Entrepreneurship: is it good enough to be social? John F. McVea and Michael J. Naughton Introduction • The term Social Entrepreneurship has experienced a huge growth in influence over that last decade. The literature proposes a number of advantages to social entrepreneurship as a frame of reference: • Promoting innovation within non-profits • Leveraging and focusing scarce philanthropic resources • Faster response to strategic challenges • Infusion of business skills to non-business world • Involvement of non government assets in social problems • Creation of hybrid (blurred) organizations between for profit and non profit worlds. It is widely observed that practice has outpaced theoretical development leading to little agreement on definitions or frameworks for social entrepreneurship. We believe that widespread and unchallenged acceptance of the term Social Entrepreneurship masks some dangers and has contributed to confusion in the field. We believe that if we apply some insights from Catholic Social Teaching to the issue of social entrepreneurship we can move beyond the false dichotomy of Entrepreneurship/ Social Entrepreneurship and identify three specific entrepreneurial strategies which support a more robust discussion of the nature of the work that is entrepreneurship. We believe that the field would benefit from spending less time discussing social entrepreneurship and more time discussion the nature of the good entrepreneur. • • • • • The dangers of naïve acceptance of Social Entrepreneurship • • • The rhetorical risk: • Narrow definition: if S.E. is simply used to rebrand non-profits then much of the value of the new activities, hybrid design, stimulation of new resources and innovation is lost. • Implied dichotomy: if “good” ventures are termed “social” it can imply that other forms of entrepreneurship are “asocial” or “anti social” • Boundarylessness: In contrast, if all business activities are deemed “social”, to some degree or other, then the term loses all meaning focus on the distinctive phenomenon that is S.E. Despite these risks we are more concerned with a risk beyond rhetoric; the risk of undermining the meaning of work, particularly from the perspective of Catholic Social Teaching. While this perspective is drawn from the Catholic tradition, accepting the content of CST does not require acceptance of Catholic faith (Guitan, 2009). The three goods of social entrepreneurship • We are concerned by the side-effects of a concentration thesis that suggests that the moral responsibilities of entrepreneurship can be concentrated in a subset of businesses called social enterprises, presumably leaving other enterprise to simply concentrate on serving themselves. • We are concerned by the impact such a concentration thesis could have on the conception of the meaning of work beyond the world of social enterprise. • We are concerned with how such an approach can focus attention solely on the altruistic contributions of entrepreneurial ventures as the sole measure of their contribution to the Common Good • Instead we propose that, rather than trying to determine the difference between entrepreneurship and social entrepreneurship, it would be more productive to focus on the questions “What is Good Entrepreneurship? What action and activities define that goodness?” • We further propose that, by apply the perspective of Catholic Social Teaching, we can identify three specific strategies through which entrepreneurial ventures may contribute to the Common Good thus suggesting that good entrepreneurship requires a focus on: 1. Good Goods. The primary way an entrepreneurial venture can contribute to the Common Good is by bringing into existence new products and services which are inherently good and which enrich lives and minimize any unintended harms. This can include what we call the “entrepreneurship of the mundane”, that is, the manufacture of the nuts and bolts and basic necessities of life as well as the creation of life saving treatments. However, inclusion of good goods as a primary moral contribution of entrepreneurship must also require of the entrepreneur analysis of what goods are not good, and what aspects of even good goods should be redesigned or rethought in order to minimize unintended consequences. We find, in our discussions, that this is a much under appreciated dimension of the good of entrepreneurship. 2. Good Work. The second way an entrepreneurial venture can contribute to the Common Good is through the nature of the work that is carried out by the venture. This dimension has several aspects both internal and external to the entrepreneur: • The development of good character in the entrepreneur. This aspect of the good is derived from the subjective dimension of work, that is, just as how-we-work ends up changing the world, so working-on-the-world changes us. Most professionals spend the majority of their waking hours at work. As habits, character and wisdom are developed through experience and activity, for the entrepreneur, doing good work is an important opportunity to develop character. Society as a whole is better off for having good, successful entrepreneurial leaders who, through that calling, can become leaders of character. This dimension of the entrepreneurial good is widely unappreciated even by entrepreneurs themselves • Good relations with employees, customers and other stakeholders. Value creation and trade creates opportunities for the building of social relationships. The central question is “Are you in good relation with those with whom you create value?’ Do your employees have opportunity to develop as people? 3. Good Wealth. The third way the good entrepreneur can contribute to the Common Good is through the creation of good wealth. Good wealth requires a balance of reward for labor/ creativity with the provision of a living wage to all. Good wealth is often captured by individual action but has social strings attached. From the CST perspective the creation of good wealth implies a particular solidarity with the poor. One way to contribute to the common good is to donate altruistically to those in need. But even here, altruism is only one of a number of possible strategies. Good entrepreneurs may also contribute by donating their time or their particular skills. Indeed, since the donation of time and work often requires physical interaction with those in need, it often generates a solidarity of far greater integrity. Finally, it must be emphasized that altruism, for the entrepreneur, is always dependent, indeed subsequent to the creation of good wealth in the first place. Literature cited Alvord, Sarah, David L. Brown, and Christine W. Letts, 2004. “Social Entrepreneurship and Societal Transformation: An Exploratory Study,” The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science. 40:260. Benedict XVI, Caritas et veritate,   Boschee, Jerr. 1998 “What does it take to be a social entrepreneur?” National Centre for Social Entrepreneurs (www.socialentrepreneurs.org/whatdoes/html), 5pp.   Cannon, Carl. 2000. “Charity for profit: how the new social entrepreneurs are creating good by sharing wealth” National Journal, June 16: 1898-1904.   Christie, Michael and Benson Honig. 2006. “Social entrepreneurship: New research findings.” Journal of World Business. 41: 1-5.   Dees, Gregory, J., 1998. “The Meaning of ‘Social Entrepreneurship,’” Original Draft: 10/3.   Drucker, P.F. 1985. Innovation and Entrepreneurship. New York: Harper & Row.   Fowler, Alan. “NGDOs as a moment in history: beyond aid to social entrepreneurship or civic innovation?” Third World Quarterly, 21(4): 637-654.   Gregg, S. and G. Preece: 1999, Christianity and Entrepreneurship (The Centre for Independent Studies Limited, St. Leonards, NSW, Australia).   Hibbert, Sally A., Gillian Hogg and Theresa Quinn. “Consumer response to social entrepreneurship: The case of the Big Issue in Scotland.” International Journal of Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Marketing. 7(3): 288-301.   Johnson, Sherrill, 2000. “Literature Review on Social Entrepreneurship,” Canadian Center for social Entrepreneurship. (http://www.bus.ualberta.ca/ccse/Publications/).   John Paul II, Pope.: 1992 Laborem Exercens (On Human Work): 1981, in D. J. O’Brien and T. A. Shannon, (eds.), Catholic Social Thought (Orbis Books, Maryknoll, NY).   John Paul II, Pope.: 1992 Sollicitudo Rei Socialis (On Social Concern): 1987 in D. J. O’Brien and T. A. Shannon, (eds.), Catholic Social Thought (Orbis Books, Maryknoll, NY).   Kennedy, R., G, Atkinson, and M. Naughton, (eds.): 1994, Dignity of Work: John Paul II Speaks To Managers and Workers (University Press of America, Lanham, Maryland).   Mair, Johanna and Ernesto Noboa, 2003. “Social Entrepreneurship: How Intentions to Create a Social Enterprise get Formed,” IESE Business School.   Mair, Johanna and Ignasi Marti, 2006. “Social entrepreneurship research: A source of explanation, prediction, and delight,” Journal of World Business. 41: 36-44.   Melé, D.:2001, ‘A Challenge for Business Enterprises: Introducing the Primacy of the Subjective Meaning of Work in Work Organization’, (http://www.stthomas.edu/cathstudies/cst/mgmt/le/papers/mele.htm) Conclusions We have argued that, while there is great promise in the contemporary social entrepreneurship movement, there are also a number of important dangers. We propose that, if we confront rather than acquiesce to these dangers, we can use the perspective of Catholic Social Teaching to broaden the scope of entrepreneurial ventures that we study, to enrich the moral dimension of entrepreneurial strategy and to deepen the teaching of entrepreneurship as a whole. We recommend the following to move toward these contributions: • Incorporate social entrepreneurship into entrepreneurship in a way that enhances the three goods of entrepreneurship. Specifically we propose replacing the questions “What is social entrepreneurship?” with the questions “What does it mean to be a Good entrepreneur?” From this perspective we can then apply what we have called the three goods of entrepreneurship as a means of supplying critical challenge and inspiration to all forms of entrepreneurship such that the true moral dimension of this critical force in our lives comes into fruition. • Encourage research within the entrepreneurship discipline that addresses traditional social entrepreneurial issues such as micro lending, fair trade products, etc. • Develop bridge courses such as Theo/Cath 306 which help students understand and experience the meaning of the good entrepreneur as well as connect students to the spiritual and moral principles of a good entrepreneur. • Expose entrepreneurship students to so-called social entrepreneurs as well so-called conventional good entrepreneurs so they can see the spectrum of entrepreneurial activities. © File copyright Colin Purrington. You may use for making your poster, of course, but please do not plagiarize, adapt, or put on your own site. Also, do not upload this file, even if modified, to third-party file-sharing sites such as doctoc.com. If you have insatiable need to post a template onto your own site, search the internet for a different template to steal. File downloaded from http://colinpurrington.com/tips/ academic/posterdesign. Acknowledgments I am indebted to Michael Naughton and Laura Dunham for their reflections and thoughts on this paper.
View full slide show




Eligibility Eligibility • FULL-TIME enrollment at home campus at the time of application and prior to placement • Cumulative 2.5 GPA (2.75 for UT Martin) • Be a sophomore, junior or senior at the time of exchange Exploring Participation • Must be in GOOD STANDING (academic, social, and financial) • Complete campus application and selection process 03/18/19 National Student Exchange and rsity of Tennessee - Martin Unive 10
View full slide show




SCHOLARSHIPS • University Merit Scholarship: Criteria to Renew – A GPA of 3.20 after the freshman year, then 3.30 after the sophomore and junior years. Scholars must also complete at least 30 credit hours per year. • Academic Excellence Level 1 Scholarship: Criteria to Renew – A GPA of 3.20 after the freshman year, then 3.30 after the sophomore and junior years. Scholars must also complete at least 30 credit hours per year. • Academic Excellence Level 2 Scholarship: Criteria to Renew – GPA of 2.85 after the freshman year, then cumulative 3.00 after the sophomore and junior years. Scholars must also complete at least 30 credit hours per year. • Blue & Gold Level 1 Scholarship: Criteria to Renew – GPA of 2.70 after the freshman year, then cumulative 2.90 after the sophomore and junior years . Scholars must also complete at least 30 credit hours per year. • Blue & Gold Level 2 Scholarship: Criteria to Renew – GPA of 2.50 after the freshman year, then 2.75 after the sophomore and junior years . Scholars must also complete at least 30 credit hours per year.
View full slide show




Decision Tree Model for F14 Freshmen GPA: Part 2—HS GPA > 92.0 Decision Tree Model for F14 Freshmen GPA: Part 2—HS GPA > 92.0 HS GPA>92.0 or Missing Scholarship = Yes HS GPA >=96.5 or missing Math Placement Exam >= 5 Math Placement Exam < 5 Scholarship = No HS GPA < 96.5 Logs per non-STEM crs,wks 2-6 >=29.1 Logs per non-STEM crs,wks 2-6 <29.1 LMS logins per non-STEM crs. Wk 2-6 ‘ >=10.4 AP STEM Crs. >=1 AP STEM Crs = 0 LMS logins per non-STEM crs. wk 2-6 < 10.4 Logs per STEM crs, wks 2-6 >=10.9 or miss. Logs per STEM crs. wks 2 6 < 10.9 Logs per STEM Crs., wks 2-6 >=15.6 Logs per STEM Crs, wk 2-6 <15.6 Ethnic Group = White , Hisp. Ethnic Group= Asian, Afr. Amer., Unk. SAT Math >=70 0 SAT Math <700 or miss. Avg HS. CR, M Wrt >=183 0 miss Avg. HS CR, M, Wrt< 1830 DFW STEM Crs Total >=2 DFW STEM Crs Total <2 SAT Math >=76 0 SAT Math <760 DFW nonSTEM 1st yrs >=28% DFW nonSTEM 1st yrs <28% STEM Crs logs Wk 1 >=8 STEM Crs logs Wk 1 <8 or miss Avg. GPA = 3.63 N= 285 Avg. GPA 3.40 N = 83 Avg. GPA =3.50 N= 73 Avg. GPA = 3.05 N=30 Avg. GPA = 3.76 N=26 Avg. GPA = 3.52 N = 74 Avg. GPA = 3.59 N = 54 Avg. GPA = 3.13 N = 54 Avg. GPA = 3.23 N= 163 Avg. GPA = 3.49 N=101 Avg. GPA = 3.76 N = 11 Avg. GPA = 3.03 N= 194 Avg. GPA = 3.05 N= 72 Avg. GPA = 2.90 N = 73 Avg. GPA= 1.30 N=11 Avg. GPA = 2.52 N= 13 16
View full slide show




Decision Tree Model for Freshmen GPA: Part 1—HS GPA <= 92.0 HS GPA<=92.0 LMS logins per non-STEM crs, wk 2-6 >=11.3 or missing Avg. HS SAT CR >570 Avg. HS SAT CR<=570 LMS logins per non-STEM crs, wks 2-6<11.3 Avg. HS SAT CR >=540 ‘ SAT Math CR >1360 SAT Math CR <=1360 Logins per STEM crs, wk 2-6 >=32.2 Logins per STEM crs, wk 2-6 <32.2 AP STEM Crs>= 1 AP Stem Crs = 0 Highest DFW STEM Crs. Rate>= 17% Highest DFW STEM Crs. Rate <17% SAT Math >=68 0 SAT Math< 680 or miss. NonSTEM crs logs > = 3 or miss. NonSTEM crs logins <3 Avg. GPA = 3.63 N = 46 Avg. GPA = 3.20 N = 23 Avg. GPA = 2.92 N= 34 Avg. GPA = 3.25 N=94 Avg. GPA = 3.35 N=78 Avg. GPA = 3.09 N= 121 Avg. GPA = 2.94 N= 371 Avg. GPA = 2.53 N = 57 AP STEM Crs. >=1 AP STEM Crs = 0 Avg. HS SAT CR < 540 Logs per STEM crs, wk 2-6 >=5.3 or miss Logs per STEM crs. wk 2-6 < 5.3 Avg. GPA = 1.59 N = 13 miss. STEM crs logs Wk 1 <5 STEM logs Wk. 1 >=5 or miss. STEM crs logs Wk. 1 <5 STEM crs logs Wk 1 >=1 or miss. STEM crs kogs Wk 1 = 0 Avg. GPA = 3.21 N = 64 Avg. GPA = 2.69 N=16 Avg. GPA = 2.75 N = 73 Avg. GPA = 2.12 N= 18 Avg. GPA = 2.62 N= 305 Avg. GPA = 1.94 N = 25 STEM crs logs Wk. 1>=5 or 12
View full slide show




Academic Standing Policy • Good Academic Standing To remain in good academic standing, an undergraduate student must maintain a cumulative grade point average (GPA) of at least 2.0. • Semester Warning An undergraduate student whose term GPA is below 2.0 in the semester of the evaluation is given a “semester warning.” • Academic Probation An undergraduate student whose cumulative GPA is below 2.0 is placed on academic probation. • Academic Suspension An undergraduate student on academic probation whose cumulative GPA remains below 2.0 at the next evaluation is suspended from the University, unless the student’s GPA for that semester is at least 2.3, in which case the student remains on probation instead. Be watching for more information about earned to attempted credit ratio!
View full slide show




PLACEMENT HOW? Placement Placement Test Test Transfer Transfer Credits Credits SAT SAT or or ACT ACT Scores Scores High High School School AP AP Scores Scores (Mathematics) (Mathematics) WHAT TO DO? Take Take placement placement test test on on any any campus campus at at Testing Testing Center. Center. Accuplacer Accuplacer MATH MATH can can be be taken taken twice. twice. Students Students who who wish wish higher higher placement placement must must then then “appeal”. “appeal”. Appeal Appeal is is request to take a pencil-and-paper type test on material from the course they request to take a pencil-and-paper type test on material from the course they placed placed into. into. Bring Bring transcript transcript showing showing general general education education math math credits credits from from another another college college or or university university to to CCBC CCBC for for evaluation. evaluation. If If completed completed in in Maryland, Maryland, the the highest highest level level developmental math course, Intermediate Algebra can be used for placement. developmental math course, Intermediate Algebra can be used for placement. Placement Placement by by SAT SAT MATH MATH score score of of 500 500 or or higher higher (or (or by by ACT ACT MATH MATH score score 21 21 or or higher) places the student into an entry-level general education math course higher) places the student into an entry-level general education math course (MATH (MATH 111, 111, 125, 125, 131/2/3, 131/2/3, 135, 135, 163). 163). For For higher higher placement, placement, the the student student must must take take Accuplacer MATH. MATH. Accuplacer Students Students with with documentation documentation of of AP AP math math scores scores of of 3, 3, 4, 4, or or 5 5 from from high high school school can can be awarded college credit and placement according to this chart. be awarded college credit and placement according to this chart.
View full slide show




Application and Placement Process • • • • • • • • Meet with academic advisor Complete UT Martin NSE application Interview with campus NSE Coordinator Attend campus pre-placement meeting Attend campus post-placement meeting Consult with financial aid officer Complete advising agreement Read, complete and return materials to host coordinator in a timely manner 03/18/19 National Student Exchange and rsity of Tennessee - Martin Unive 13
View full slide show




5. Mean projections and mean student scores are calculated. Student Projection1 Student Score 1 Student Projection 2 Student Score 2 Student Projection 3 Student Score 3 Student Projection 4 Student Score 4 Student Projection 5 Your School Student Score 5 Student Projection 6 Student Score 6 Student Projection 7 Student Score 7 Student Projection 8 Student Score 8 Student Projection 9 Student Score 9 Student Projection 10 Student Score 10 Student Projection 11 Student Score 11 Student Projection 12 Student Score 12 Student Projection 13 Student Score 13 Student Projection 14 Student Score 14 Student Projection 15 Student Score 15 Student Projection 16 Student Score 16 Student Projection 17 Student Score 17 Student Projection 18 Student Score 18 Student Projection 19 Student Score 19 Student Projection 20 Student Score 20 Mean Projected Score Mean Student Score Copyright © 2003. Battelle for Kids
View full slide show




Work Activities Custom A B C COTS A B 1. Software Project Management and Quality Planning FULL GRADE GRADE GRADE 2. Software Risk Management FULL 3. Software Configuration Mgmt FULL 4. Procurement & Vendor Mgmt FULL 5. Software Requirements Identification and Management FULL 6. Software Design & Implementation FULL 7. Software Safety Design FULL 8. Verification & Validation FULL FULL GRADE GRADE GRADE FULL FULL FULL FULL FULL FULL FULL GRADE FULL FULL FULL FULL NA FULL FULL GRADE GRADE GRADE FULL C GRADE GRADE FULL FULL GRADE FULL FULL FULL NA FULL NA GRADE GRADE GRADE 12
View full slide show




Types of Probation  Academic Watch— Full-time student has a cumulative GPA or 2.0 or higher but GPA falls below 2.0 in one semester or term. Students in this category are limited to 4 courses and must meet with Academic Support Services.  Academic Warning—Part-time student with a cumulative GPA below 2.0 after 6 credits. Students in this category will be place on academic probation after 9 credits if the GPA does not improve.  Academic Probation ( transcript notations: “Probation 1” and “Probation 2”)—Full or Part-time student with a cumulative GPA below 2.0 (or 1.75 for first year students). Also, a full or parttime student who has completed less than 2/3 of attempted credits--attempted credits include: F, NP, I, WP, WF or W.
View full slide show




RAPTOR Syntax and Semantics – Selection and Iteration Control Structures Decision - A decision is part of a Selection or Iteration (loop) statement. A decision symbol (its value during execution) determines which way execution will continue. Use relational operators (and logical operators) to get a Boolean value for the decision. Relational: =, <, <=, >, >=, /=, != Logical: and, or, not, xor Iteration Statement (loop statement) – An Iteration statement enables a group of statements to be executed more than once. Use I.T.E.M (Initialize, Test, Execute, and Modify) to ensure your loop (and loop control variable) are correct. Boolean Expression Boolean Expression A Condition Controlled Loop (basic loop) repeats its statements until a condition (the decision statement) becomes true. Loop Selection Statement - A selection statement is used to decide whether or not to do something, or to decide which of several things (if any) to do. Always executed at least once Boolean Expression If the Boolean Expression is TRUE, execute the left hand path otherwise execute the right hand path Exit the Loop If TRUE Executed if Boolean expression is TRUE Executed if Boolean expression is FALSE Executed before the loop restarts (May never be executed) GPA > 3.0 Put “Dean’s List!”¶ “Enter a number between 1 and 10” GET Number Initialize (and modify) the loop control variable Number >= 1 and Number <= 10 Test the loop control variable PUT Number + “ is not between 1 and 10. Try again”¶ Execution step The validation loop above will continue to execute until the user enters a number between 1 and 10. Number is the loop control variable. If the value of the variable GPA is greater than 3.0 then execute the statement Put("Dean’s List") otherwise do nothing If a student’s GPA is less than 2.0 then execute the statement Put("Academic probabtion") otherwise execute the statement Put("Cadet in good standing") A Count Controlled Loop repeats its statements a fixed number of times. (This executes the loop 100 times because of the decision: Count >= 100). GPA < 2.0 Put “Academic Probation”¶ Put “Cadet in good standing”¶ N←1 Initialize the loop control variable (above the loop) Loop This statement is executed 100 times GPA >= 3.5 GPA_Grade ← “A” Execution step PUT N + “ squared Is “ + N ^ 2¶ GPA >= 3.0 N = 10 GPA_Grade ← “B” Test the loop control variable GPA >= 2.0 N←N+1 GPA_Grade ← “C” GPA_Grade ← “Fail” This last example requires several decision statements as there are several decisions (more than two possible paths). The code assigns a nominal “grade” based on a student’s GPA. The “pattern” of these selection statements is called cascading selections. Modify the loop control variable The count controlled loop above executes exactly 10 times (it displays the numbers 1 through 10 and the squares of those numbers). Count is the loop control variable.
View full slide show




NCAA Division I Policies on Academics CONTINUING ELIGIBILITY  Must earn 24 hours towards academic-degree progress each academic year. INITIAL ELIGIBILITY for Financial Aid, Practice & Competition (Qualifier)  High school graduate  Must maintain at least a 2.0 cumulative grade point average (for good standing at SIUE).  Cumulative grade point average of 2.00 in 14 academic courses in the core curriculum  Must be enrolled in a minimum of 12 credit hours during the fall and spring academic terms.   Must pass a minimum of 6 credit hours in the preceding term to be eligible to compete in the subsequent term. Required Sum ACT/SAT is based on the core grade point average – 2.5 core gpa or above: 68 ACT Sum (17) – 2.25 core gpa: 77 ACT Sum (19) – 2.00 core gpa: 86 ACT Sum (21)  Must declare a major no later than the beginning of their fifth full-time semester.  Must meet Percentage of Degree Requirement regulations.
View full slide show




GPA CALCULATORS • The admission GPA is calculated first by using the overall GPA on the applicant’s transcript at the end of the application semester. If the overall GPA is lower than a 2.75, it will be recalculated based on the applicant’s last 60 hours of coursework. When calculating the Last 60 Hours GPA, full semesters must be used; therefore, the total hours may be in excess of 60. Either method of GPA calculation must meet the minimum 2.75 requirement for admission eligibility without exception. • Overall GPA - Use your transcript from myGateway. At the end, under "Transcript Totals", plug in the GPA hours and Quality Points from the Overall line. List any courses you are currently taking under "Courses not showing". Add in the number of hours and the letter grade you received or expect to receive to get an updated Overall GPA. • Last 60 Hours GPA - Use the Class History from your Degree Evaluation to see your courses listed in order taken regardless of location. Start with the most current coursework. Enter in the Semester, Term Graded Attempted and Term Quality Points. Make sure the Term GPA matches. Enter in enough semesters so that they, plus what you are currently enrolled in, total at least 60 hours. You must use full semesters. Enter the courses you are currently taking under Courses not showing. Add in the number of hours and the grade you received or expect to receive to get an updated Last 60 Hour GPA.
View full slide show




WHAT WERE THE FINDINGS OF THE RESEARCH?  Responses From Before Entering the Dining Hall:  Responses From Standing at the Exit of the Dining Hall:  Yes, Junior male  Yes, Freshman female  No, Sophomore male  Yes, Freshman female  No, Freshman male  No, Freshman male  No, Freshman male  Yes, Junior male  Yes, Junior male  Yes, Senior male  No, Senior female  Yes, Freshman female  Yes, Junior male  Yes, Freshman female  Yes, Sophomore male  Yes, Senior female  Yes, Freshman female  No, Freshman male  Yes, Freshman male  Yes, Sophomore male
View full slide show




Academic Data on SIUE Student-Athletes 02-03: Average GPA 2.889, 21% on Dean’s List, 41% had a cumulative GPA over 3.0 and 6 teams had an average team GPA over 3.0  03-04: Average GPA 2.968, 20% on Dean’s List, 40% had a cumulative GPA over 3.0 and 6 teams had an average team GPA over 3.0  04-05: Average GPA 2.938, 22% on Dean’s List, 48% had a cumulative GPA over 3.0 and 8 teams had a average team GPA over 3.0 
View full slide show




Academic Integrity York College’s mission statement stipulates that strict adherence to principles of academic honesty is expected of all students. Therefore, academic dishonesty will not be tolerated at York College. Academic dishonesty refers to actions such as, but not limited to, cheating, plagiarism, fabricating research, falsifying academic documents, etc., and includes all situations where students make use of the work of others and claim such work as their own. When a faculty member believes a student has committed an act of academic dishonesty, the faculty member must inform the student in writing and then has ten business days from that written notification to the student to report the incident to the Dean of Academic Affairs and the Department Chair. Documentation related to instances of academic dishonesty will be kept on file in the student’s permanent record. If the academic dishonesty is the student’s first offense, the faculty member will have the discretion to decide on a suitable sanction up to a grade of 0 for the course. Students are not permitted to withdraw from a course in which they have been accused of academic dishonesty. Students who believe they have been unjustly charged or sanctioned (in cases involving a first offense) must discuss the situation with the faculty member and have 10 business days thereafter to submit an appeal to Student Welfare Committee through the Dean of Academic Affairs. If an appeal is filed, the Student Welfare Committee will then conduct a hearing to review the charge and/or sanction. In cases of a first offense, the faculty member may request that the Student Welfare Committee conduct a hearing and decide on the sanction, which can involve academic suspension or dismissal from the College, if the faculty member believes the offense to be of an extremely egregious nature. If the Dean of Academic Affairs determines that the academic dishonesty is the student’s second offense, the Dean will provide written notification to the student, the faculty member, and the Department Chair. The Student Welfare Committee will automatically conduct a hearing to review the charge and decide on an appropriate sanction, which will involve academic suspension or dismissal from the College. Students who believe the Student Welfare Committee has unjustly sanctioned them may submit a written appeal to the Dean of Academic Affairs within 72 hours of receiving notification of the Student Welfare Committee’s sanction. 5
View full slide show




CALB ODS: 8,000 + Data Fields Student  Meeting Time CALB  Section Attendance CALB  Session Attendance CALB                           Academic Outcome Academic Study Administrator Admissions Application Admissions Attribute Admissions Cohort Admissions Decision Admissions Rating Admissions Requirements Admissions Source Advisor Course Attribute Course CALB ODS Course Corequisite Course Level Course Prerequisite Course Schedule Enrollment Faculty Faculty Attribute Faculty Department College Government Academic Outcome Government Admissions Government Course Government Financial Aid Government Student • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • GPA GPA by Level GPA by Term Instructional Assignment Meal Assignment Meeting Time Non Instructional Assignment Offering Corequisites Offering Grade Type Offering Prerequisites Outcome Departmental Honor Outcome Honor Outcome Institutional Honor Phone Assignment Pre Student Recruitment Attribute Recruitment Cohort Recruitment Information Recruitment Source Room Assignment Schedule Offering Sport Student Student Activity Student Attribute Student Cohort Student Course Student Course Attribute Finance • Account Attributes • Account Hierarchy • Account Index • Account Type Attributes • Activity Attributes • Attributes Sets • Budget Availability Ledger • Budget Detail • Chart Attributes • Encumbrance • Endowment Attributes • Endowment Distribution • Endowment Summary • Fixed Assets • FOAPAL Attributes • Fund Hierarchy • Grant Budget Detail • Grant Fund • Grant Ledger • Invoice • Operating Ledger • Organization Hierarchy • Program Hierarchy • Proposal • Purchase Order • Transaction History • Vendor Financial Aid • Applicant Need • Award by Fund • Award by Person • Award Disbursement • Applicant Status • Budget Components • Enrollment • Fund • Government Finaid Fund • Government Financial Aid • Loan Application • Need Analysis • Satisfactory Academic Progress • Tracking Requirements • User Defined Fields Acounts Receivable • Application of Delivered Analytics • Appl of Pmt Detail Acctg • Contract • Deposit • Exemption • Installment Plan • Memo • Miscellaenous Transaction • Receivable Account • Receivable Accounting • Receivable Account Detail
View full slide show




Exploring Participation Cost Eligibility Exploring Participation The Exchange 03/18/19 National Student Exchange and rsity of Tennessee - Martin Unive 8
View full slide show




Operational Data Store: 8,000 Data Fields Student  Academic Outcome  Academic Study  Administrator  Admissions Application  Admissions Attribute  Admissions Cohort  Admissions Decision  Admissions Rating  Admissions Requirements  Admissions Source  Advisor  Course Attribute  Course CALB ODS  Course Corequisite  Course Level  Course Prerequisite  Course Schedule  Enrollment  Faculty  Faculty Attribute  Faculty Department College  Government Academic Outcome  Government Admissions  Government Course  Government Financial Aid  Government Student • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • GPA GPA by Level GPA by Term Instructional Assignment Meal Assignment Meeting Time Non Instructional Assignment Offering Corequisites Offering Grade Type Offering Prerequisites Outcome Departmental Honor Outcome Honor Outcome Institutional Honor Phone Assignment Pre Student Recruitment Attribute Recruitment Cohort Recruitment Information Recruitment Source Room Assignment Schedule Offering Sport Student Student Activity Student Attribute Student Cohort Student Course Student Course Attribute Finance • Account Attributes • Account Hierarchy • Account Index • Account Type Attributes • Activity Attributes • Attributes Sets • Budget Availability Ledger • Budget Detail • Chart Attributes • Encumbrance • Endowment Attributes • Endowment Distribution • Endowment Summary • Fixed Assets • FOAPAL Attributes • Fund Hierarchy • Grant Budget Detail • Grant Fund • Grant Ledger • Invoice • Operating Ledger • Organization Hierarchy • Program Hierarchy • Proposal • Purchase Order • Transaction History • Vendor Financial Aid • Applicant Need • Award by Fund • Award by Person • Award Disbursement • Applicant Status • Budget Components • Enrollment • Fund • Government Finaid Fund • Government Financial Aid • Loan Application • Need Analysis • Satisfactory Academic Progress • Tracking Requirements • User Defined Fields Acounts Receivable • Application of Delivered Analytics • Appl of Pmt Detail Acctg • Contract • Deposit • Exemption • Installment Plan • Memo • Miscellaenous Transaction • Receivable Account • Receivable Accounting • Receivable Account Detail
View full slide show