No abstract

This empirical study explored the impression management techniques and standardized performances college students use on their Facebook profiles to ensure their peers believe they are fully participating in the undergraduate experience. Employing an ethnographic research design and data collected using participant-observation and interview methods, I considered the texts and images that appear repeatedly on Facebook profiles from a dramaturgical framework. I found that participants in this study identified at least 6 standardized fronts that students use to help ensure they give peers the impression of conforming to appropriate undergraduate norms.

Research on how performance-based funding influences the behaviour and performance of academics is limited in Europe. In this study, we investigate the changing publication patterns among Finnish academics associated with the introduction of awarding funding for publications within specific journals in the national performance-based funding model. We find evidence, particularly in the social sciences, and to a lesser extent humanities, that Finnish academics increasingly target international (English-language) publication outlets and lowertiered journals. We conclude discussing the possible long-term implications of the current funding formula for both Finnish academia and society.

No abstract

Purpose To add to the limited research on the Disadvantaged Status, a component in the American Medical College Application Service (AMCAS) primary application, the authors explored how applicants to a medical school between 2014 and 2016 determined whether they were disadvantaged and whether to apply as such. Method The authors used case study methodology to explore the experiences of students at a medical school in the Northeast. The authors derived data from transcripts of semistructured interviews with students and the students’ AMCAS applications. Transcripts and applications were analyzed using a constant comparative approach and considered in the context of social comparison and impression management theories. Results Overall, the 15 student participants (8 used the Disadvantaged Status) had difficulty determining whether they were disadvantaged and how applying as such would affect their prospects. Contributing factors included ambiguity around both the term disadvantaged and its use in the admissions process. Simply experiencing hardship during childhood was insufficient for most participants to deem themselves disadvantaged. Participants’ decision processes were confounded by the need to rely on social comparisons to determine whether they were disadvantaged and impression management to decide whether to apply as such. Conclusions The ambiguous nature of the Disadvantaged Status, comparisons with even more disadvantaged peers, and uncertainty about how shared information might affect admission decisions distorted participants’ understandings of identity within the context of the application. The authors believe that many applicants who have experienced significant hardships/barriers are not using the Disadvantaged Status.

No abstract

Improving the future quality of program and policy evaluation in the environ

This is the first attempt to analyse the performance of US$ 12.6 million invested by Save The Tiger Fund (STF) in more than 250 tiger conservation grants in 13 tiger-range countries. We devised a simple implementation evaluation method to assess performance on an ordinal scale using archival documents from project grant files. Performance was scored based on whether the grantee managed to achieve what they set out to do as articulated in their project proposal. On average, STF grantee project outputs exceeded their original objectives, but many confounding variables made it difficult to determine the ecological outcomes of grantees' conservation actions. Successful projects were usually collaborative in nature with high community visibility and support, their results were disseminated effectively, and they informed policy, measured outputs, were grounded by strong sound science, supported by government agencies, attracted new donors and delivered results even when political factors created difficult working environments. The poorly performing projects were associated with one or more of the following factors: poor tracking of results, deviation from the proposal, poorly defined goals, lack of capacity, poor evaluation practices, lack of political support, weak transparency, work at inappropriate scales or purchase of high-tech equipment that was never used.