Typescript (photocopy). / Digitized by Kansas Correctional Industries

This thesis investigates first-year students� challenges in making sense of the learning and teaching environment during their first semester at university. The aims for the research are threefold. Firstly, mapping the range of challenges students at one university faced in their learning and teaching environments in the first semester. Secondly, developing a greater understanding of those challenges. Thirdly, identifying what educational initiatives the university could consider that might assist students to meet those challenges. The challenges were examined in the context of changes in higher education. My interest and motivation for this research project concerns improved practices in the first-year teaching and learning environment, rather than improved students. This means that I did not look for deficits within students, but for indications of what helps or does not help students� introduction to the new environment of academia. By mapping students� challenges in the first semester, I hope to contribute to the understanding of academic staff of the range of challenges students have to deal with. The interpretation of the results and my line of argument are partly influenced and shaped by the theoretical framework of academic literacies, and the notion of de-familiarisation. For this project, two data sources were used. The first source was data from a survey carried out in May 2004 amongst students enrolled in 100-level courses. The second source was data from interviews conducted with first-year students in the same year. In considering the analysis as a whole, a number of key issues could be discerned. These related to communication, academic skills, access to resources and help, and engagement and connection. The results showed that some of these issues had less to do with educational practices, and more to do with contested understandings of the nature of university education, and the nature of students now entering university. I argue that underlying these issues there are contentious questions of who should adjust or adapt to whom: students to the university, or the university to students? Students� reported experiences further suggest that some teachers seemed more aware than others that first-year students face particular challenges. Students did not consider their experiences as reflective of the university as a whole. The university was experienced as an institution with divergent ways of organising courses, of valuing aspects of university learning, and of interpreting seemingly similar things. This suggests that where students experienced challenges, these were not necessarily a function of students� characteristics, or students� attitudes to studying, but of particular course environments. The overall picture that presents itself, then, is that there are challenges that could be considered unnecessary. Whereas few students would experience all of the challenges identified in the results chapters, I argue that there are some aspects that warrant improvement. Improvement initiatives in first-year education, however, are not necessarily considered important by all academic staff. This is another contested issue in universities. A more explicit introduction of first-year students to academia as a range of heterogeneous communities would respond to first-year students� needs for familiarisation and clarity, as well as reflect some of the values that universities could be said to espouse. Successful interventions in first-year education, however, will also depend on ongoing dialogue with staff about various contested issues, the changed and changing context of higher education, and related challenges and opportunities.

The relationships among students' reports of learning outcomes based on leadership experiences in various types of student organizations and various roles within organizations were investigated. Relationships between demographic variables (i.e., ethnicity, gender, age, and type of housing) and type of organization, role within an organization, and learning outcomes, were also examined. A new instrument, the Student Leadership Learning Outcomes Assessment (SLLOA), was created to measure student generated learning outcomes; it has good internal consistency and validity. The SLLOA was completed by 328 student leaders at a private southeastern university. SLLOA scores indicated student leaders in cultural and service groups reported learning more than student leaders in sports/athletic groups. Vice Presidents and Presidents reported learning more from the leadership experience than Treasurers. Female student leaders reported learning more than male. Relationships were found between ethnicity of student leaders and type of organization and between type of housing (i.e., on campus, off campus without parents/parental figures, off campus with parents/parental figures) and type of organization. There was no relationship between type of organization and leaders' gender and age, or between the role held and leaders' gender, ethnicity, and type of housing. The results revealed no relationship between ethnicity and SLLOA scores.

The purpose of this study was to examine the perceived leadership orientations of leaders and general members affiliated with the Corps of Cadets at Texas A&M University, assess the validity and reliability for the Competing Values Instrument for the cadet population, and identify differences in leadership orientations of leaders and members of a student organization. The survey instrument used was an adaptation of Quinn's 1988 Competing Values Instrument. The two-part 32-item instrument was theoretically based on Quinn and Rohrbaugh's (1981, 1983) Competing Values Framework of managerial-leadership. The instrument divided the items into eight groups of leadership role orientations: Innovator, Broker, Producer, Director, Coordinator, Monitor, Facilitator, and Mentor. The instrument was administered to 520 cadets enrolled in 28 randomly selected Reserve Officers' Training Corps (ROTC) and School of Military Science (SOMS) courses at Texas A&M University. Responses were compared using various background information and environmental factors. Responses were also examined to establish validity and reliability for the instrument when used with college student members of this student organization. Factor analysis procedures resulted in slight alteration of items within specific factors. Results supported the idea that perceived leadership orientations are associated with academic classification, Corps classification, gender, age, leadership experience prior to college, involvement in college leadership experiences other than the Corps of Cadets, contract status, level of leadership position in the student organization, and military service affiliation. The contributions the student organization made to the development of leadership were assessed, and a better understanding of leaders' and members' perceptions of their leadership tendencies and practices was obtained. Survey instrument data indicated the Corps of Cadets was effective in enhancing students' perceptions of their leadership orientations. Recognizable differences were found to have existed in relationship to the complexity and nature of the leadership position. The higher the level of leadership position held by members of the Corps of Cadets, the more frequent those members' practice of leadership and management behaviors became. Military cadets were also more likely to practice leadership and management behaviors more frequently than non-military cadets. The study provided evidence that the Corps of Cadets has some effect on leadership development.

This study provides a literature review of presidential leadership styles, how college presidents communicate with constituencies, shared student governance and independence of student newspapers. The study involved two surveys: one to Pennsylvania college public relations directors and a second to Pennsylvania college student editors. The combined survey results examined whether presidential leadership style affected interactions with faculty, administration and student newspapers. The study concluded that the type of presidential leadership style did not correlate with interactions with student newspapers or the paper's coverage of the president, that there was no correlation between the independence of newspapers and its treatment of the president and that an institution's religious or secular structure had no influence on the president's interactions with the student newspaper. / School of Education / Interdisciplinary Doctoral Program for Education Leaders (IDPEL) / EdD / Dissertation

This thesis investigates first-year students� challenges in making sense of the learning and teaching environment during their first semester at university. The aims for the research are threefold. Firstly, mapping the range of challenges students at one university faced in their learning and teaching environments in the first semester. Secondly, developing a greater understanding of those challenges. Thirdly, identifying what educational initiatives the university could consider that might assist students to meet those challenges. The challenges were examined in the context of changes in higher education. My interest and motivation for this research project concerns improved practices in the first-year teaching and learning environment, rather than improved students. This means that I did not look for deficits within students, but for indications of what helps or does not help students� introduction to the new environment of academia. By mapping students� challenges in the first semester, I hope to contribute to the understanding of academic staff of the range of challenges students have to deal with. The interpretation of the results and my line of argument are partly influenced and shaped by the theoretical framework of academic literacies, and the notion of de-familiarisation. For this project, two data sources were used. The first source was data from a survey carried out in May 2004 amongst students enrolled in 100-level courses. The second source was data from interviews conducted with first-year students in the same year. In considering the analysis as a whole, a number of key issues could be discerned. These related to communication, academic skills, access to resources and help, and engagement and connection. The results showed that some of these issues had less to do with educational practices, and more to do with contested understandings of the nature of university education, and the nature of students now entering university. I argue that underlying these issues there are contentious questions of who should adjust or adapt to whom: students to the university, or the university to students? Students� reported experiences further suggest that some teachers seemed more aware than others that first-year students face particular challenges. Students did not consider their experiences as reflective of the university as a whole. The university was experienced as an institution with divergent ways of organising courses, of valuing aspects of university learning, and of interpreting seemingly similar things. This suggests that where students experienced challenges, these were not necessarily a function of students� characteristics, or students� attitudes to studying, but of particular course environments. The overall picture that presents itself, then, is that there are challenges that could be considered unnecessary. Whereas few students would experience all of the challenges identified in the results chapters, I argue that there are some aspects that warrant improvement. Improvement initiatives in first-year education, however, are not necessarily considered important by all academic staff. This is another contested issue in universities. A more explicit introduction of first-year students to academia as a range of heterogeneous communities would respond to first-year students� needs for familiarisation and clarity, as well as reflect some of the values that universities could be said to espouse. Successful interventions in first-year education, however, will also depend on ongoing dialogue with staff about various contested issues, the changed and changing context of higher education, and related challenges and opportunities.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Missouri-Columbia, 2007. / The entire dissertation/thesis text is included in the research.pdf file; the official abstract appears in the short.pdf file (which also appears in the research.pdf); a non-technical general description, or public abstract, appears in the public.pdf file. Title from title screen of research.pdf file (viewed on October 8, 2007) Vita. Includes bibliographical references.

Thesis (Ph.D.)--Ohio University, August, 2008. / Abstract only has been uploaded to OhioLINK. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 414-451)

No description available.

No description available.