in funding public higher education institutions (Giving USA, 2018) and the growing number of student affairs fundraising programs (Crowe, 2011). Bolman and Deal's (2017) four organization frames—structural, human resources, political, and symbolic—provided the theoretical lens to examine both programs. Key findings centered on the programs' approach to building organizational structures that aligned with strategic goals (structural frame), navigating institutional development landscapes (political frame), creating a compelling vision to inspire philanthropic support (symbolic frame), and fostering support from leadership (human resources frame). Major implications for practice include a proposed test for determining whether an institution is prepared to start a student affairs fundraising program, strategies for integrating the program with institutional advancement, a proposed staffing model, approaches for navigating institutional fundraising environments built for academics and athletics fundraising, and tactics for establishing student affairs philanthropic priorities. The research updates the comparative case study literature on student affairs fundraising programs and illuminate strategies for practitioners exploring, creating, or evolving such programs.

The principal purpose of this program evaluation was to determine how the 2010–2019 alumni of the William & Mary (W&M) D.C. Summer Institutes (DCSI) perceived their participation helped them achieve career readiness. Existing literature on experiential learning methods and practices has suggested great value in such opportunities, but less information existed about the outcomes of internship programs in higher education. As leaders consider what their institutional operations look like following the COVID-19 global pandemic and demand for quality internships rises, research on what works in high-impact programs, such as DCSI, offer valuable data for faculty, administrators, and students. A total of 449 DCSI alumni spanning the first 10 years of the program were invited to participate in an electronic survey, followed by the option to interview to discuss the topic and their experiences in more detail. I analyzed the resulting quantitative and qualitative data to determine if DCSI outcomes aligned with program intentions. The findings suggested overall, DCSI alumni perceived an increase in their career readiness as a result of their participation, with the biggest increase in their professionalism. Women and students of color perceived higher levels of readiness overall and in multiple career competencies than their male and White counterparts. This evaluation highlighted the need for universities to increase access to internship programs for all students, especially women and students of color. First-generation and low-income students in particular would benefit by participating in internship opportunities, which may be especially effective for increasing career readiness.

Abstract Low-income Pell Grant recipients represent a small percentage of undergraduate students at America’s elite colleges and universities. The purpose of this phenomenological case study was to understand the lived experiences of low-income Pell Grant students who attended a most competitive college. I used Tinto and Pusser’s (2006) institutional action model as my theoretical framework because this theory enabled a focus on the institutional factors low-income Pell Grant students identified as contributing to their persistence to succeed within the most competitive college context. My study employed a qualitative research approach. The 11 student participants – seniors, juniors, sophomores, and freshman – all expressed ways in which elite college experiences had impacted their collegiate persistence to succeed. From the findings emerged themes of adapting, access to support, feedback, people mattered, and context. This research found low-income Pell Grant students were grateful for financial assistance that paid for their higher education. Yet, the participants noted challenges with certain institutional areas that negatively influenced their sense of belonging and participation in extracurricular activities, and these provide insight into how institutional programs can be improved. Reduced cultural capital meant the low-income students were reluctant to seek academic assistance and to ask the elite colligate administration for support. Elite institutional leaders and federal policymakers can benefit from this study. The research findings are important for practitioners seeking to improve socioeconomic diversity at our nation’s most competitive colleges. Keywords: low-income student, most competitive college, Pell Grant

The purpose of this study was to examine the degree of success or failure of three Virginia community colleges to establish viable educational foundations and to identify the characteristics enabling them to do so.;Studying Virginia community colleges provided an opportunity to observe fund-raising efforts made in the state where government appropriations decreased the most (during the period 1990-94) and, therefore, had the greatest potential effect. Three colleges with distinctly different geographical locations might shed light on the impact of cultural/social/economic factors on philanthropy; and three institutions of differing sizes (small, medium, and large) might address an economic environment in which 'bigger is better' functions as an assumption for success.;Descriptive data for all 23 community colleges in the Virginia Community College System were gathered from a fourteen-item questionnaire mailed to the development office of each institution, and from unpublished VCCS reports of student enrollment and of system productivity analysis. The three case study colleges were studied through their respective publications (viewbooks, alumni newsletters, annual reports, college catalogues), and through face-to-face interviews with four persons at each institution--the college president, director of development, a significant donor and Educational Foundation Board member, and a faculty representative.;The basic research question addressed in this study was: Do the attributes and activities of the educational foundations affiliated with three community colleges parallel the ten factors for effective fund-raising described by Duronio and Loessin (1991) and Kerns and Witter (1992)? The ten characteristics formed the basis for the theoretical model and the framework for the case study interview questions; a positive relationship was expected--and found--between the characteristics and attributes of three educational foundations.;It was concluded that the ten characteristics used as the model accurately reflected the characteristics for effective fund-raising in community colleges, and that each of the colleges was consistent with the model to a greater or lesser degree. It was also concluded that three factors are especially significant for fund-raising success: a clear institutional image, a professional development office (and director), and accurate and adequate communication among all constituencies.;Further study is needed to evaluate the processes of communication employed on community college campuses and their suitability for institutional needs. In addition, some further research of creative and unique fund-raising efforts by colleges is needed, which the methodology used in this paper did not uncover.

No description available.

The purpose of this study was to determine Virginia Community College System (VCCS) faculty preferences for four possible institutional directions for the VCCS and to explore possible relationships between specific faculty characteristics and preferences for the individual directions. Information derived from the study was to be used to clarify whether or not community college faculty support the broad institutional directions by community college leaders in their efforts to instill a strong identity for this institution.;The population for this study was all full-time teaching faculty in the VCCS for the academic year 1982-83. 323 faculty were systematically selected after first being stratified along the variable of institutional size as determined by full-time student enrollment. Those selected for the sample received a survey questionnaire primarily asking them to rank order their preferences for four possible institutional directions for the VCCS and requesting information about specific faculty characteristics.;It was hypothesized that (1) the majority of VCCS faculty would rank first the direction of Comprehensive Community College, (2) that they would least prefer the direction of Community-Based Learning Center, and (3) that specific faculty characteristics would affect specific preferences.;Information derived from the completed questionnaires (70 percent response rate) was statistically analyzed using multiple discriminant function analysis. The results supported the first two hypotheses but failed to show any correlation between specific faculty characteristics and specific directions with one exception: faculty teaching the majority of their courses in occupational-technical courses were likely to most prefer the institutional direction of Comprehensive Community College.;The results also support the overall conclusion that the heterogeneity of community college faculty negatively affects their unanimity for any one institutional direction desired by national and state leaders of the community college. The lack of support for any one institutional direction may be an important factor in the community college's continuing identity problem with the general public, legislators, and those in higher education.;Further study is needed to clarify which faculty characteristics, if any, affect preferences for institutional directions. In addition, student, administrator, and alumni preferences should also be investigated.

During the past two decades, the image of higher education institutions, collectively and individually, has become more important as competition among colleges and universities for students, faculty, and resources has become more aggressive. In 1979 Mayhew asked whether it is possible for institutions that do not have well-established images to actually create them. This study addresses Mayhew's question by focusing on the concept of image at one institution, George Mason University.;This study examined both GMU's deliberate attempts to improve its image as well as the effects upon image of its inherent culture. Specifically, the two-part research question asked, first, how do GMU's efforts to improve its image compare and contrast to Topor's method of image-building outlined in Institutional Image (1986) and Marketing Higher Education (1983)? and second, to add a new perspective to image-making, how does GMU's "culture" as defined by Deal and Kennedy (1982) affect its image?;The study found that successful image-making at GMU involves the intimate nexus of both academic planning and marketing. GMU's president, George Johnson, keenly is aware of the importance of institutional image-making, and he strives to identify people, curricular programs, and projects that contribute to GMU's positive image. While GMU is striving to establish its own kind of culture, one of innovation, experimentation, and uniqueness, its culture differs from that described by Deal and Kennedy (1982) in that a strong sense of shared beliefs, values, and traditions is not prominent at GMU.;GMU is an example of an institution that, indeed is sucessfully creating an image that is attracting prominent faculty, better students, and increasing resources. The author believes, however, that more attention to building a stronger culture would provide a firmer foundation upon which to base GMU's image. Further study of the role of GMU's evolving culture would shed light on this question.

American higher education is moving into a new phase in which environmental challenges are likely to intensify, threatening the survival of some institutions. Small private colleges, especially those that are reliant on enrollments and the tuition revenue that enrollments generate, are especially vulnerable to environmental challenges. This puts them at a competitive disadvantage with stronger private institutions and state-supported institutions. The formation of interorganizational relationships (IORs) is one coping strategy that may be an important factor for survival.;The purpose of this study is to examine interorganizational relationships in higher education using a comprehensive, theory-based model. The model examines both the partner characteristics and relationship characteristics of IORs. Partner characteristics describe the motivations institutions have for engaging in IOR behavior. It is the resource-based aspect of the model. Relationship characteristics describe the social aspects that help enable and maintain the IOR over time. The performance outcome is essentially the result of the IOR. It is a function of the level of perceived satisfaction among members in the IOR, and the measure of success by which members judge the relationship. Both partner characteristics and relationship characteristics contribute to success.;This was an instrumental case study examining a consortium of six small, private liberal arts colleges. Findings show that partner and relationship characteristics both contribute to the success of the IOR in this case; however, the desire for institutional autonomy is also an important factor in the perceived success of the IOR.

Institutional research is a function of higher education whose role is still evolving. This study investigated the presence or lack of commonalities inherent in the personnel or in the collegiate milieu relative to whether the function was initiatory or responsive. The results of the study indicated that public institutions were more likely to recognize institutional research as a unique function compared with their private counterparts, and that increased size and complexity of a college resulted in institutional research being a recognized function or subfunction in higher education. Factors such as sex, age, prior college teaching, involvement in college governance, educational background and journals read yielded no statistically significant relationship in regard to an initiatory or responsive role of institutional research whereas public versus private and the size of the college did yield statistically significant relationships. Other factors such as membership in professional associations, use and availability of computers, the use of modern management tools and the amount of time spent doing institutional research were marginally significant in separating initiatory from responsive institutional research suggesting the need for further study. Individuals who spent more time doing institutional research perceived the value of the function and were more likely to be initiatory in their approach to it. The major criterion separating private and public institutions was the locus of control for decision making. One of the implications of the study was the need for replication both in other sections of the country and to survey the same population over time in order to measure changes in society, in higher education management, and in accountability requirements. The vignettes are examples of the value of subjective data.