Risky Honors

Most educators today are likely to proclaim a commitment to teaching critical thinking. Willingness to take intellectual risks such as questioning orthodox teachings or proposing unconventional solutions is an important component of critical thinking and the larger project of liberal education, yet the reward structures of educational institutions may actually function to discourage such risk-taking. In light of the extra importance placed on grades and high-stakes entrance exams in an increasingly competitive educational marketplace, this problem might presumably be magnified among honors students. This essay concludes by calling on honors educators and other interested parties to contribute their voices, their questions, and their proposed solutions to a new JNCHC Forum focusing on the tension among talented students between taking intellectual risks and a desire to avoid the personal struggle and possible failure that sometimes come from taking such risks

Introduction: The Demonstrable Value of Honors Education

In May of 2016, a small cadre of scholars was called to the campus of Wayne State University in Detroit, Michigan, for the Honors Education Research Colloquium, a two-day meeting focusing on the future direction of research in honors education. The participants were assembled by Jerry Herron, who at the time was president of the National Collegiate Honors Council (NCHC), close on the heels of a decision by the NCHC Board of Directors in June of the previous year to make research—along with professional development and advocacy—one of three strategic priorities. After a day of presentations, in turn, by each of the participants, the colloquium discussion turned on the second day to an enumeration of ways in which the goal of encouraging honors research might best be effected. That enumeration included such topics as bridging the gap between those scholars doing related educational research inside and outside of honors and the establishment of an infrastructure to facilitate data collection and other collaborative research across multiple NCHC member institutions. One of the concepts that emerged most forcefully from those discussions was vocal consensus about the need for more, and more robust, research evidence addressing the question of whether honors education adds value—for a society that helps to support the educational enterprise, for faculty and others who work to provide honors programming, for the institutions that house honors programs and colleges, and, especially, for the students who participate in such programs

Variability and Similarity in Honors Curricula across Institution Size and Type

As Samuel Schuman argues in his seminal introduction to honors administration, “The single most important feature of any honors program is its people: the students who learn there and the faculty who teach them” (33). Next, argues Schuman, comes the curriculum; the context of the learning that takes place when honors faculty and honors students come together is framed by the curriculum. Honors curricula provide opportunities for honors students to endeavor challenges beyond what traditional undergraduate curricula provide. For faculty, honors is a unique opportunity to blend research and teaching and to provide a curricular laboratory for experimenting with varied topics and pedagogical approaches

Disciplinary Affiliation and Administrators’ Reported Perception and Use of Assessment

Using survey data collected from 269 participants in the fall of 2016 and the spring of 2017, this study examines whether any changes might have occurred within the last 20 years regarding the disciplinary affiliation of honors administrators. Additionally, we explored current assessment practices of honors administrators and possible associations between these practices and the administrators’ disciplinary affiliation. Our study investigates disciplinary variation among honors directors in their attitudes toward and perceived effectiveness with outcomes assessment. While we mostly found similarities among directors/deans in their use of assessment, some significant differences occurred in attitudes toward and confidence with using assessment and program review. We discuss these differences and their implications for the National Collegiate Honors Council

Variability and Similarity in Honors Curricula across Institution Size and Type

As Samuel Schuman argues in his seminal introduction to honors administration, “The single most important feature of any honors program is its people: the students who learn there and the faculty who teach them” (33). Next, argues Schuman, comes the curriculum; the context of the learning that takes place when honors faculty and honors students come together is framed by the curriculum. Honors curricula provide opportunities for honors students to endeavor challenges beyond what traditional undergraduate curricula provide. For faculty, honors is a unique opportunity to blend research and teaching and to provide a curricular laboratory for experimenting with varied topics and pedagogical approaches

Long-term Radio Observations of the Intermittent Pulsar B1931+24

We present an analysis of approximately 13-yr of observations of the intermittent pulsar B1931+24 to further elucidate its behaviour. We find that while the source exhibits a wide range of nulling (~4-39 d) and radio-emitting (~1-19 d) timescales, it cycles between its different emission phases over an average timescale of approximately 38 d, which is remarkably stable over many years. On average, the neutron star is found to be radio emitting for 26 +- 6 % of the time. No evidence is obtained to suggest that the pulsar undergoes any systematic, intrinsic variations in pulse intensity during the radio-emitting phases. In addition, we find no evidence for any correlation between the length of consecutive emission phases. An analysis of the rotational behaviour of the source shows that it consistently assumes the same spin-down rates, i.e. nudot = -16 +- 1 x 10^-15 s^-2 when emitting and nudot = -10.8 +- 0.4 x 10^-15 s^-2 when not emitting, over the entire observation span. Coupled with the stable switching timescale, this implies that the pulsar retains a high degree of magnetospheric memory, and stability, in spite of comparatively rapid (~ms) dynamical plasma timescales. While this provides further evidence to suggest that the behaviour of the neutron star is governed by magnetospheric-state switching, the underlying trigger mechanism remains illusive. This should be elucidated by future surveys with next generation telescopes such as LOFAR, MeerKAT and the SKA, which should detect similar sources and provide more clues to how their radio emission is regulated.Comment: 12 pages, 12 figures, accepted for publication in MNRA

A Study of Giant Pulses from PSR J1824-2452A

We have searched for microsecond bursts of emission from millisecond pulsars in the globular cluster M28 using the Parkes radio telescope. We detected a total of 27 giant pulses from the known emitter PSR J1824-2452A. At wavelengths around 20 cm the giant pulses are scatter-broadened to widths of around 2 microseconds and follow power-law statistics. The pulses occur in two narrow phase-windows which correlate in phase with X-ray emission and trail the peaks of the integrated radio pulse-components. Notably, the integrated radio emission at these phase windows has a steeper spectral index than other emission. The giant pulses exhibit a high degree of polarization, with many being 100% elliptically polarized. Their position angles appear random. Although the integrated emission of PSR J1824-2452A is relatively stable for the frequencies and bandwidths observed, the intensities of individual giant pulses vary considerably across our bands. Two pulses were detected at both 2700 and 3500 MHz. The narrower of the two pulses is 20 ns wide at 3500 MHz. At 2700 MHz this pulse has an inferred brightness temperature at maximum of 5 x 10^37 K. Our observations suggest the giant pulses of PSR J1824-2452A are generated in the same part of the magnetosphere as X-ray emission through a different emission process to that of ordinary pulses.Comment: Accepted by Ap

Characteristics of the 21st-Century Honors College

Today, honors education can be found in almost every corner of U.S. higher education. Since the turn of the twenty-first century, there also has been significant growth in the number of honors colleges in the United States, but there have been limited data to describe with any precision how fast that growth has been. Sederberg (2005, 2008) was among the first to document the emergence and growth of a distinct honors college organizational form and to identify unique characteristics that distinguish honors colleges from honors programs, but further growth within the organizational field of higher education necessitates an updated profile of honors colleges. This chapter presents results from the 2021 Census of U.S. Honors Colleges. We identified all known honors colleges in the United States and conducted an omnibus survey of honors college leaders. We used data from the survey to create one of the most complete statistical profiles of honors colleges to date, including information on leadership characteristics and student demographics; institutional size and structural features; admissions criteria, acceptance rates, and yield rates; honors curricula; and resources such as facilities, personnel, budgets, and endowments. We find that the number of honors colleges at American universities has more than doubled (140% increase) in the past two decades. While there are significant tendencies toward institutional isomorphism among honors colleges, we also find significant variation across honors colleges depending on institutional mission (i.e., Carnegie Classification) and whether they have more autonomous, free-standing structure within their own institutional context

Creating a Profile of an Honors Student: A Comparison of Honors and Non-Honors Students at Public Research Universities in the United States

This study uses data from the 2018 Student Experience in the Research University (SERU) Survey of undergraduate degree-seeking students to develop a profile of an honors student. Nineteen research universities participated in the 2018 SERU Survey, with a resulting sample size of almost 119,000 undergraduate students, of whom 15,280 reported participation in or completion of an honors program. No other study has surveyed honors students on such a scale and across so many institutions. This study could be useful for recruiting since it would give recruiters a better idea of what to look for that would make prospects successful in an honors program/college. Knowing what high-ability students expect from their education could also be useful in structuring an honors curriculum and experience accordingly. Finally, knowing better the wants and needs of high-ability students could be useful for advising, mentoring, and counseling honors students