Coursehero >> Virginia >> Virginia Tech >> LIB 04282000

Course Hero has millions of student submitted documents similar to the one below including study guides, homework solutions, papers, exam answer keys and textbook solutions.

the ed College Student Experiences Questionnaire, during his or her second semester sophomore year. The researcher looked at student scores on five scales that were predictors of student leadership development. These five scales were Estimate of Gains, Student Acquaintances, Experiences with Faculty, Clubs and Organizations, and Course Learning. The data were analyzed using descriptive statistics, investigating the means, standard deviations, and differences between the means. Descriptive statistics were used because the study investigated an entire population rather than a sample. Discussion On each scale of the CSEQ studied, including Estimate of Gains, Student Acquaintances, Experience with Faculty, Clubs and Organizations, and Course Learning, 51 the LC group scored higher than the NLC group. However, the differences in each instance are small. There is a considerable difference in mean scores between the scales studied. In general the scores are moderate and in one instance the scores are well below moderate, for both the LC and the NLC group. On each of the scales studied, the LC and NLC group score in the same way. In other words, the LC and NLC groups are more similar in scores on the same scale than different. Both the LC and NLC groups scored the highest on the Course Learning scale of the CSEQ. The Course Learning scale includes specific tasks students are involved in when participating in a college level course such as completing assigned readings, taking notes, contributing to class discussions, and working on group projects. This high score could be associated with the emphasis put on grade point average in selecting the student participants for the scholarship. This could also be related to the completion of a yearlong leadership course by the LC group when participating in the Leadership Community. Surprisingly, both the LC and NLC groups scored the lowest on the Clubs and Organizations scale of the CSEQ. The Clubs and Organizations scale includes items about students participation and leadership in clubs and organizations on campus. The mean scores of both the LC and NLC groups indicated that most students in these groups never participate in activities associated with clubs and organizations. This is surprising as involvement in clubs and organizations is the traditional area student affairs practitioners associate with student leadership development. Both the LC and NLC groups scored moderately low on the Experiences with Faculty scale of the CSEQ. The mean score of both the LC and NLC groups indicates the 52 students occasionally discuss course material with faculty or socialize with faculty outside of class. This is unexpected, considering both the LC and NLC groups high scores on the Course Learning scale. This is also surprising with the high faculty contact the students have in the Leadership Community, having faculty teach classes in the residence hall. A closer look at the gains between the LC and NLC group reveal, the LC group scored higher on gains associated with community orientation and gains related to the leadership development goals of the leadership community. The NLC group scored higher on gains associated with individual or non-community related growth. This justifies support for the Leadership Community despite relatively small overall gains between the two groups. Literature There have not been any other studies using the CSEQ for the purposes of measuring leadership development. However, have there been studies supporting each scale on the CSEQ including Estimate of Gains, Student Acquaintances, Experiences with Faculty, Clubs and Organizations, and Course Learning, as factors associated in leadership development for students (Astin, 1993; Hernandez, et al., 1999; Kuh, 1995; Kuh, Whitt, & Associates, 1991; Pascarella & Terrenzini, 1991; Sermersheim, 1996; Woo & Bilynsky, 1994). The present study is consistent with the literature findings. The literature would support the finding that the LC group scored higher than the NLC group on the five scales associated with leadership development. Being part of the Leadership Community affords students more opportunities to interact with peers, interact with faculty, and participate in clubs and organizations. The 53 research supports that student s involvement on campus is directly related to the extent to which the student connects to a network of people, leadership positions, and a variety of opportunities provided by the college (Hernandez, et al., 1999). By becoming involved in the Leadership Community, students are putting in the initial effort to become involved and gain leadership development. The impact of a student s involvement experience is determined by the amount and quality of the individual student s effort (Astin, 1993; Pankanin, 1995). The amount of time and effort students put into their own achievement and development are important in determining their educational outcomes (Pace, 1987). Therefore, it is consistent with the literature that the LC group scored higher on the scales of the CSEQ associated with leadership development and educational gain in college. The present study supports the literature pertaining to employers studies. Employers , who hire students, want students with completed bachelor s degrees and who have a variety of skills. These skills include knowledge skills, technical skills, interpersonal skills, employability skills, and computer literacy skills (Aksoy, 1998). According to the results of this study, the LC group scored higher on the Estimate of Gains section including an item for each of these skills. Other studies included leadership potential and extracurricular activities as employer criteria (Kretovics & McCambridge, 1998; Reardon, Lenz, & Folsom, 1998). If these items are included, the LC group scored higher on these items than the NLC group. Not consistent with the literature was the finding that the LC and NLC group never or occasionally participated in activities associated with clubs and organizations on campus. Research supports that students involved in organizations and leadership roles on campus throughout their time in college develop leadership skills specifically in the 54 areas of maturity, commitment, and negotiation (Cooper, Healy, & Simpson, 1994). Involvement in campus clubs and organizations is the traditional avenue of leadership development for students in college. It is surprising to have both the LC and NLC groups score low on this scale, considering their high school leadership experience. Research also supports that students participating in leadership roles in clubs and organizations on campus increases students preparation for their chosen field, specifically reported by students involved in Greek-letter fraternities and sororities (Sermersheim, 1995). This finding has significance, as the LC group scored lower than the NLC group on two items on the Estimate of Gains scale investiga

Find millions of documents here - Study Guides, Homework Solutions, Papers, Exam Answer Keys and more. Course Hero has millions of course related materials that will enable you to learn better, faster and get an A in all your courses.
Below is a small sample set of documents: