The author engages in a study of rhetoric and composition's disciplinary identity and representations as seen in various disciplinary locations. Despite individual preferences toward other titles, the discipline is commonly referred to as "rhetoric and composition," a title that embraces but does not categorize the field. In this dissertation the author examines the relationship between rhetoric and composition, arguing in the first section of the dissertation that the conjunction "and" is not sufficient to describe the many relationships between these two terms. The first section of the dissertation also examines the positioning of rhetoric and composition in historical texts as well as in journals published by the National Council of Teachers of English, concluding that the hierarchies often created between rhetoric and composition or theory and practice arehighly contextual.The second section of the dissertation examines the role of departmental and institutional structures in the development of doctoral programs in rhetoric and composition, and argues that the discipline needs to take a proactive role in addressing these influences. The author demonstrates this need through an historical examination of the formation of doctoral programs in rhetoric and composition and the disciplinary identity represented by TA training texts. The second section then argues that conscious and considered representations of disciplinary identity are important to the continued growth and development of rhetoric and composition. The dissertation concludes with an argument that rhetoric and composition needs to develop undergraduate majors and minors. The concluding chapter highlights the role of departments and undergraduate majors in the American university and urges scholars and administrators in the discipline to work toward the establishment of undergraduate curricula.

The undergraduate major change or declaration process can be cumbersome for students who find themselves in unknown territories when making decisions or seeking help during this transition. One of the most challenging groups of students to assist through this transition are those who are denied access to their intended program of study. These students are often pursuing selective degree programs with limited enrollment and competitive admission requirements. Research on students pursuing selective degree programs is largely outdated, with most studies being older than ten years. The purpose of this qualitative study was to explore how undergraduate students experience leaving selective health profession interest areas in dental hygiene, nursing, and radiologic sciences at a public research university located in Tennessee. This qualitative study included the experiences of 12 third and fourth-year college students at one institution who applied for a selective degree program, were not accepted, and remained enrolled at the institution. It included semi-structured, open-ended individual interviews to investigate these undergraduate students’ experiences when undergoing an undergraduate major change away from a selective degree program. The results aligned with the theoretical framework of Schlossberg’s transition theory (Schlossberg, 1981; Schlossberg, 1991; Schlossberg et al., 1995). The students leaving selective health profession interest areas in dental hygiene, nursing, and radiologic sciences placed importance on college and career choice, experienced change of major difficulties, used campus and other support resources, and developed new strategies for success throughout the change of major process. Recommendations for further study include expanding the sample size and adding other selective degree programs to gain a more holistic picture, developing studies at multiple institutions that follow students throughout the entirety of their undergraduate careers, and investigating students’ coping strategies to identify ways to foster resiliency.

The official stance of the Association America of Medical Colleges (AAMC) regarding the undergraduate major of applicants for admission to medical school is that there are no required or preferred majors. While the AAMC is the body that governs admission to allopathic medical schools in the United States, this statement does not provide clarity to prospective medical school applicants as to what undergraduate major to select; it only encourages students from a variety of educational backgrounds to apply. Furthermore, a broad statement about undergraduate major flexibility does not indicate how choice of major will eventually impact admission to medical school. While the AAMC encourages applicants to choose any undergraduate major they wish, there is minimal peer-reviewed research or empirical evidence of the relationship between applicants' undergraduate major and their likelihood of admission to medical school. Through the lens of the student-choice construct, this dissertation sought to determine if applicants' undergraduate major is a statistically significant predictor of successful admission to medical school. This model accommodates decisions such as the intent to pursue post-secondary education, which institution to attend, what major to choose, and whether to persist to degree completion. The student-choice construct also contends that these decisions are influenced by the amount of human, financial, social, and cultural capital available to the student throughout the decision-making process. To study how choice of major impacts admission to medical school, I conducted a quantitative study using a hierarchical binary logistic regression. Secondary data were collected using the formal data request procedure outlined by the AAMC. Application-level data were received from the AAMC, and personally identifiable information including applicants’ names, identification numbers, and addresses were removed by the AAMC before the data were delivered. Additionally, given that the study involves the analysis of de-identified extant data, this study received exemption from the Institutional Review Board at Temple University. The dataset included 53,371 applicants to allopathic medical school for the 2019 application cycle. These applicants attended undergraduate institutions primarily located in the United States and Canada. The study revealed that undergraduate major does not serve as a statistically significant predictor of admission to medical school over and above applicants' demographic characteristics, MCAT scores, and undergraduate grade point average. Applicants who chose a Biology, Chemistry, Physics, or Mathematics (BCPM) major did not have a greater chance of being admitted to medical school than an applicant who chose a non-BCPM major. These findings are consistent with previous studies that sought to predict variables that contribute to medical school admission. Future research should investigate the predictive ability of admissions variables such as applicant characteristics captured from medical school interviews; letters of recommendation; personal statements and community service, leadership, and healthcare experiences. A combined or comparative study similarly analyzing applicants to different health profession programs might also be useful. In addition, a non-binary categorization of specific undergraduate majors would provide an even more nuanced analysis of how different majors predict admission to medical school. / Educational Administration