KU Experiential Learning Final Research Report

JOUR 460: Research Methods in Strategic Communication
KU Experiential Learning Final Research Report
(Fall, 2015)
Team Uruguay: Dylan Jacobs, Macaela Jones, Emily Kawola, Bria Strickland, Sookie
Thongkham

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Executive Summary
Certificates at other Universities
Arts Engagement
Global Awareness
Leadership
Research Experience
Service Learning
Research Methods
Survey
Focus Group
Data Analysis
Survey
Focus Group
Participants
Survey
Focus Group
Findings
Survey
Awareness
Perceptions
Interactions
Strategies
Certificate-Specific Questions
Media Diet
Open-Ended Questions
Focus Group
Limitations
Survey
Focus Group
Conclusion
Appendices
Appendix A
Appendix B

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
(Written by Dylan Jacobs and Emily Kawola)
KU Experiential Learning is a program that provides students with certifications in different
areas. The areas are Global Awareness, Leadership, Research, Service Learning and Arts
Engagement. The mission of the Experiential Learning programs is:
“Experiential learning denotes a rigorous learning experience, occurring within a
community setting (e.g., professional, artistic, scientific, scholarly, local) and integrated as part
of an academic degree program, which requires the student to take an active role in the learning
process.”
As part of Dr. Erba’s JOUR 460: Research Methods class, we were assigned to answer a research
question given to us by the representatives of KU Experiential Learning: how does KU
Experiential Learning increase awareness among KU undergraduate students? This question is
the base for all of the research methods used and data that was collected, was always done so
with this question in mind. All research was done in a systematic manner and could be
duplicated.
Our research methods included secondary research, a focus group, and a survey. The
purpose of the secondary research was to familiarize ourselves with KU Experiential Learning
and the certificates/programs it offers. It was also meant to give an analysis of the
certificates/programs in regards to their individual communication strategies and explore
challenges and opportunities facing these certificates/programs. This secondary research
evaluated online information in which we noted the process of finding information for each
program. We also evaluated media channels each certificate is currently using and analyzed any
data provided in regards to traffic and interaction with these media channels. The last part of the
secondary research was the evaluation of other (similar) programs in which we selected two peer

institution’s programs and explored similarities and differences, as well as what they were doing
in terms of branding and programming.
The next form of research we conducted was a focus group in which we recruited one
person per group member to participate. The group member could not be a journalism student.
This focus group was held in order to collect more in-depth detail through asking questions that
would help to answer the research question by encouraging conversation about ideas regarding
Experiential Learning that participants had. This focus group was ultimately transcribed and
analyzed by category to better interpret the data we had collected.
As the last method of research, we provided a survey to 679 participants in order to
measure perceptions, attitudes and opinions regarding KU Experiential Learning. The survey
included questions pertaining to perception, awareness, interactions, strategies, certificate-
specific questions, media diet, and open-ended questions.
Overall, our research provided us with many insightful findings. In our secondary
research we were able to find that some of the peer universities incorporate these programs into
either majors or minors and require more of a commitment to the program. The focus group
showed that students highly preferred that they receive university information such as
certification information from an advisor or a professor. From our survey, it was found that the
majority of participants see extra curricular activity as important, but the majorities have not
heard of KU Experiential Learning.
CERTIFICATES AT OTHER UNIVERSITIES
Arts Engagement (Bria Strickland)
According to the information provide from the client there weren’t any previous models
of the Arts Engagement Certificate as extensive as KU’s. I was able to find a few arts programs

with some similarities to KU’s program. Most of the programs were offered from Art and Design
schools.
Otis College of Art and Design offers a variety of certificate programs that fall under
Arts. Art Education, Graphic Design, and Fine Arts are a few of their programs. The
requirements of these certification programs are to complete several courses that teach the
foundation and fundamentals. The number of courses required depends on which certification a
student wants to learn. There is an additional cost to complete the certificate that could be as high
as $14,000. Other than taking the course and paying the fees there are no outside requirements of
attending events.
They currently have a website dedicated to the certificate programs, but I could not find
specific social media accounts. They don’t mention the certificate programs on their main
accounts
Penn State offers an online undergraduate certification in Digital Art. The program is
open to anyone who wants to learn about graphic design and multimedia art. Though their
certificate program differs from KU, their website set up similar to KU’s Arts Engagement
website. On the home page it tells about the reasoning for the certificate, how to apply, and links
to related programs. There are other tabs that identify the required courses, the cost of the
program, and how to contact the coordinator. At the bottom of the page they provide links to
their general social network accounts, but they are not specific to the certificate program
The website for Otis College of Art and Design’s certificate programs provided an
example of what not to do for KU’s program. They have too much information on one page.
Instead of section off each certificate program onto its own page everything is on one page. This
makes it difficult for readers to find the information they are looking for without scrolling.

The website for the Penn State program does a good job of explaining thoroughly explaining
their program. Something I liked was the personal testimonial from a student in the program.
This is something that could be incorporated into the Art Engagement website, so that students
see how the program has benefitted a peer. On the certificate website they also mention some of
the career benefits that come from obtaining a certificate through the program.
Global Awareness Program (Dylan Jacobs)
I chose to evaluate the University of Central Oklahoma program and the Georgia Tech
University programs because they include a mixture of similarities with KU’s GAP certification
program, whereas the University of Pittsburgh shared only the coursework in common. The
programs differ greatly in programming. Georgia Tech provides a complimentary program that
coincides with majors by selecting certain classes and spending at least 26 weeks of international
experience. This program also has a list of participating majors that have this program integrated
into the major course load and are the only ones able to complete the program. Regarding
branding and marketing, there were links to social media profiles both websites, The U of
Central Oklahoma has a Twitter and Facebook that do not have very big followings. Neither
program has a logo as KU’s G.A.P. program does so it is hard to differentiate the program from
being a club or major or minor unless you read into it. U of Central Oklahoma has a program that
is fundamentally similar to that of KU’s GAP, however it differs in that a person can complete
the “global experience” portion in a multitude of ways that don’t only include studying abroad.
Also, it has a capstone portion where it is much like the reflection part of the GAP but students
have more than one way to complete that final task.
I believe that the GAP could take away a few things from these two previously
mentioned programs. For example, incorporation into major programs, especially those who

require a foreign language and where a high rate of students study abroad, such as the journalism
school. A comprehensive program specific for those majors who cannot fit a foreign language or
many electives into their schedule, such as the STEM field. Otherwise, I believe the GAP is a
unique program with many benefits that stand out over the other given institutions.
Leadership Program (Macaela Jones)
Florida State University’s Leadership Studies Certificate is similar to KU’s Leadership
Certificate. Their leadership certificate is designed to be an 18-unit program made for
undergraduate students. All students that receive the certificate must receive a C or higher in all
leadership classes. Students that complete the certificate will have it on their transcript. To apply
for the certificate students must first submit a “plan of study” form and make an advising
appointment with the leadership certificate advising.
The website has a list of all the courses for the certificate as well as supporting courses.
There is also a fact page that is devoted to answering commonly asked questions. The certificate
is completed over a longer period of time due to the fact that students cannot take more than two
leadership classes at one time. To receive credit for the courses students must write a 3-4-page
reflection paper about their experiences.
The certificate program does not have any social media accounts of its own for branding.
It also is branded with the same design and message as all of the other certificates at the
university. Therefore it does not stand out from the other certificates. There is no specific logo or
tagline for the leadership certificate. Its webpage also has the same red and beige and white
design as the rest of the university’s web pages.
The University of Wisconsin’s Leadership Certificate is also comparable to KU’s
Leadership Certificate. Its goal is to create leaders in a classroom environment and in the world.

The certificate program is run out of the Center for Leadership and Involvement at the university.
To qualify for the program students must be enrolled at the university, involved in leadership
positions while at school, have an average cumulative GPA of 2.5 and have 100 hours of
recorded leadership experience. Before applying to the certificate students must experience an
informational session in person or online, finish a leadership competencies activity and make an
advising appointment.
Program certification requires a number of leadership activities, academic classes,
modules online, reflections and a value capstone analysis. Students are required to attain 100
hours of activities between the three categories of civic engagement, organizational/group
leadership and trainings/workshops. They must also complete a Leadership Studies or Global
and Cultural Competence course with a minimum of a B, finish three out of five modules and
write a reflection for everyone. They must also write a reflection about their competencies.
Finally, they must write a reflection of their leadership experience.
The Leadership Certificate program for the University of Wisconsin has a Facebook
page. The page consists of posts about certificate recipients, leadership opportunities and
informational leadership events. While the certificate program has a social media account it does
not post frequently. The last post on the page is from December 17, 2013. Besides a Facebook
page, the certificate program does not have any other social media accounts.
For branding the leadership certificate has two main features. First it has the slogan,
“Define your direction. Get involved.” Second it has a logo that is a square full of small multi-
colored boxes with a narrow winding trail going down the middle. The webpage for the
certificate does not differ vastly from the rest of the university’s web pages. It has a standard red,
beige and white design.

There are many similarities between KU’s leadership certification program and the
leadership certificate programs of the University of Wisconsin and Florida State University.
Florida State University and the University of Wisconsin’s Leadership Certificate programs
compare and contrast KU’s leadership program. For example, completion of the certificate is
noted on the transcripts of students from both universities. Placing the certification on student
transcripts will motivate students to complete the certificate. The certificate would look good to
future employers and on resumes.
Florida State University requires students to take 18 units for the certificate in contrast
with KU that only requires the completion of three leadership courses. I think both forms of class
requirements are beneficial. More courses ensure that students have a full understanding of
leadership. On the other hand having a smaller requirement provides students with the
opportunity to get a minor or just get the certificate on top of their major. KU’s course
enrollment format is beneficial because it allows for a more diverse group of students to
complete the certification.
Florida State University and the University of Wisconsin have a GPA requirement for classes
taken for the certificate and KU does not. KU should probably follow the example of the other
universities and create or mention the GPA requirement for the certificate. A GPA requirement
would help ensure that students enrolled in the certificate program will be prepared to succeed.
Also, it would ensure that students would try to do well in the required courses.
Both Florida State and the University of Wisconsin require that students make an
advising appointment with advisors from the Leadership Certificate program but KU does not.
Creating an advising requirement ensures that students enrolling will have a strong
understanding of the requirements of the certificate. KU should adopt this idea because it would

force the students to interact with the Leadership Certificate office and educate them about it. As
a result they may be more compelled to finish the certificate if they have an advisor to keep them
accountable.
All of the Universities have a course list of required and suggested classes to take for the
certificate. The course lists are helpful for KU students to use when trying to find classes that
they have to take for the certificate. Florida State University and the University of Wisconsin
both have a FAQ page on their certificate websites but KU does not. The FAQ pages provide an
easy place for students to sift through all the certificate information. They also provide answers
to common questions that students may have pertaining to the certificate.
Another thing that KU should implement is more required informational activities. The
University of Wisconsin requires students to participate in informational sessions to learn more
about the program and how it works. Informational sessions would benefit KU Leadership
Certificate students by ensuring that they will know about the program before they start it. This
will reduce the amount of student mistakes when completing the certificate.
Research Experience (Sookie Thongkham)
The Illinois Office of Undergraduate Research (OUR) purpose is to make research central
to the academic experience. The only source of information appears to be the webpage. There is
a Twitter and Facebook account for the office but both appear to not be very active in promoting
the certificate.
The Undergraduate Programs at University of South Florida (USF) purpose is to support
development of undergraduates as researchers and prepare them for graduate school. The
certificate is focused on the College of Behavioral & Community Sciences. The requirements for

the certificate are all provided as coursework. There is a person of contact specifically regarding
course selection along with flyers for additional information and research opportunities.
The Illinois certificate will not appear on transcript but the office of undergraduate research
(OUR) will provide a separate document showing completion. The website explains the purpose
of the certificate, the requirements and how to register. All of the information regarding the
certificate is listed on one page without separate tabs for organization. The requirements are
listed in numerical steps with bulleted notes. The Illinois OUR was able to keep the information
about their certificate short and concise to fit onto one page.
The USF certificate is only offered through the College of Behavioral & Community
Sciences. Information about the certificate is also on one page without separate tabs for USF. As
mentioned before, all requirements are set up through coursework. Directed research projects
have their own designated course. By having designated courses, students do not have to go
through a separate process to get involved in or start a research project. The main contact for this
certificate is the Director of Student Academic Support Services. All applications are submitted
to the director.
I think the KU Research Experience could possibly follow the one page method by
keeping the information short and concise. Also, there should be a mention that directed study
courses can provide the research experience project for presentation. This will make it a cohesive
process versus finding research separately from the requirements.
Service Learning (Emily Kawola)
Stanford University has integrated their service learning into several different categories
that allows the student to choose what route is best for them. All of these programs are organized
by the Haas Center for Public Service. These four different programs allow students to choose

how they want to participate in service learning. The Haas Center allows their students to create
their own service project, that can last a summer or a quarter. These projects can be both local
and international with over 350 programs to choose from. Another program they offer is
choosing courses that center in service learning and learning how to deal with the problems of
the world.
The Haas Center website has all of the information that a prospective student would be
looking for. The website has an overall consistent theme of the classic standard Stanford red.
This helps to create the connection between the Haas Center and the university. The website is
broken into six different sections, cardinal service, faculty, alumni, community, placements and
about. In addition to these tabs the Haas website includes photos of students participating in
programs and testimonials from students on their experiences in the programs.
Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis has created a program to cultivate
volunteering amongst its students. Their goal is to encourage learning and development of
students and staff at the same time giving back to the community. Their website has programs
for Civic-minded graduates and professionals, which are research opportunities. Under each of
these programs, they provide an in-depth description of the program and why it is beneficial.
They also provide several additional PDF’s that continue to help the viewer to understand how
the program works. IUPUI has a great section that shows all the service opportunities in the area,
broken up by field, to help find the perfect service opportunity.
Both of these programs provide their participants with everything that they need to
complete their program. Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis provides an entire
section on service opportunities in the area. The Service Learning Certificate require service

hours to complete the program, by adding service opportunities to the page, you make it a one-
stop shop for participants.
Another idea that IUPUI has is to create a program that allows students to start working
with professionals in the field. This program gives students contacts that they can use after
school when looking for jobs, as well as experience in the field.
Stanford University provides their students with several different options for completing
their service learning. By doing so they allow students to tailor their learning to best fit what they
like and need for their future. The Service learning program is small at the moment but in the
future it could be interesting to see maybe a couple of different tracks for people to choose from.
RESEARCH METHODS
Survey (Macaela Jones and Sookie Thongkham)
The questions for the survey questionnaire were conceptualized into the following
themes: Awareness, Perceptions, Strategies, Certificate-Specific, Media Diet, and Open-Ended.
The questions were based on nominal or interval scales. Each member of our five-person team
recruited ten people totaling to 50 surveys just for our team. We recruited participants for our
survey through convenience sampling by asking friends, roommates, co-workers, classmates
and/or significant others. However, we analyzed data from surveys distributed by our entire
JOUR 460 class, totaling to a sample population of 679 participants. Participants were either
given a paper survey and asked to return it when they finished or they completed the survey in
the presence of one of our team members. After collecting all of our surveys we manually
recorded the data from each survey by entering the responses into an online data collection
program. We analyze the data by using a SPSS software through KU Virtual Lab. The data was
analyzed in terms of percentages, means and standard deviations.

Focus Group (Macaela Jones, Emily Kawola & Sookie Thongkham)
The questions for the moderator guide were conceptualized into the following themes:
Awareness/Knowledge, Perceptions, Interactions, Motivations & Barriers, and Education
Background. All questions were either open-ended or closed-ended questions. Every closed-
ended question had a follow-up open-ended question. Open-ended questions provided more
elaborate details about the presence of KU Experiential Learning in the minds of KU
undergraduate students.
Our team conducted its focus group September 30, 2015 at 6 p.m. Four participants
attended the focus group, which started at 6:30 p.m. and ended at 7:46 p.m. The focus group took
one hour, 15 minutes to be completed from the time the moderator started his introduction to the
last participant's comment.
Our recruitment consisted of asking 23 students if they would be willing to participate in
a 90-minute focus group on Experiential Learning. The students that we asked were either
friends, roommates, classmates or significant others of members of our group. We relied on a
convenience sampling method. Participants who attended ended up consisting of friends and
significant others from members of our group. We received no participants from the Office of
KU Experiential Learning.
All of our participants were women and are dedicated to their studies. Two of our
participants, Jackie and Kelsey, were transfer students. At least two of our participants, Brianna
and Jackie, had studied abroad. One participant, Brianna, stated that she had completed at least
two of the certificate programs. It is to be said that Brianna may not actually have the Global
Awareness certification due to an email that was mistakenly sent to some students telling them
they had completed it when they had not. This is also supported by the fact that Brianna does not

mention completion of some components of the GAP certificate, such as the reflection essay.
Therefore, we are not sure if she has actually completed this certification.
Conducting the focus group required six people. We had one moderator asking questions
from our moderator guide to participants and keeping the conversations on track. There were two
note takers who observed the reactions, tones and gestures of participants. In addition, there were
two people that observed the focus group and passed additional questions to ask to the
moderator. Finally, our professor sat in an adjacent room listening to the focus group. He
occasionally added input to the focus group to the note passers and they would relay the
information to the moderator.
The focus group was held in the conference room in Stauffer-Flint. Participants were
asked to sit around a table for the focus group. The moderator sat in the middle of the table with
participants next to and across from him. The note passers sat behind the moderator and the note
takers sat in two other corners of the room.
During the focus group, our participant Brianna carried the most of the conversation as
she was observed to be the most opinionated. Other participants seem to have an open mind
because they would often nod in agreement with another participant’s answer or elaborate off
another participant’s answer. There were times when we tried to receive a specific answer from
them, the participants would be confused or provide the same answer because the questions
sounded familiar or they perceived that multiple questions were asking the same thing. Some
participants did not sound as confident in their answer because they presented their answer as if
they were making sure it was correct or what we were looking for. In this case, we were unsure
as to how much honesty, in terms of how the feel, were behind their responses. Also, because the
focus group was small, it may have felt intimidating to the participants because at times they

would look at each other to see who would answer first so they could get an idea of how to
respond.
Our team consists of five people. We each transcribed 14 minutes and 13 seconds of
audio from the focus group. The transcription consists of 11 thousand and 15 words and is 42
pages long. Our focus group notes were two pages long and consisted of 637 words. Our focus
group’s debrief consisted of 1,565 words and was three pages long.
When analyzing the focus group transcription, we each created an individual document of
codes. We used the tracks tool in Microsoft Word to leave comments of possible code names.
Each team member read through the focus group transcription and used the data from the quotes
to develop codes. We then categorized quotes into the codes that they associated with. For
example, the topic of a question from the focus group may be a category or theme and the codes
would be the specific answers and responses given by the participants as supporting evidence.
Next, we listed the names of all of our codes to compare the classification of quotes. This
revealed that we had common codes and we moved forward by deciding which name best
described that code. After finalizing the names of the codes, we began to put them into categories
or themes. Then, we created a master list of the codes by combining all of our quotes. We did not
duplicate quotes under one code. However, a quote may be used for multiple codes. There was
no limit to the number of codes we developed and there was no limit to the number of quotes we
had in each code.
The six categories that emerged from our data include: students’ perceptions of certificate
programs, students’ ideas for changes to programs, perceptions of digital media, negative
perception of communication, basic communication and benefits and awareness. The codes with
the most quotes include: perceiving thoughts of what Experiential Learning entails, suggesting

certificate be included in academic planning, using social media for university information,
naming confusion for experiential learning, and perceiving benefits. These categories and codes
consist of the participants’ knowledge and awareness about the certificates and how they, as
students, prefer information to be communicated about Experiential Learning. The participants
provide supporting evidence that students are not aware of the experiential learning program, do
not understand its purpose and do not associate it with certificates.
DATA ANALYSIS
Survey (Bria Strickland and Sookie Thongkham)
Our team collected a total of 50 surveys. After collecting survey results our team divided
up the questions in order to analyze the results. We all used SPSS Statistics 22 software to
analyze the survey data. Depending on the type of question, it was either continuous data for
interval scale questions or categorical data for nominal scale questions we analyzed accordingly.
For continuous data, we reported the mean and standard deviation of all relevant items
from the survey. We also explored data based on gender and year in school.
We analyzed the continuous variables using a general linear model with a univariate
function for analyzing single items or a multivariate function for analyzing more than one item.
These items would be analyzed as dependent variables. When we explored data based on gender
and year in school demographic variables we analyzed them as fixed factors. This generates
several tables exploring the actual effects of these variables on the dependent variables.
However, we only do this to obtain the calculated means tables.
If the mean difference was lower than 0.5, we simply stated that no significant
differences in the data were found. Any mean differences equal to or greater than 0.5 were worth
reporting. For example, if there are no differences between the mean of male participants and the

mean of female participants we state something such as overall participants agreed it is important
to complete a certificate, and provide the overall mean and standard deviation. If there is a
difference between the mean of male participants and the mean of female participants, then we
may state something along the lines of overall women--provide the mean and standard deviation
for the female variable--were more likely than men--provide the mean and standard deviaion for
the male variable--to think that it is important to complete a certificate.
Categorical data is expressed in percentages. We analyzed the categorical variables either
as individual variables/items or based on gender and year in school. Only participants who
identified as either male or female were calculated. Freshmen and sophomores were combined
into underclassmen while seniors and fifth years were combined into seniors.
For individual variables/items, we analyzed the descriptive statistics of frequencies. The
frequencies provide the data of how many people selected each answer. For example, a yes or no
question may have data resulting in 152 participants selecting “Yes,” and 291 participants
selecting “no” which totals to 443 participants that answered the questions out of the total 679
participants that were given the survey. However, the frequencies only provide percentages
where the 100% represents the total amount of participants who answered the question and not
out of the total participants that were given the survey. Depending on the question, there are
some instances where we calculated the percentages ourselves in which case the 100% represents
the total participants that were given the survey.
For analyzing categorical variables that are based on genders or year in school, we used a
crosstabs function to provide the data of the gender and year in school characteristics of the
participants who answered the question. For example, again, for the yes or no question the data
may report 37 males and 115 females reported “Yes” while 101 males and 187 females reported

“No.” It will also include data on totals such as a total of 138 males and 302 females answered
the question. The same applies to year in school with the the three variables: underclassmen,
juniors and seniors.
The purpose is to count the number participants and their answers, expressed in
percentages.
Focus Group
Our team consists of five people. The transcription of the focus group is full. We each
transcribed 14 minutes and 13 seconds of audio from the focus group. The transcription consists
of 11 thousand and 15 words and is 42 pages long. Our focus group notes were two pages long
and consisted of 637 words. Our focus group debrief consisted of 1,565 words and was three
pages long.
When analyzing the focus group transcription, we each created an individual document of
codes. We used the tracks tool in Microsoft Word to leave comments of possible code names.
Each team member read through the focus group transcription and pulled quotes that qualified as
supporting evidence, organizing them under specific codes. For example, the topic of a question
from the focus group may be a category or theme and the codes would be the specific answers
and responses given by the participants as supporting evidence.
Next, we listed the names of all of our codes to compare the classification of quotes. This
revealed that we had common codes and we moved forward by deciding which name best
described that code. After finalizing the names of the codes, we began to put them into categories
or themes. Then, we created a master list of the codes by combining all of our quotes. We did not
duplicate quotes under one code. However, a quote may be used for multiple codes. There was

no limit to the number of codes we developed and there was no limit to the number of quotes we
had in each code.
The six categories that emerged from our data include: students’ perceptions of certificate
programs, students’ ideas for changes to programs, perceptions of digital media, negative
perception of communication, basic communication and benefits and awareness. The codes with
the most quotes include: perceiving thoughts of what Experiential Learning entails, suggesting
certificate be included in academic planning, using social media for university information,
naming confusion for experiential learning, and perceiving benefits. These categories and codes
consist of the participants’ knowledge and awareness about the certificates and how they, as
students, prefer information to be communicated about Experiential Learning. The participants
provide supporting evidence that students are not aware of the experiential learning program, do
not understand its purpose and do not associate it with certificates.
PARTICIPANTS
Survey (Written by Macaela Jones & Reviewed by Emily)
Out of the 679 students that collectively took the survey, a majority of the
participants (297 students) come from three schools. The schools with the most
attendance are first the School of Journalism and Mass Communications with
184 participants (27.1%), second the school of education with 96 participants
(10.2%) and finally the school of engineering with 44 participants (6.5%).
Year in School
678 students answered our question asking what year in school they were
in. The data shows that according to year in school 155 students (22.8%) identify

as underclassmen. The underclassmen category is composed of freshmen and
sophomores. 45 students (6.6%) identify as freshmen and 110 (16.2%) identify as
sophomores. 260 (38.3%) identify as juniors and 263 (38.7%) identify as seniors.
The seniors category is composed of seniors and 5th year seniors. 228 students
(33.6%) identify as seniors and 35 (5.2%) identify as 5th year seniors. Keep in
mind not all participants provided an answer for year in school. Further on, the
amount of participants for year in school may not be the same as the total
amount of participants that answered a question.
Number of credit hours
After looking at our data for the number of credit hours students are
taking we found (M=14.8, SD=2.058).
Number of clubs or organizations
After looking at the data for the number of clubs or organizations that
participants were involved in we found (M=9, SD=1.88).
Hours of work per week
After looking at the data for the number of hours participants worked per
week we found (M= 50, SD= 9.99).
Gender
223 (32.84%) students of 679 students identified themselves as males. 451
(66.42%) of the 679 students identified themselves as females. 5 participants

marked other for gender. Of the 5 that marked other out of 679 students (.73%)
only two wrote in a response to describe what other meant to them. The two
(.29%) out of the 5 responding participants both identify as transgender. Keep in
mind we only compared data with participants that identified as either male or
female. Further on, the amount of participants that were male and female may
not be the same as the total amount of participants that answered a question.
Age
After reviewing the data collected from participants about their age we
found (M= 20.59, SD= 1.964).
Race/Ethnicity
573 (84.4%) identify as Caucasian or White American, 39 (5.7%) identify
as Latina/o or Hispanic, 28 (4.1%) of participants identify as Asian or Asian
American, 22 (3.2%) identify as Black or African American, 10 (1.5%) identify as
Other and 5 (.7%) identify as Native American. Of the participants that
responded as other 1 (.1%) identified as Albino African American, 1 (.1%)
identified as Black and Hispanic, 1 (.1%) identified as Black and Latino, 1 (.1%)
identified as Brazilian, 1 (.1%) identified as Caucasian and Latina, 1 (.1%)
identified as Iranian, 1 (.1%) identified as Islander Atlantic, 1 (.1%) identified as
Multiracial, 1 (.1%) identified as White and Black and 1 (.1%) identified as
White/Mexican.
First-generation student

125 (18.4%) of participants identify as a first-generation student.
Focus Group:
Participants’ Demographic Information
Pseudonym Year in
School
Major Minor Race/Ethnicity Gender
Brianna Senior Religious
Studies
N/A Caucasian/Jewish Female
Lauren Junior Exercise
Science
N/A Caucasian Female
Jackie Senior History &
GIST
N/A Caucasian/Hispan
ic
Female
Kelsey Junior Biology Spanish Caucasian Female
Participants’ Characteristics
Pseudonym International
Student
Country
of
Origin
Completed
a
Certificate
Number
Certificate
Completed
Name of
Certificate
Completed
Interested
in
Certificate
Brianna N/A U.S.A Yes 2 GAP &
Leadership
N/A

Certificate
Lauren N/A U.S.A. No N/A N/A Unsure
Jackie N/A U.S.A. No N/A N/A Unsure
Kelsey N/A U.S.A. No N/A N/A Unsure
All of our participants were women and are dedicated to their studies. Two of our
participants, Jackie and Kelsey, were transfer students. At least two of our participants, Brianna
and Jackie, had studied abroad. One participant, Brianna, has completed at least two of the
certificate programs.
During the focus group, our participant Brianna carried the most of the conversation as
she was observed to be the most opinionated. Other participants seem to have an open mind
because they would often nod in agreement with another participant’s answer or elaborate off
another participant’s answer. There were times when we tried to receive a specific answer from
them, the participants would be confused or provide the same answer because the questions
sounded familiar or they perceived that multiple questions were asking the same thing. Some
participants did not sound as confident in their answer because they presented their answer as if
they were making sure it was correct or what we were looking for. In this case, we were unsure
as to how much honesty, in terms of how the feel, were behind their responses. Also, because the
focus group was small, it may have felt intimidating to the participants because at times they
would look at each other to see who would answer first so they could get an idea of how to
respond.

FINDINGS
Survey
Make sure all sections are added before submitting
III.Awareness:
A. Overall awareness:
Q2.1: Familiar with Experiential Learning:(Written by Macaela & Reviewed by
Dylan)
The mean of participants that were familiar with Experiential Learning was 2.55
and the standard deviation was 1.358. There was no difference between the
means of males and females. When comparing the year in school combined we
found that seniors (M = 2.81, SD = 0.09) were more likely than underclassmen
(M = 2.33, SD = 0.11) to be familiar with Experiential Learning. There was not a
significant difference for juniors.
Q2.2: Heard of KU Experiential Learning programs:(Written by Macaela &
Reviewed by Emily)
Out of all participants surveyed only 245 (36.62%) of them had heard of KU
Experiential Learning programs. 36 (23.529%) of underclassmen have heard of
KU Experiential Learning programs. 102 (40%) juniors have heard of the
programs. 106 (40.613%) seniors have heard of the programs. 60 (27.273%) of
the males surveyed stated that they had previously heard of KU Experiential
Learning programs. After surveying females 185 (41.573%) reported hearing of
the programs.

Q2.3_1: Heard of Arts Engagement
A total of 134 (20.02%) participants stated that they had previously heard of Arts
Engagement. After being asked if participants had heard of the Arts Engagement
certificate 14 (38.89%) of underclassmen said yes. 46 (45.10%) juniors surveyed
had heard of the certificate. The senior class had 73 (68.87%) students hear
about the Arts certificate. 30 (50%) of people that identified as males and 101

(54.59%) of people who identify as females had previously heard of the Arts
certificate.
Q2.3_2: Heard of Entrepreneurship
209 (31.24%) participants stated that they had previously heard of the
Entrepreneurship certificate. When asked if students had heard of the
Entrepreneurship certificate 37 (24.18%) underclassmen, 78 (30.59%) juniors
and 94 (36.02%) seniors said they said they had heard of it. Of these students 77
(35%) identified as males and 131 (29.44%) identified as females and had heard
of the certificate.
Q2.3_3: Heard of Global Awareness
293 (43.80%) students reported hearing of Global Awareness certificates. 45
(29.41%) underclassmen, 109 (42.75%) juniors and 138 (52.87%) seniors stated
that they had previously heard of the Global Awareness certificate. 80 (36.36%)
males and 211 (47.42%) females stated that they had heard of the certificate.
Q2.3_4: Heard of Leadership
299 (44.69%) students reported hearing about the Leadership certificate. Of the
students surveyed 52 (33.99%) underclassmen, 120 (47.06%) juniors and 127
(48.66%) seniors had heard of the Leadership certificate. Of those students 93
(42.27%) were male and 203 (45.62%) were female.
Q2.3_5: Heard of Research Experience

172 (25.71%) of participants stated they had previously heard of the Research
Experience certificate. Of the students surveyed 31 (20.26%) underclassmen, 59
(23.13%) juniors and 82 (31.41%) seniors had heard of the Research Experience
certificate. Out of these students 55 (25%) who identify as male and 116 (26.07%)
who identify as female were familiar with the certificate.
Q2.3_6: Heard of Service Learning
226 (33.78%) participants stated that they had previously heard of the Service
Learning Certificate. Out of the students that were asked about the Service
Learning certificate, 27 (17.65%) underclassmen, 76 (29.80%) juniors and 122
(46.74%) seniors had heard of it. Of these students 48 (21.82%) who identify as
male and 176 (39.55%) who identify as females had previously heard of the
certificate.
Q2.3_7: Never heard of any of these certificates
183 (27.35%) participants stated they had never heard of any of the certificate
programs. Out of the participants 62 (40.52%) underclassmen, 70 (27.45%)
juniors and 51 (19.54%) seniors surveyed had never heard of any of the previously
mentioned certificates. Of these students 65 (29.55%) identify as male and 117
(26.29%) identify as female.
B. Hearing about certificates:
Q2.4: First hear about KU Experiential Learning or Certificates:(Written by
Macaela & Reviewed by Emily)

When asked what year participants had first heard about KU Experiential
Learning or certificates 32 (24.06%) males and 90 (29.51%) females reported
freshman year, 36 (25%) males and 108 (35.41%) females reported sophomore
year, 27 (20.30%) males and 57 (18.69%) females report junior year, 7 (5.26%)
males and 7 (2.30%) females report senior year and 31 (23.31%) males and 43
(14.10%) females report not being able to recall. 45 (57.69%) underclassmen, 42
(24.28%) juniors, 34 (17.99%) seniors report first hearing about KU Experiential
Learning or certificates during freshman year. 17 (21.79%) underclassmen, 62
(35.84%) juniors and 66 (34.92%) seniors report first hearing about it during
sophomore year. 3 (3.85%) underclassmen, 40 (23.12%) juniors and 42 (22.22%)
seniors heard about it during junior year. 0 (0%) underclassmen, 0 (0%) juniors
and 14 (7.41%) seniors heard about KU Experiential Learning or certificates
during senior year. 13 (16.67%) underclassmen, 29 (16.76%) juniors and 33
(17.46%) seniors do not recall when they heard about it.
Q2.5: How did you hear about KU Experiential Learning or its certificates? Please
select all that apply. (Written by Sookie & Reviewed by Macaela)
The top five ways that participants heard about KU Experiential Learning or any
of the certificates are as follows: email, class presentation, faculty, friend and
advisor. A total of 443 participants (65.24%) have heard of KU Experiential
Learning or its certificates. Among the 443 that answered, participants were
underclassmen (N=79, 17.83%), juniors (N=172, 38.83%) or seniors (N=191,
43.12%). Among the 443 that answered, participants identified as a male (N=138,
31.15%) or female (N=302, 68.17%).

Email
Of the 443 participants who have heard about KU Experiential Learning or any of
the certificates, 166 participants (37.47%) heard about them through email.
Among 443 participants, a total of 22 were underclassmen (4.99%), 61 were
juniors (13.77%) and 83 were seniors (18.74%). Among 163 of those participants
identified as male (N=44, 9.93%) or female (N=119, 26.86%).
Class Presentation
the certificates, 151 participants (34.09%) heard about them through class
presentations. Among 443 participants, a total of 19 were underclassmen
(4.29%), 61 were juniors (13.77%) and 70 were seniors (15.8%). Among 150 of
those participants identified as male (N=40, 9.03%) or female (N=110, 24.83%).
Faculty
the certificates, 142 participants (32.05%) heard about them through faculty.

Among the 443 participants, a total of 18 were underclassmen (4.06%), 55 were
Friend
the certificates, 96 participants (21.67%) heard about them through a friend.
Among the 443 participants who answered, a total of 14 were underclassmen
(3.16%), 44 were juniors (9.93%) and 38 were seniors (8.58%). Among 95 of
those participants identified as male (N=32, 7.22%) or female (N=63, 14.22%).
Advisor
the certificates, 86 participants (19.41%) heard about them through an advisor.
Among the 443 participants, a total of 15 were underclassmen (17.44%), 37 were
Q2.6: Do you know anyone who has completed one of the KU Experiential
Learning Certificates? (Written by Sookie & Reviewed by Macaela)
Only a total of 443 participants reported knowing or not knowing someone who
has completed one of the KU Experiential Learning Certificates. A total of 152
participants out of that 443 (34.31%) reported knowing someone who has
completed at least one of the KU Experiential Learning Certificates. Among the
152 participants that reported knowing someone, a total 8 were underclassmen
(5.26%), 45 were juniors (29.61%) and 98 were seniors (64.47%). Among the 152

participants that reported knowing someone, identified as male (N=37, 24.34%)
or female (N=115, 75.66%).
Conclusion: This category covers the awareness of KU Experiential Learning and
its certificate programs. It explores the familiarity and initial outreach to
students. Overall, participants reported being not familiar at all to familiar with
KU Experiential learning. A majority of participants were not aware about the KU
Experiential Learning programs or any of the certificates. Among the students
who were aware of KU Experiential Learning, majority of students recalled
hearing about the program for the first time their sophomore or junior year. The
Global Awareness and Leadership certificates had the most students aware of its
program.
IV. Perceptions:
Q3.1-Q3.3: (Written by Sookie & Reviewed by Macaela)
Q3.1: How interesting does the term “Experiential Learning” sound to you?
Overall, participants thought “experiential learning” sounded more uninteresting
than interesting (M=2.988, SD=0.051). There was no difference between genders
or year in school.
Q3.2: How beneficial do you think “experiential learning” would be for you?
Overall, participants thought “experiential learning” would be more than
beneficial (M=3.512, SD=0.047). There was no difference between genders or
year in school.

Q3.3: How important do you feel involvement outside of the classroom is to a
student’s success in college?
Overall, participants thought involvement outside of the classroom was
important to a student’s success in college (M=4.157, SD=0.045). There was no
difference between genders or year in school.
Q3.4: How appealing do the following certificates sound to you based on their
name? (Written by Sookie & Reviewed by Macaela)
The certificates that participants thought, based on their name, were most
appealing to least appealing are as follows: Leadership, Global Awareness,
Service Learning, Research Experience and Arts Engagement.
Leadership
Overall, participants thought “Leadership” sounded more than appealing
(M=3.765, SD=0.048). There was no difference between genders or year in
school.
Global Awareness

Overall, participants thought “Global Awareness” sounded more than appealing
school.
Service Learning
Overall, participants who thought “Service Learning” sounded appealing
school.
Research Experience
Overall, participants who thought “Research Experience” sounded less than
appealing (M=2.97, SD=0.059). There was no difference between genders or year
in school.
Arts Engagement
Overall, participants who thought “Arts Engagement” sounded less than
appealing (M=2.538, SD=0.06). There was no difference in means between
genders or year in school.
Q3.5: Overall, I feel that completing a certificate sounds: (Written by Sookie &
Reviewed by Macaela)
Q3.5_1: On a scale from simple to complicated
Overall, participants thought completing a certificate was more complicated than
simple (M=3.312, SD=0.044). There was no difference between genders or year
in school.
Q3.5_2: On a scale from fast to time-consuming

Overall, participants thought completing a certificate was more time-consuming
than fast (M=3.697, SD=0.043). There was no difference between genders or year
in school.
Q3.5_3: On a scale from boring to interesting
Overall, participants thought completing a certificate was more interesting than
boring (M=3.242, SD=0.050). There was no difference in means between
Conclusion: Overall, participants thought “Experiential Learning” sounded
interesting and more than beneficial. Overall, participants felt involvement
outside of the classroom is important to a student’s success in college. Leadership
and Global Awareness were the most appealing certificates based on their names.
Participants perceive experiential learning as beneficial but may have barriers
pursuing a certificate because they are unsure if it is more complicated than
simple, time-consuming than fast, and more interested than boring.
V. Interactions:
A. Email:
Q4.1: Have you ever received an email from KU saying you could apply for a
certificate program? (Written by Sookie & Reviewed by Macaela)
Out of 679 participants, 287 report (42.27%) receiving an email from KU saying
he or she could apply for a certificate program. A total of 28 underclassmen
(4.12%), 108 juniors (15.91%) and 150 seniors (22.09%) received an email.

Among those identified, 82 males (12.08%) and 203 females (29.9%) received an
email.
Q4.2-Q4.3: (Written by Sookie & Reviewed by Macaela)
Q4.2: This email was:
Q4.2_1: On a scale from unclear to clear:
Overall, participants thought the email was clear (M=3.637, SD=0.106). There
was no difference between the means of males and females. When comparing the
year in school combined, we found that seniors (M=3.984, SD=0.104) were more
likely than underclassmen (M=3.226, SD=0.271) to think the email was clear.
The difference in means between seniors and underclassmen was 0.758.
Q4.2_2: On a scale from not interesting to interesting:
The mean of participants was 2.885 with a standard deviation of 0.109. There
was a 0.513 difference between the means of males and females. Overall women
(M = 3.142, SD = 0.106) were more likely than men (M = 2.629, SD = 0.19) to
think that this email was interesting. There was no difference between year in
school.
Q4.2_3: On a scale from not helpful to helpful:
Overall, participants thought the email was helpful (M=3.275, SD=0.103). There
was no difference between the means of males and females. When comparing the
year in school combined, we found that seniors (M=3.621, SD=0.101) were more
likely than underclassmen (M=2.940, SD=0.263) to think the email was helpful.
The difference in means between seniors and underclassmen was 0.681.
Q4.3: This email made me want to learn more about the certificate program.

Q4.3_1: On a scale from strongly disagree to strongly agree:
The mean of participants was 3.029 with a standard deviation of 0.102. There
was a 0.538 difference between the means of males and females. Overall, women
(M=3.298, SD=0.104) were more likely than men (M=2.76, SD= 0.176) to want
to learn more about the certificate program because she or he received an email.
There was no difference between year in school.
B. Website:
Q4.4: Have you visited KU Experiential Learning’s website or one of the
certificate programs’ website? (Written by Sookie & Reviewed by Macaela)
A total of 173 out of 679 participants (25.67%) have visited the KU Experiential
Learning’s website or one of the certificate programs’ website. Among those
identified, a total of 129 females (19%) and 44 males (6.48%) visited a website. A
total of 103 seniors (15.17%), 53 juniors (7.81%) and 16 underclassmen (2.36%)
visited a website.
Q4.5: (Written by Macaela & Reviewed by Emily)
Q4.5_1: Visited Experiential Learning’s website
59 (34.30%) of participants stated that they visited Experiential Learning’s
website. 4 (25%) underclassmen, 17 (32.08%) juniors and 38 (36.89%) seniors
reported having visited Experiential Learning’s website. 13 (29.55%) males and
46 (35.66%) females mentioned previously visiting the website.

Q4.5_2:Visited Arts Engagement website
Of the participants who reported visiting KU Experiential Learning’s website or
one of the certificate programs’ websites 40 (23.26%) participants said they
visited the Arts Engagement website. 3 (18.75%) underclassmen, 11 (20.75%)
juniors and 25 (24.27%) seniors reported having visited the Arts Engagement’s

website. 7 (15.91%) males and 33 (25.58%) females mentioned previously visiting
the website.
Q4.5_3: Visited Entrepreneurship’s website
Of the participants who reported visiting KU Experiential Learning’s website 25
(14.53%) participants said they had visited the Entrepreneurship website. 1
(6.25%) underclassman, 6 (11.32%) juniors and 18 (17.48%) seniors reported
having visited Entrepreneurship’s website. 7 (15.91%) males and 18 (13.95%)
females mentioned previously visiting the website.
Q4.5_4: Visited Global Awareness website
(61.05%) participants said they had visited the Global Awareness website. 7
(43.75%) underclassmen, 33 (62.26%) juniors and 65 (63.11%) seniors reported
having visited Global Awareness website. 23 (52.27%) males and 82 (63.57%)
Q4.5_5: Visited Leadership’s website
(31.98%) participants said they had visited the Leadership website. 3 (18.75%)
underclassmen, 22 (41.51%) juniors and 30 (29.13%) seniors reported having
visited Leadership’s website. 13 (29.55%) males and 42 (32.56%) females
mentioned previously visiting the website.
Q4.5_6: Visited Research Experience’s website
(22.67%) participants said they had visited the Research Experience website. 10

(18.87%) juniors and 29 (28.16%) seniors visited Research Experience’s website.
13 (29.55%) males and 26 (20.16%) females mentioned previously visiting the
website.
Q4.5_7: Visited Service Learning’s website
(41.86%) participants said that they have visited the Service Learning website. 5
(31.25%) underclassmen, 16 (30.19%) juniors and 51 (49.51%) seniors reported
having visited Service Learning’s website. 13 (29.55%) males and 59 (45.74%)
Q4.6-4.13: (Written by Dylan Jacobs & Reviewed by Bria Strickland)
Q4.6.1: Experiential Learning website -- Unclear:Clear
For those that had visited the Experiential Learning website, participants agreed
the website was mostly clear (M = 3.76, SD = 0.25) with no noticeable
differences between gender and year in school.
Q4.6.2: Experiential Learning website -- Not helpful:Helpful
For those that had visited the Experiential Learning website, underclassmen (M =
4.17, SD = 0.5) and seniors (M = 4.12, SD = 0.17) were more likely than juniors
(M = 3.56, SD = 0.28) to agree the website was helpful. There were no noticeable
differences between genders.
Q4.6.3: Experiential Learning website -- Boring:Interesting
For those that had visited the Experiential Learning website, underclassmen (M =
3.833, SD = 0.56) were more likely than juniors (M = 3.25, SD = 0.31) and
seniors (M = 3.24, SD = 0.19) to say the website was interesting.

Q4.6.4: Experiential Learning website -- Unappealing:Appealing
the website was neither appealing nor unappealing (M = 3.51, SD = 0.23), with no
noticeable differences between gender and year in school.
Q4.6.5: Experiential Learning website -- Poor quality:High quality
the website was of fairly high quality (M = 3.64, SD = 0.20) with no noticeable
differences between gender and year in school.
Q4.7.1: Arts Engagement website -- Unclear:Clear
For those that had visited the Arts Engagement website, underclassmen (M =
4.33, SD = 0.54) were more likely than seniors (M = 3.67, SD = 0.22) to say the
website was clear. Overall, participants agreed the website was mostly clear. (M =
3.95, SD = 0.24)
Q4.7.2: Arts Engagement website -- Not helpful:Helpful
For those that had visited the Arts Engagement website, juniors (M = 4.05, SD =
0.57) were more likely than seniors (M = 3.43, SD = 0.26) to say the website was
helpful.
Q4.7.3: Arts Engagement website -- Boring:Interesting
3.00, SD = 0.57) were less likely than juniors (M = 3.65, SD = 0.52) and seniors
(M = 3.58, SD = 0.23) to say the website was interesting. Males (M = 3.83, SD =
3.27) were more likely than females (M = 3.27, SD = 0.23) to say the website was
interesting.
Q4.7.4: Arts Engagement website -- Unappealing:Appealing

2.67, SD = 0.63) were less likely than seniors (M = 3.37, SD = 0.26) to describe
the website as appealing.
Q4.7.5: Arts Engagement website -- Poor quality:High quality
For those that had visited the Arts Engagement website, participants agreed the
website was neither poor quality nor high quality, with no noticeable differences
between gender and year in school. (M = 3.23, SD = 0.25)
Q4.8.1: Entrepreneurship website -- Unclear:Clear
For those that had visited the Entrepreneurship website, participants agreed the
website was clear, with no noticeable differences between gender and year in
school. (M = 4.01, SD = 0.29)
Q4.8.2: Entrepreneurship website -- Not helpful:Helpful
For those that had visited the Entrepreneurship website, participants agreed the
website helpful, with no noticeable differences between gender and year in
school. (M = 3.93, SD = 0.35)
Q4.8.3: Entrepreneurship website -- Boring:Interesting
For those that had visited the Entrepreneurship website, participants thought the
website was mostly boring, with no noticeable differences between gender and
year in school. (M = 2.78, SD = 0.34)
Q4.8.4: Entrepreneurship website -- Unappealing:Appealing
For those that had visited the Arts Engagement website, seniors (M = 2.96, SD =
0.28) were less likely than juniors (M = 3.70, SD = 0.61) to say the website was

appealing. Males (M = 3.42, SD = 0.60) were more likely than females (M = 2.83,
SD = 0.42) to say the website was appealing.
Q4.8.5: Entrepreneurship website -- Poor quality:High quality
For those that had visited the Arts Engagement website, Males (M = 3.50, SD =
0.45) were much more likely than females (M = 2.87, SD = 0.31) to describe the
website as being of high quality. No noticeable difference in year in school was
found.
Q4.9.1: Global Awareness website -- Unclear:Clear
For those that had visited the Global Awareness website, underclassmen (M = 4.29, SD
= 0.43) were more likely than juniors (M = 3.79, SD = 0.22) to say the website was
unclear.
Q4.9.2: Global Awareness website -- Not helpful:Helpful
For those that had visited the Global Awareness website, participants reported the
website was helpful, with no noticeable differences between gender and year in school.
(M = 4.10, SD = 0.14)
Q4.9.3: Global Awareness website -- Boring:Interesting
website was neither boring nor interesting, with no noticeable differences between
gender and year in school. (M = 3.76, SD = 0.14)
Q4.9.4: Global Awareness website -- Unappealing:Appealing
website was mostly appealing, with no noticeable differences between gender and year
in school. (M = 3.89, SD = 0.14)

Q4.9.5: Global Awareness website -- Poor quality:High quality
For those that had visited the Global Awareness website, juniors (M = 3.49, SD = 0.20)
were less likely than underclassmen (M = 4.14, SD = 0.38) to describe the website as
being of high quality.
Q4.10.1: Leadership website -- Unclear:Clear
For those that had visited the Leadership website, seniors (M = 3.95, SD = 0.28) were
much more likely than underclassmen (M = 3.00, SD = 0.74) and seniors (M = 3.58, SD
= 0.23) to say the website was clear. Males (M = 3.17, SD = 0.38) were less likely than
females (M = 3.82, SD = 0.42) to say the website was clear.
Q4.10.2: Leadership website -- Not helpful:Helpful
more likely than juniors (M = 3.24, SD = 0.28) and underclassmen (M = 3.25, SD =
0.67) to say the website was helpful. Males (M = 3.14, SD = 0.34) were less likely than
females (M = 3.87, SD = 0.38) to say the website was helpful.
Q4.10.3: Leadership website -- Boring:Interesting
more likely than underclassmen (M = 3.00, SD = 0.67) to say the website was
interesting. Males (M = 2.99, SD = 0.34) were more likely than females (M = 3.74, SD =
0.38) to say the website was boring.
Q4.10.4: Leadership website -- Unappealing:Appealing
For those that had visited the Leadership website, males (M = 3.23, SD = 0.34) were
more likely than females (M = 3.82, SD = 0.38) to say the website was unappealing. No
noticeable difference in year in school was found.
Q4.10.5: Leadership website -- Poor quality:High quality

For those that had visited the Leadership website, participants reported the website was
of poor quality nor high quality, with no noticeable differences between gender and year
in school. (M = 3.70, SD = 0.26)
Q4.11.1: Research Experience website -- Unclear:Clear
For those that had visited the Research Experience website, participants reported the
website was mostly clear, with no noticeable differences between gender and year in
school. (M = 3.89, SD = 0.21)
Q4.11.2: Research Experience website -- Not helpful:Helpful
website was neither helpful nor unhelpful, with no noticeable differences between
Q4.11.3: Research Experience website -- Boring:Interesting
website was neither boring nor interesting, with no noticeable differences between
Q4.11.4: Research Experience website -- Unappealing:Appealing
For those that had visited the Research Experience website, seniors (M = 3.64, SD =
0.23) were more likely than juniors (M = 3.00, SD = 0.35) to describe the website as
appealing.
Q4.11.5: Research Experience website -- Poor quality:High quality
For those that had visited the Research Experience website, females (M = 3.70, SD =
0.24) were more likely than males (M = 3.29, SD = 0.27) to describe the website as
being of high quality.
Q4.12.1: Service Learning website -- Unclear:Clear

For those that had visited the Service Learning website, seniors (M = 4.07, SD = 0.20)
were more likely than juniors (M = 3.48, SD = 0.40) to say the website was clear.
Q4.12.2: Service Learning website -- Not helpful:Helpful
were more likely than juniors (M = 3.48, SD = 0.39) and underclassmen (M = 2.38, SD
= 0.58) to report the website as being helpful. Males (M = 2.94, SD = 0.44) were more
likely than females (M = 3.78, SD = 0.21) to report the website as unhelpful.
Q4.12.3: Service Learning website -- Boring:Interesting
were more likely than juniors (M = 2.67, SD = 0.38) and underclassmen (M = 2.75, SD =
0.56) to report the website as being interesting. Males (M = 2.59, SD = 0.42) were more
likely than females (M = 3.54, SD = 0.20) to report the website as boring.
Q4.12.4: Service Learning website -- Unappealing:Appealing
For those that had visited the Service Learning website, underclassmen (M = 2.38, SD =
0.52) were more likely than juniors (M = 3.19, SD = 0.35) and seniors (M = 3.85, SD =
0.17) to report the website as being unappealing. Males (M = 2.63, SD = 0.39) were
more likely than females (M = 3.65, SD = 0.18) to report the website as unappealing.
Q4.12.5: Service Learning website -- Poor quality:High quality
For those that had visited the Service Learning website, participants reported the
website was neither of poor quality nor high quality, with no noticeable differences
between gender and year in school. (M = 3.61, SD = 0.21)
C. Participants who completed a certificate:

Q4.13: Have you completed at least one certificate? (Written by Dylan Jacobs &
Reviewed by Bria Strickland)
104 (15.3%) of participants reported that they have completed at least one certificate.
Including 5 (5.20%) underclassmen, 25 (26%) juniors, and 73 (75.92%) seniors reported
having completed at least one certificate. 20 (20.8%) males and 84 (87.36%) females
reported having completed at least one certificate
Q4.14: (Written by Macaela & Reviewed by Emily)
Q4.14_1: Completed Arts Engagement
Overall, 4 (5.48%) seniors and 2 (8.00%) juniors stated that they completed the Arts
Engagement certificate. Of those students 6 (7.143%) were female.
Q4.14_2: Completed Entrepreneurship
Overall, 2 (2.74%) seniors and 1 (4.00%) junior stated that they completed the
Entrepreneurship certificate. Of those students, 2 (2.38%) participants were female and
1 (5.00%) was male.
Q4.14_3: Completed Global Awareness
Overall, 34 (46.58%) seniors, 6 (24.00%) juniors and 1 (20.00%) underclassman stated
that they completed the Global Awareness certificate. Of those students, 33 (39.29%)
participants were female and 9 (45.00%) were male.
Q4.14_4: Completed Leadership
Overall, 16 (21.92%) seniors and 4 (16.00%) juniors stated that they completed the
Leadership certificate. Of those students, 15 (17.86%) participants were female and 5
(25.00%) were male.
Q4.14_5: Completed Research Experience

Overall, 9 (12.33%) seniors and 2 (8.00%) juniors stated that they completed the
Research Experience certificate. Of those students, 10 (11.90) participants were female
and 1 (5.00%) was male.
Q4.14_6: Completed Service Learning
Overall, (52.05) seniors, 10 (40.00%) juniors and 4 (80.00%) underclassmen stated that
they completed the Service Learning certificate. Of those students. 46 (54.76)
participants were female and 6 (30.00%) were male.
Q4.15: Overall, completing a certificate was: (Written by Bria & Reviewed by Sookie)
In terms of means from highest to lowest, completing a certificate was interesting, fast
and simple.
On a scale of boring to interesting
Overall, participants thought that completing a certificate program was interesting
(M=4.02, SD=0.892). There were no significant differences based on gender or year in
school.
On a scale of fast to time-consuming
Overall, participants thought that completing a certificate was fast (M=2.79, SD=1.212).
Compared to juniors (M=2.640 SD=.244) and seniors (M=2.808 SD=.143),
underclassmen (M= 3.400 SD= .545) were more likely to think completing a certificate
was time-consuming. The difference in means between underclassmen and seniors was
0.592. The difference in means between underclassmen and juniors was 0.76). Females
(M=3.048 SD= .210) were more likely to think that completing a certificate was time
consuming compared to males (M=2.352 SD=.282)
On a scale of simple to complicated

Overall, participants thought completing a certificate was simple (M=2.13, SD=1.077).
Underclassmen (M=2.600 SD =.486) were more likely to think completing a certificate
was simple compared to juniors (M=2.08 SD= .217) and seniors (M=2.808 SD= .127).
The difference in means between underclassmen and juniors was 0.52. There were no
significant differences based on gender.
Q4.16-Q4.19: (Written by Bria & Reviewed by Sookie
Q4.16:
Participants reported enjoying taking the classes necessary for the certificate programs
(M=3.95 SD=1.101). Seniors (M=4.107 SD=.169) enjoyed the classes necessary for the
certificate more compared to juniors (M=3.714 SD=.247) and underclassmen (M=3.6
SD=4.95). There were no significant differences based on gender.
Q4.17
Participants reported enjoying the out-of-classroom activities necessary to complete a
certificate program (M=4.26 SD= .995). Seniors (M=4.488 SD=.148) enjoyed the out-
of-classroom activities more compared to juniors (M=3.754 SD=.216) and
underclassmen (M=4.2 SD=.434). There were no significant differences based on
gender.

Q4.18
Participants reported enjoying reflecting on their experiences (M=3.71 SD= 1.244).
Juniors (M=3.560 SD=.249) and seniors (M=3.822 SD=.146) were more likely to enjoy
reflecting on their experiences compared to underclassmen (M=3.0 SD.556). The
difference in means between underclassmen and seniors was 0.822. The difference in
means between underclassmen and juniors was 0.56. There were no significant
differences based on gender.
Q4.19
Overall participants thought that the expectations for the certificate programs were very
realistic (M=4.07 SD=1.100). There were no significant differences based on gender or
year in school.
D. Participants who did not complete a certificate:
Q4.20: (Written by Bria & Reviewed by Sookie)
The top three reasons that participants reported for not being interested in completing a
certificate based on means are as follows: too busy (M=3.75 SD= 1.053), no
option/room to take an extra course(M=3.52 SD= 1.199), and do not wish to take any
extra courses (M=3.52 SD=1.134). There were no significant differences based on gender
or year in school.
The top five reasons that participants reported for considering completing a certificate
are as follows: boost resume (M=4.34 SD=0.87), benefit future career (M=4.22
SD=0.933), impress future employers (M=4.15 SD=1.009), appear on transcript
(M=3.99 SD=1.045) and specialize in field of study(M=3.88 SD=1.038). There were no
significant differences based on gender or year in school.

The top three groups of people who participants reported as recommenders for
completing a certificate are as follows: a potential employer (M=4.50 SD=0.899), a
career advisor (M=4.05 SD= 1.06) and an academic advisor (M=3.91 SD=1.112). There
were no significant differences based on gender or year in school.
Conclusion: In terms of interactions, participants understand the benefits of the
certificates and are interested in pursuing them. However, participants lack the
motivation to pursue certificates because of barriers such as additional courses and
time. Participants considered completing a certificate if it benefited anything in relation
to career or field of study. Most participants that completed a certificate were
recommended by one-on-one interactions.
VI. Strategies:
A. Overall strategies:
Q5.1-Q5.9: (Written by Emily Kawola & Reviewed by Dylan)
Q5.1

Participants reported that they were neither more likely nor unlikely to read the
back of a t-shirt (M= 3.23 SD=1.393). There was no difference between genders
or year in school.
Q5.2
Participants reported that they would explore the KU Website for
information on extracurricular activities (M= 2.16 SD=2.00). There was no
difference between genders or year in school.
Q5.3
Participants reported that they were neither more likely nor unlikely to
delete emails from KU unless they are emails from professors (M= 3.52 SD=
1.370). There was no difference between genders or year in school.
Q5.4
Participants reported that on the idea of spending time outside of the
classroom on an activity not pertaining to class (M= 3.20 SD=1.194). There was
no difference between genders or year in school.
Q5.5
Participants reported on the ability to relate to other fields different from
their own field of study is important (M=3.58 SD= 1.123). There was no
significant difference between genders. There is no significant difference between
underclassmen (M=3.403) and juniors (M=3.341) but seniors show a difference
(M= 3.845).

Q5.6
Participants reported on being often overwhelmed with the coursework in
their major (M= 3.56 SD=1.101). There was no difference between genders or
year in school.
Q5.7
Participants reported they would not mind taking some more classes to
earn a certificate as long as they still graduate on time (M=3.44 SD= 1.240).
There was no difference between genders or year in school.
Q5.8
Participants reported they would take a class that counted towards a
certificate (M=3.59 SD=1.055). There was no difference between genders or year
in school.
Q5.9
Participants reported that they enjoy taking classes in fields different than
their own field of study (M=3.25 SD=1.189). There was no difference between
B. Attending an informational event:
Q.5.10 I would attend an informational event for a certificate program if:
(Written by Bria & Reviewed by Sookie)

The top three reasons participants reported for attending an informational event
are as follows: the topic was relevant to major (M=3.97 SD=1.039), knew friends
would be there (M=3.95 SD=1.113) and free food (M=3.94 SD=1.186). There were
no significant differences based on gender and year in school.
C. Learning more about experiential learning/certificates:
Q.5.11 I would be interested in learning more about KU Experiential Learning or
its certificate via: (Written by Bria & Reviewed by Sookie)
The top five outlets participants reported for learning more about experiential
learning/certificates are as follows: an advisor, a friend, faculty, a class
presentation and email.
Participants reported they would be interested in learning more about
Experiential Learning from advisor (M=3.85 SD=1.154). There were no
Experiential Learning from a friend (M=3.71 SD= 1.168). There were no
Experiential Learning from faculty (M=3.68 SD=1.166). There were no significant
differences based on gender or year in school.

Experiential Learning from class presentation (M=3.33 SD 1.266). Overall,
women (M=3.647, SD=0.103) were more likely than men (M= 3.138, SD=0.146)
to be interested in learning more about Experiential Learning from a class
presentation. There were no significant differences based on year in school.
Experiential Learning through email (M=3.10 SD=1.353). There were no
Conclusion: The questions asked in this section are to help the client explore ways for
Experiential Learning to reach out to students about programs based on their preferred
methods of communication for both events at KU and Experiential Learning specifically.
Students reported the top five ways in which they wanted to hear about Experiential
Learning. Experiential Learning can increase interaction via advisors and KU faculty, in
class presentation, and email. Moving forward, this data will help Experiential Learning
determine more successful ways to reach the student population.
VII. Certificate-Specific Questions:
A. Personal growth:

Participants perceive the most important to least important certificates for
personal growth to be Leadership (M= 4.17 SD= 1.062), Global Awareness
(M=3.83 SD=1.227), Service Learning (M=3.43SD=1.262), Research Experience
(M=3.39 SD= 1.266) and Arts Engagement (M= 2.92 SD=1.404). There were no
B. Future career:
Q7.2: (Written by Emily Kawola & Reviewed by Dylan)
Participants reported on how important certain certificates would be in their
future careers. In order of importance, leadership, global awareness, research
and art engagement.

Participants reported on the importance of Leadership in their future
careers (M=4.36 SD= 0.980). There was no difference between genders or year in
school.
Participants reported on the importance of Global Awareness in their
future careers (M=3.82 SD=1.247). There was no difference between genders or
year in school.
Participants reported on the importance of Research in their future careers
(M=3.71 SD= 1.273). There was no difference between genders or year in school.
Participants reported on the importance of Service Learning in their future
careers (M= 3.30 SD= 1.33). There was no difference between genders or year in
school.
Participants reported on the importance of Arts Engagement in their
future careers (M= 2.53 SD= 1.432). There was no difference between genders or
year in school.
C. Activities:
Q7.3: (Written by Emily Kawola & Reviewed by Dylan)
Participants reported on how often they take part in activities related to
the certificate programs. In order of importance, leadership, service learning,
global awareness, research and arts engagement.

Leadership (M= 3.56 SD=1.262). There was no difference between genders or
year in school.
Service Learning (M= 2.90 SD= 1.327). There was no difference between genders
or year in school.
Global Awareness (M= 2.89 SD= 1.362). There was no difference between
Research (M=2.83 SD= 1.339). There was no difference between genders or year
in school.
Arts Engagement (M= 2.45 SD= 1.452). There was no difference between genders
or year in school.
VIII.Media Diet:
A. Learning about campus events:
Q8.1:
The top five outlets for learning
about campus events are (in
order) Word of Mouth, Class
announcements, Email,
Facebook and Twitter.

Participants reported on how often the learn about events on campus
through word of mouth/friends (M=4.29 SD=.974). There was no difference
between genders or year in school.
through class announcements (M=3.69 SD= 1.183). There was no difference
through email (M=3.51 SD=1.320). There was no difference between genders or
year in school.
through facebook (M=3.14 SD=1.392). There was no difference between year in
school. There was a
difference between
genders, male (M=2.784
SD= 0.097) and female
(M=3.304 SD=.068)

through twitter (M= 2.81 SD=1.466). There was no difference between genders or
year in school.
B. Using social media:
Q8.2:
The top five reason that participants are using social media are (in order)
communicate with friends, keep up with current events, promote themselves
online, connect with KU groups and to look for social activities on campus.
Participants reported that they use social media platforms to Communicate with
friends (M=4.51 SD= .907). There was no difference between genders or year in
school.
Participants reported that they use social media platforms to keep up with
current events (M=3.94 SD=1.141). There was no difference between genders or
year in school.
Participants reported that they use social media platforms to promote
themselves online (M=3.23 SD=1.350). There was no difference between year in

school. There was a difference in gender, male (M= 2.849 SD=.092) and female
(M=3.355 SD= .065)
Participants reported that they
use social media platforms to connect
with KU groups (M=3.00 SD=1.350).
There was no difference
between year in school.
There was a difference
between male (M= 2.613
SD= .092) and female
(M=3.216 SD=.065)
participants.
Participants reported that they use social media platforms to look for
social activities to do on campus (M=2.98 SD=1.352). There was no difference

Conclusion: These questions helped to show the major sources in which the
participants gather information from. This can help the client to target their
message to the areas in which it would be most read. These question also help to
understand the importance of social media to the respondent. It shows what they
use it for, which can help to understand how to format the client’s social media
platforms.
IX. Open-Ended Qs: (Written by Emily Kawola & Reviewed By Dylan Jacobs)
Q6.1:
This question was asking our participants what would motivate them to
participate in a certificate program. Many of the participants said that boosting or
adding to their resume was a motivational factor. They felt as though by completing a
certificate, and having it on their resume could help them when applying for jobs or
graduate schools.
Another consistent idea that participants had was the idea of appealing to a
future employer. Many felt that if they would ensure that if it could help them get a job
and a employer would recognize the certificate they would participate.
Participants reported that receiving an addition on their diploma, or an extra
tassel would motivate them to participate in the certificate program. Many reported that
a physical
Many participants felt that they would be motivated to complete a certificate if
they did not have to take any extra classes. If the certificate fit into their schedule of
classes and did not hinder their graduation date.
Q6.2:

These questions asked participants what they think the future benefits of an
experiential learning certificate could have for their future career. The main thread
through the responses to this question are experience.
Many participants feel that through the experiential learning program they can
gain real world experience that they can apply to future jobs.
In addition they also felt that they could bolster their resume for potential
employers. Many felt that it could help to set them apart from other applicants.
Some participants reported that an experiential learning certificate would benefit
their overall knowledge.
Conclusion: These questions helped to fully understand both the respondents
motivations and their perceived future benefits of the certificate program.These answers
can help the client to target their messaging about the certificate goals It can also help to
decide where would be the best place to place their messages.
Focus Group
Benefits and Awareness (Dylan Jacobs)
In this category, the participants gave information regarding benefits, motivations, perceptions of
Experiential Learning, as well as awareness insight. This category will be beneficial in helping
us recommend outreach strategies based on a student's background, as well as their pre-
graduation goals.
Perceiving benefits
This code includes the benefits, regarding both professional development and personal growth,

associated with certification through Experiential Learning as expressed by the participants.
When speaking of benefits and what certification entails, Kelsey, a junior majoring in
biology said, “I think a certificate is something that is always beneficial you could always
add it to your resume or add that to a lot of things professionally and that can help you
just the fact that you have a certificate in something.”
Brianna, a senior majoring in religious studies responded to the comment by Kelsey in
saying, “It helps you stand out too,” she added, “And when you’re putting your resume in
there. It’s like oh I did this this and this and got a certificate if they don’t know what it is
they can ask you and it is a time to really show yourself.”
Kelsey also commented on the possible benefits of the Leadership certificate by saying,
“if you have a leadership certificate and you’re going into something like a job it might
help you.”
Lauren, a junior majoring in exercise science said, “Because it makes you well-rounded.
It like pulls you out of your little space, I don't know.”
Kelsey also said, “anybody wants anything extra that they can get to put themselves
ahead.”

Code conclusion: This code provided useful information about the participants feelings towards
being certified, and how it may benefit them. We found most responses were positive and
certification was seen as a beneficial and useful to the participants.
Where/how participants heard of Experiential Learning
This code includes information regarding where and/or how participants heard of Experiential
Learning, quotes include both online and face-to-face methods of first contact.
Brianna, a senior in religious studies, who was the only participant to have heard of the
Experiential Learning programs was asked how she heard about the Global Awareness
Program and the Leadership program and she said, “I heard about it like through the
Study Abroad office and then through the Leadership Studies program.”
Brianna added more detail into how she heard about the programs by saying, “I just got
an email saying oh ok now you qualify for this because you studied abroad,” Brianna
continued her comment, “It was just me. I didn't hear it from my friends, but I like heard
it the class at the leadership one and then the global awareness I just got an email like
after. But one of my friends does have the, or was pursuing the arts engagement one.”
Jackie, when asked about her impressions of the email she too received after studying

abroad, said, “I mean like honestly it didn’t leave a very big impression because I can’t
even remember really like if that was whom it was from or what the certificate was for.”
Brianna, in contrast to Jackie’s impression of the emails, said, “But I feel like if I didn’t
receive the emails about it and if I didn’t hear the leadership one in my leadership studies
class I would have no idea about these things. I feel like it’s so hidden that you have to
seek it out; they are not known, at all.”
Code conclusion: Although there was only one participant who had heard of at least one of the
Experiential Learning programs, this code provided valuable information about outreach and its
effectiveness as other participants, namely Jackie, commented on the ineffectiveness of email
outreach.
Explaining motivations to seek certification
This code includes participants motivations to seek out certification through Experiential
Learning. These motivations include both personal and professional, that is, motivations ranged
from seeking certification due to personal interest in a topic, or motivation being possible
benefits of gaining professional knowledge from certification, used for employment purposes.
Motivation also included length of time or effort needed to complete certificates.
Brianna said, “You can look into the arts engagement one if it’s something you're

passionate about.”
Jackie said, “just knowing that it’s another thing you can put on your resume,” she then
added, “another thing to make you stand out from someone else that could be applying
for the same job.”
Jackie also added another viewpoint regarding motivation in saying, “The easiness of it I
guess. Like is it gonna be hard? Am I gonna have to put in a lot of time or make my brain
explode because I have to think so hard sort of thing?” also adding, “have I already
qualified and finished everything I need?”
Lauren stated, “I think knowing the amount of effort to the certificate and a timeline to
the certificate if you don’t have any of the qualifications,” she continued by saying, “The
payoff. What is it gonna do and what does it mean, what do I gain from it?”
Brianna said, “I don’t feel like people wanna add different experiences unless it’s actually
going to build your resume or help them get class credit.”
Code conclusion: The motivations expressed by the participants to seek certification focused on
the ease of certification and the amount of effort needed to participate, as well as possible
benefits as being a motivating factor to seek certification through Experiential Learning.

Perceiving process as simplistic
This code includes quotes from participants in which they perceived the process of certification
as simple, that is, a process that did not require much effort on their part.
Brianna, when asked about her experience receiving her certificates, said, “I felt they
were both really easy to get because I had already done these things and they were like
just put it into a certificate so it was super easy for me.”
Brianna also added, “No it was pretty easy. It was just like a checklist.”
Lauren stated, “If you already did it and it didn't take any conscious awareness of you
already completing the things you needed to.”
Code conclusion: Because the other participants outside of Brianna did not have any experience
with any of the certifications, the group seemed to accept a slightly skewed notion that it
required very little of the certification seeker due to comments by Brianna. It is to be said that
Brianna may not actually have the Global Awareness certification due to an email that was
mistakenly sent to some students telling them they had completed it when they had not. This is
also supported by the fact that Brianna does not mention completion of some components of the
GAP certificate, such as the reflection essay. Therefore, we are not sure if she has actually

completed this certification.
Perceiving what employers are looking for
This code represents qualities of potential employees in which employers are looking for, as
perceived by the participants.
When asked what they thought employers were looking for, Brianna said, “Someone that
is well-rounded.” She added, “They're versed in different subjects, like even if it is not
their major they know something about these different topics.”
Jackie said, “I think if they're looking for somebody who is well-rounded, it would be
encouraging to see something that is like a global awareness certificate and a leadership
certificate and like an art, whatever that art one was, to get like a, that shows that clearly
you are knowledge about various different things that are going on in the world [...]”
Code conclusion: This code provided information regarding the participants ideas of what
employers are looking for in potential employees. Both participants who commented on this
topic seemed to agree that being “well-rounded” important and being able to have a wide variety
of knowledge.
Transfers and awareness

This code represents the awareness and perception of Experiential Learning as a transfer student.
Kelsey, a transfer student stated, “I transferred so that kind of changed my opportunities
and what I was looking for so in that process I felt it was kind of hard to begin when
other people have been here before. Because I wasn’t apart of the university it was a
smaller college. So I think if those opportunities are given to non traditional students in
way that would be easier to find I don’t know if that could be helped or how, but I know I
am apart of the non-traditional student foundation so we always try to find ways that
include other people and organizations with us so I don’t know how that can help I just
know it’s harder when you’re in a situation like that to be involved in things that you feel
like you're already past it.”
Code conclusion: This code gave us the point-of-view from a transfer student and her reaction to
programs such as Experiential Learning. Because KU does have a large transfer-student
population, this can help Experiential Learning to better communicate to them and understand
their struggles to get involved in their programs.
Freshman and awareness
This code represents the awareness of Experiential Learning as a freshman and possible

problems associated with the way information is given to freshman and their true ability to act on
information given to them regarding extra curricular activities.
Brianna said, “I know they had tables for Experiential Learning at orientation, but like
just like any other thing during orientation, it goes right over your head you’re just
looking at all these booths and all these things to do. But I think if it were in a more
intimate setting like sitting down with your advisor the first time to get your hold off and
if that is something they would bring up like as a discussion point.”
Code conclusion: This code gave insight regarding freshman and the amount of information that
they take in with respect to extra-curricular activities and the overwhelmingness of it. This could
be beneficial and help change the way in which Experiential Learning separates itself from the
clutter of other programs that freshman students are being exposed to. Participants were very
agreeable to Brianna’s comment although others did not counter with their own comments.
Category conclusion: In conclusion, we were able to break down this category into specific
codes that will provide us with information and support to suggest marketing methods based on
our participants responses. This category will be beneficial due to its focus on topics such as the
wants of students, their perceptions of Experiential Learning, as well as important student-
demographic information. We found that the focus group participants believe that certification
through Experiential Learning is beneficial in both a personal and professional level, and that
their motivations to seek out certifications, too, are both personal and professional. We also

found that the participants heard of Experiential Learning through both face-to-face contact and
through email, however, face-to-face contact was more effective and meaningful, as was a
pattern throughout the focus group. This category will allow Experiential Learning to understand
multiple student demographics and continue to improve outreach efforts by pushing the benefits
of the programs and capitalizing on students’ motivation.
Perceptions of Digital Media (Emily Kawola)
This category addresses the digital media of KU Experiential Learning. It examines the web
pages for all of the certificates as well as social media.
Providing Website Feedback for Global Awareness
This code shows the perceptions our focus group participants had about the website of the GAP
program.
Brianna a senior in religious studies said “See on the right side it shows how you can get
involved with them like email us, tweet at us, like our Facebook, and it's way more
friendly and way more visual than all the other pages. The other ones are just like hey
here’s our information and that’s it.”
Jackie made a comment about the appearance of students on the website, “I think it’s

important to see our peers participating in it.”
In response to Jackie’s observation Brianna said “It looks so much fun, see look they’re
dancing. So much more fun.”
Code Conclusion: Overall there was a positive reaction to this web page. This is also the web
page with the most on it and the most interactive.
Interaction with KU website
This code examines the interactions that our participants interact with the KU website.
Lauren said “I would probably look them up on ku.edu, because that is where I get all of
my information from KU.”
Jackie agreed with Laurens statement “I’d probably go to the KU website specifically and
just search for what I’m looking for.”
Brianna agreed as well saying “to find real information I feel like they would want to
search that on the KU website.”
Code Conclusion: These quotes show the importance of the KU experiential learning websites
being discoverable. Our participants visit the KU website to get any information that they may
need.

KU Experiential Learning Final Research Report

KU Experiential Learning Final Research Report

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (20)

Viewers also liked

Viewers also liked (14)

Similar to KU Experiential Learning Final Research Report

Similar to KU Experiential Learning Final Research Report (20)

KU Experiential Learning Final Research Report