[giaban]0.000 VNĐ[/giaban] [kythuat]
[/kythuat]
[tomtat]
[tomtat]
The relationship between policies, practices and institutional trends in the awarding of doctoral degrees to Hispanic students
Table of Contents
Abstract
Acknowledgments
Table of Contents
List of Tables
List of Figures
I. Introduction
A. Background of the Problem
B. Purpose of the Study
C. Methodology
D. Research Questions
E. Definition of Key Terms
II. Literature Review
A. Social Capital Theory
B. Social Resources
C. Faculty Mentorship
D. Funding
III. Methodology
A. Research Design
B. Dependent Variable
C. Independent Variables
a. Dedicated scholarship programs
b. National Summer Institute programs.
c. Fellowship program
d. Cohorts
e. Orientation programs
f. Social networks
g. Faculty mentoring
h. Funding programs
D. Telephone Survey
E. Conceptual Framework
F. Research Participants and Institutions
G. Data Collection Method
H. Instrumentation
I. Data Analysis
J. Conclusion
IV. Results
A. Hispanic-Serving Programs at Participating Institutions
B. Survey Question Results
a. Survey question # 1: Dedicated scholarship programs
b. Survey question # 2: Formal policy on underrepresented faculty
c. Survey question # 3: Refinance repayment of undergraduate loans.
d. Survey question # 4: Formal cohorts
e. Survey question # 5: Orientation programs
f. Survey question # 6: Social organizations.
g. Survey question # 7: Faculty mentoring
h. Survey question # 8: Targeted funding
i. Survey question # 9: Dedicated program of full tuition from high school to doctoral degree.
j. Survey question # 10: Funding to increase access to postsecondary education for low income/underrepresented backgrounds.
k. Survey question # 11: Additional policies and programs
l. Survey question # 12: Primary sources of funding.
m. Survey question # 13: Success rate of matriculation vs. graduation rates of Hispanics receiving a Ph.D.
n. Survey question # 14: Marketing
C. Comparisons of Independent Variables and Percentage Change in Hispanic Doctoral Student Degree Completion (Dependent Variable)
a. Perceived influence of programs at participating institutions on degree completion of Hispanic doctoral students.
b. Perceived frequency of Hispanic doctoral students’ use of programs at participating institutions..
c. Perceived importance of programs at participating institutions to Hispanic doctoral students.
D. Qualitative Data
a. Theme 1: Geographic location
b. Theme 2: Private vs. public institutions
c. Theme 3: Diversity programs vs. Hispanic-focused programs
d. Theme 4: Adequate vs. inadequate funding
e. Theme 5: Institutional programs
f. Theme 6: Decentralized vs. centralized
g. Theme 7: Comparisons of top five universities
E. Results of Correlation Analysis
G. Conclusion
V. Discussion
A. Survey Questions
a. Perceived influence of programs
b. Perception of frequent use of programs.
c. Perceived importance of programs for Hispanic students
B. Discussion of Themes
a. Geographic location
b. Diversity programs vs. Hispanic-focused programs
c. Public vs. private institutions
d. Adequate vs. inadequate financial aid/funding
C. Limitations
D. Implications
E. Recommendations
F. Conclusions
References
Appendix A
Appendix B
Appendix C Bài viết liên quan
