Graduate Co-Curricular Program Recommendations


Published on

Published in: Education
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

Graduate Co-Curricular Program Recommendations

  1. 1. Master’s CandidateCo-Curricular Program (MCP)
  2. 2. Student Population Characteristics Driven and focused student population geared mainly towards business Primarily residential students 4,157 full time undergraduates 1,399 graduate students 600 students in the “Master’s Candidate Program”
  3. 3. Who: Students in the Master’s Candidate Program Students in their Sophomore through Senior Year General Characteristics of the Program  Need a 3.2 GPA to enroll  Required internship (for select programs)  GMAT test scores waived General Characteristics of Student Population  Call themselves “five-year students”  Poor group dynamic skills  Unprepared for graduate school  Unprepared to declare major
  4. 4. General Learning Outcomes The Master’s Candidate Program will gain an identity to which the students can relate The students who have enrolled in the Master’s Candidate Program will create professional partnerships with students who are currently enrolled in graduate school The students who participate in the co-curricular program as a part of the Master’s Candidate Program will have a better understanding of the Master’s degree they plan to pursue Students will understand the key differences in academic rigor of undergraduate and graduate programs Students will understand the importance of working within a diverse learning community
  5. 5. Goals from a Self AuthorshipPerspective Cognitive: Students will understand the differences between academic expectations in undergraduate and graduate programs Intrapersonal: Students will understand their role in a master’s program Interpersonal: Students will interact with classmates, faculty, and staff appropriately Students will gain a sense of self understanding in relation to the program and other Master’s Candidates.Baxter Magolda& King, 2004, p. 312.
  6. 6. Discrepancies Between Goals andStudents’ capabilities Master’s students with several years of work experience openly express disdain about sharing class with recent college graduates New college graduates express high levels of discomfort participating in a class with seasoned professionals Faculty favors opinions of the mature students Differing views and approaches from faculty and different functional areas Top down pressure to achieve public recognition and rankings by encouraging students in the graduate school direction Disagreement about admissions requirementsThompson, G. (2011).
  7. 7. DifferencesUndergraduate Graduate Attention from faculty  Faculty expect more autonomous abilities Classes mainly  Classes include a comprised of peers variety of ages, experience levels, and Campus life backgrounds First time away living  Commuting to school, away from financial responsibilities  Transition into a family, initial transition professional in your into adulthood field
  8. 8. Points of Contact Undergraduate admissions and application processes Orientation Faculty Mentor Program Advising
  9. 9. Program Identity Why?  Students need to “make meaning” through the Master’s Candidate program  They need to bring the identity of the program closer to their core (Abes, Jones, & McEwen, 2007)  Learning Partnerships Model- assumption 2: self is central to knowledge construction (Baxter Magolda, & King, 2004) How?  Typical events such as orientation, social gatherings, and informal meetings may be able to accomplish this  We believe it will also be effective for students to not only meet with everyone who is pursuing the five year program but those who are pursuing specific masters degrees
  10. 10. Admissions Process Changes in the Application Process  One set deadline  Students must submit their application for enrollment by the end of their sophomore year (or end of first semester junior year at the latest)  Required materials  3.2 GPA  Internship set up to run concurrently with the co-curricular program  Admissions Essay #1  Why do you want to be in enrolled in the Master’s Candidate Program? What do you think you will gain in achieving a Master’s degree in five years?  Admissions Essay #2  Please interview a professional in the field of study you wish to pursue. Please include the following in your essay: o Why is this the field of study you have chosen? o What did you like and dislike about their career? o What did you find surprising about their career? o What do you think you can contribute if you became a part of this career field?  Application Committee  Faculty members of each Master’s degree (6)  Graduate School Advisors (3)  Currently enrolled students (2)
  11. 11. Why change the Admission Process? In general, students don’t know what they want to pursue in their lives (Pizzolato, 2003) Going out into the field creates a learning environment that is intentionally structured to generate their own idea of program benefits (Ignelzi, 2000) Helps establish a set a sequence of developmental goals that leads students towards self-authorship (Taylor & Hanes, 2008)
  12. 12. Evaluate Effectiveness: AdmissionsProcess Evaluations by the faculty of the caliber of the students that are in the program  Assessment to occur once the students who participate in the new admission process matriculate into the graduate program Assess the number of students who change the degree they decide to pursue once accepted into MCP
  13. 13. Orientation  Week before students start masters program  Expectations (Faculty)  How you are expected to behave  How the work will be different(Ignelzi, 200). (Taylor & Haynes, 2008).
  14. 14. Orientation Alumni Panel  Get faculty recommendations as to who to invite  Guide the conversation topics  Discuss how they apply their classroom knowledge  Discuss how students can utilize graduate school to their advantage Goal Setting  Faculty member facilitate goal setting for what students hope to gain personally, academically, and professionally over the next year  At end of first semester, students will reevaluate their initial goals and determine progress thus far Baxter Magolda& King, 2004, p. 323
  15. 15. Mentoring Program: Fast Facts Mentors: First year graduate students who were accepted into the Master’s Candidate Program (MCP) as undergraduates Mentees: Junior year students who have been accepted into the MCP Mentor Requirements:  First year graduate students are required to serve as mentors. Mentor training will occur in the summer during Graduate School orientation
  16. 16. Mentor Program: How it works Mentees are paired up with Mentors based on their degree choice Structured events throughout the year with facilitated programs and workshops to discuss current topics Monthly check-in meetings with professional staff  All mentors are required to be present at meetings  Opportunity to set up one-on-one’s with professional staff if needed  Purpose of meetings:  Monthly status checks on how relationship is progressing  Ability for pro-staff to share any vital information mentors may need  Ability for mentors to create relationships with one another and bounce ideas/concerns/questions about mentoring
  17. 17. Why a Mentoring Program? Build a bridge for students of support and challenge from undergraduate to graduate school  Mentees are challenged through their graduate level coursework  Mentees are supported through interactions with mentors and peers Addresses the three assumptions of learning (Baxter Magolda& King, 2004)  Allows knowledge to be socially constructed  Allows expertise and authority on knowledge to be shared among peers  Puts self as central to constructing knowledge Mentees may want to strive to perform better academically with the guidance of their mentor (Fries-Britt, 2000) Mentor self-reflection  Allows Mentors to realize their own personal development towards authoring their own like (Ignelzi, 2000)
  18. 18. Evaluate Effectiveness: MentorProgram Self reflection essays  Occur twice during the program (mid year and end of the year)  Reflecting on the value of the mentor relationship  The ability of the mentor program to prepare themselves for graduate school  Reflect on the merits of the mentor program  Required by both mentors and mentees Faculty evaluations  Did the mentor program allow for an easier transition from undergraduate to graduate?  Are the new graduate students more prepared to play integral roles in group work?
  19. 19. Advising Academic Advising  Paper writing and research  Learning how to select a program: What Does it Mean to be a Graduate Students Career Services  Resume writing  Internship Searching  Professional Behavior and Correspondence  Career exploration  Types of Interviewing styles: What to Expect and How to Prepare  Networking and Informational Interviewing Residence Life  Living on your own (apartment hunting)
  20. 20. Advising Junior/senior year meet with advisor on a regular basis  Am I taking the appropriate classes?  Am I in the right mindset to be entering into the master’s program? (Pizzolato, 2008) Building the Bridge Workshop  Facilitated by a faculty member who teaches in the master’s program and a student affairs professional  Master’s candidates reflect with their peers about academic and personal success and failures  Facilitators help students see how they have grown during their undergraduate careers and what will change in a master’s program (Ignelzi, 2000)
  21. 21. Recommendations Students have to have at least a full time internship between years 4 and 5 Students should have a set deadline to apply to the program that is at the end of first semester Junior year at the very latest Application should include essays Students must have an informational interviews with different masters programs Students must attend 80% of the programming we put together Students should be required to participate in the mentor program Specialized Housing
  22. 22. Questions
  23. 23. References Abes, E.S., Jones, S.R. & McEwen, M.K. (2007). Reconceptualizing the Model of Multiple Dimensions of Identity: The Role of Meaning-Making Capacity in the Construction of Multiple Identities. Journal of College Student Development, 48 (1), 1-22. Baxter Magolda, M. B. & King, P. M. (Eds). (2004). Learning Partnerships: Theory and models of practice to educate for self-authorship. Sterling, VA: Stylus Publishing. Fries-Britt, S. (2000). Identity development of high ability Black collegians. In M. B. Baxter Magolda (Ed.), Teaching to promote intellectual and personal maturity: Incorporating students’ worldviews and identities into the learning process, New Directions for Teaching and Learning, No. 82 (pp. 55-65). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Ignelzi, M. (2000). Meaning-making in the learning and teaching process. In M. B. Baxter Magolda (Ed.), Teaching to promote intellectual and personal maturity: Incorporating students’ worldviews and identities into the learning process, New Directions for Teaching and Learning, No. 82 (pp. 5-14). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Pizzolato, J. E. (2003). Developing self-authorship: Exploring the experiences of high-risk college students. Journal of College Student Development, 44(6), 797-812. Taylor, K. T. & Haynes, C. (2008). A Framework for Intentionally Fostering Student Learning. About Campus: Enriching the Student Learning Experience.
  24. 24. References Baxter Magolda, M. B. and King P.M. (2004). Creating learning partnerships in higher education: Modeling the shape, shaping the model in M. B. Baxter Magolda& P. M. King (Eds.), Learning Partnerships:Theory and models of practice to educate for self-authorship. Sterling, VA: Stylus. Chapter 11 (pp. 303-332). Baxter Magolda, M. B. & King, P.M. (2004). Learning Partnerships Model: A framework for promoting self-authorship. In M.B. Baxter Magolda& P. M. King (Eds.), Learningpartnerships: Theory and models of practice to educate forself-authorship Sterling, VA: Stylus. Preface (pp. xvii-xxvi), Chapter 1 (pp. 1-35), and (Chapter 2; pp. 37-62). Ignelzi, M. (2000). Meaning-making in the learning and teaching process. In M. B. Baxter Magolda (Ed.), Teachingto promote intellectual and personal maturity:Incorporating students’ worldviews and identities into thelearning process, New Directions for Teaching andLearning, No. 82 (pp. 5-14). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Pizzolato, J. E. (2008). Advisor, teacher, partner: Using the Learning Partnerships Model to reshape academic advising. About Campus: Enriching the Student LearningExperience, 13(1), 18-25. Taylor, K. T. & Haynes, C. (2008). A Framework for Intentionally Fostering Student Learning. About Campus: Enriching the Student Learning Experience. Thompson, G. (2011). 5 Year program review [Class handout]. Graduate Student and Academic Services, Bentley University, Waltham, MA.