FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2762216941> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W2762216941 endingPage "224" @default.
• W2762216941 startingPage "189" @default.
• W2762216941 abstract "INTRODUCTION Beginning in 2013 and spanning four research articles, we have implemented an empirical analysis protocol for honors education that is rooted in demography (Scott; Scott and Smith; Smith and Scott Growth; Smith and Scott, Demography). The goal of this protocol is to describe the structure and distribution of the honors population, but instead of a focus on aggregates of students or faculty and staff, the educational institution is the unit of analysis. This organizational demography has answered many questions about the growth of honors throughout collegiate education over time (Smith and Scott, Growth); documenting infrastructural and programmatic differences between honors colleges and programs, and between those programs at two-year and four-year institutions (Scott); identifying the existence of all institutions offering honors education in the United States and how they are grouped by institutional mission and control (Scott and Smith); and mapping the location and regional affiliation of all honors programs and colleges in the United States (Smith and Scott, Demography). We learned that in the first half-century of the existence of the National Collegiate Honors Council (NCHC), honors education expanded by 400%, with specific waves of growth in the 1960s and 1980s, followed by increases in the 2000s in the number of programs transitioning to colleges at a time when overall growth in honors plateaued (Smith and Scott, Growth). We saw that offering honors curricula campus-wide is now pervasive in American higher education, having a presence at 1,503 of the 2,500 nonprofit undergraduate institutions, with that presence divided into over 1,300 programs and just under 200 colleges (Scott and Smith). We discovered that clear patterns exist among honors types in NCHC: institutions with honors colleges generally evidence more complex infrastructure and more investment of resources than institutions with honors programs, and the same can be said of honors programs at four-year institutions compared to those at two-year institutions (Scott). We noticed that institutional control, i.e., private versus public control, does not distinguish honors programs, with nearly equal percentages of public and private institutions having programs, but it does matter for honors colleges, with many more located in the public sector (Scott and Smith). We determined that the distribution of honors programs and colleges varies by institutional type, with many more honors colleges in doctoral universities than in master's, baccalaureate, or associate's institutions (Scott and Smith). Finally, we discovered that NCHC represents nearly 60% of institutions with honors programs or colleges and that non-members appear to have far fewer resources and be more isolated from the honors community, not only nationally but also regionally (Smith and Scott, Demography). One qualifying note is that a few non-members are doctoral universities with large honors programs; although they do not fit the overall profile of non-members, they are too few in number to affect the generalization. We proposed enriching the dataset we assembled that answered the questions above by combining forces with NCHC so that we could potentially answer additional questions. In the spring of 2016, we shared our Integrated Postsecondary Educational Data System, or IPEDS (Carnegie), dataset with the NCHC office so that they could begin reaching out to the non-members we had identified in order to grow membership. After following NCHC's data use and access permission protocol, we then jointly composed a questionnaire to conduct a census of honors programs and colleges in the United States. The questionnaire items are similar or identical to those used in the NCHC Member Survey of 2012-13 (Scott) although a few new items were added, including characteristics of the administrators running the honors academic unit, presence of a student participation fee, and employment of student workers. …" @default.
• W2762216941 created "2017-10-20" @default.
• W2762216941 creator A5024866372 @default.
• W2762216941 creator A5032468387 @default.
• W2762216941 creator A5033080547 @default.
• W2762216941 date "2017-03-22" @default.
• W2762216941 modified "2023-09-23" @default.
• W2762216941 title "Demography of Honors: The Census of U.S. Honors Programs and Colleges." @default.
• W2762216941 hasPublicationYear "2017" @default.
• W2762216941 type Work @default.
• W2762216941 sameAs 2762216941 @default.
• W2762216941 citedByCount "2" @default.
• W2762216941 countsByYear W27622169412019 @default.
• W2762216941 countsByYear W27622169412021 @default.
• W2762216941 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W2762216941 hasAuthorship W2762216941A5024866372 @default.
• W2762216941 hasAuthorship W2762216941A5032468387 @default.
• W2762216941 hasAuthorship W2762216941A5033080547 @default.
• W2762216941 hasConcept C120912362 @default.
• W2762216941 hasConcept C144024400 @default.
• W2762216941 hasConcept C145420912 @default.
• W2762216941 hasConcept C149923435 @default.
• W2762216941 hasConcept C15744967 @default.
• W2762216941 hasConcept C17744445 @default.
• W2762216941 hasConcept C182109673 @default.
• W2762216941 hasConcept C19417346 @default.
• W2762216941 hasConcept C199539241 @default.
• W2762216941 hasConcept C2780510313 @default.
• W2762216941 hasConcept C2908647359 @default.
• W2762216941 hasConcept C36289849 @default.
• W2762216941 hasConcept C47177190 @default.
• W2762216941 hasConcept C52130261 @default.
• W2762216941 hasConceptScore W2762216941C120912362 @default.
• W2762216941 hasConceptScore W2762216941C144024400 @default.
• W2762216941 hasConceptScore W2762216941C145420912 @default.
• W2762216941 hasConceptScore W2762216941C149923435 @default.
• W2762216941 hasConceptScore W2762216941C15744967 @default.
• W2762216941 hasConceptScore W2762216941C17744445 @default.
• W2762216941 hasConceptScore W2762216941C182109673 @default.
• W2762216941 hasConceptScore W2762216941C19417346 @default.
• W2762216941 hasConceptScore W2762216941C199539241 @default.
• W2762216941 hasConceptScore W2762216941C2780510313 @default.
• W2762216941 hasConceptScore W2762216941C2908647359 @default.
• W2762216941 hasConceptScore W2762216941C36289849 @default.
• W2762216941 hasConceptScore W2762216941C47177190 @default.
• W2762216941 hasConceptScore W2762216941C52130261 @default.
• W2762216941 hasIssue "1" @default.
• W2762216941 hasLocation W27622169411 @default.
• W2762216941 hasOpenAccess W2762216941 @default.
• W2762216941 hasPrimaryLocation W27622169411 @default.
• W2762216941 hasRelatedWork W1166910791 @default.
• W2762216941 hasRelatedWork W139973626 @default.
• W2762216941 hasRelatedWork W1522996432 @default.
• W2762216941 hasRelatedWork W1530538014 @default.
• W2762216941 hasRelatedWork W158455948 @default.
• W2762216941 hasRelatedWork W1588070548 @default.
• W2762216941 hasRelatedWork W1982099101 @default.
• W2762216941 hasRelatedWork W2023120410 @default.
• W2762216941 hasRelatedWork W2054182588 @default.
• W2762216941 hasRelatedWork W2064524724 @default.
• W2762216941 hasRelatedWork W2067119211 @default.
• W2762216941 hasRelatedWork W222152123 @default.
• W2762216941 hasRelatedWork W261877383 @default.
• W2762216941 hasRelatedWork W262154391 @default.
• W2762216941 hasRelatedWork W264580634 @default.
• W2762216941 hasRelatedWork W313725985 @default.
• W2762216941 hasRelatedWork W46548584 @default.
• W2762216941 hasRelatedWork W85384835 @default.
• W2762216941 hasRelatedWork W2597104192 @default.
• W2762216941 hasRelatedWork W3124652815 @default.
• W2762216941 hasVolume "18" @default.
• W2762216941 isParatext "false" @default.
• W2762216941 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W2762216941 magId "2762216941" @default.
• W2762216941 workType "article" @default.