Community College Students’ Perceptions of Their Academic Workload

One major barrier to success, for first-time, full-time college students, is course workload (Bowyer, 2012). How students respond to their situation and the barriers they face may influence decisions they make about classes in which they should enroll or those they should avoid, completing or dropping a class during the semester, and persisting from term-to-term and year-to-year. In an effort to help students succeed, colleges often give them a specified set of core courses and a specific or even prescribed pathway to complete the “general education” requirements. These core courses such as mathematics, communication, and English, among others, taken separately might not present any great challenge for well-prepared students. However, for an underprepared student who is directed to take not one, but possibly three or even four of these core courses in their first semester, this could present a huge challenge. The purpose of this case study is to determine first-time, full-time, students’ perceptions of workload in their first semester at a large southwestern community college. The study will examine students’ expectations regarding their course workload through Tinto’s (2012) conceptual framework for institutional action (Expectations, Support, Assessment and Feedback, Involvement)

Letter from William Neff to James B. Finley

Neff\u27s faith is strong and he prays daily. He sees about him the glory of the Lord. Neff prays that the Lord will bless and keep Finley. Abstract Number - 469https://digitalcommons.owu.edu/finley-letters/1667/thumbnail.jp

Letter from William Neff to James B. Finley

William Neff (Methodist Book Concern) writes that a ladies magazine [Ladies\u27 Repository] is to be published soon. It will probably be edited by Brother Hamline. Neff is certain that it will have a large readership and do a lot of good in the world. Rev. Elliott is very anxious to improve the Sunday School Library and has gone to New York for assistance to do this. Neff reports on a recent quarterly meeting held at his church, Wesley Chapel (Cincinnati). Abstract Number - 546https://digitalcommons.owu.edu/finley-letters/1842/thumbnail.jp

Letter from William Neff to James B. Finley

Neff reports that the great scourge of cholera has arrived in Cincinnati. The few first days after its appearance were enough to strike terror to the stoutest heart. So sudden and powerful was this disease that many in apparent good health fell in the streets and could not again rise but required to be carried to their homes, and very few that were attacked survived more then 5 to 10 hours. Neff describes the treatment given to those afflicted -- opium, calomel, camphor, hot tea, and mustard plasters. The major symptom is rice water diarrhea. Many doctors have fallen from fatigue and exhaustion and a good many citizens have fled from the the city. Neff and his family have not contracted the disease, which now appears to be abating. Abstract Number - 132https://digitalcommons.owu.edu/finley-letters/1130/thumbnail.jp

Letter from William Neff to James B. Finley

Neff writes to the presiding elder of the Cincinnati District, James B. Finley, about the state of Wesley Chapel in Cincinnati. Neff is a founding member of this congregation. Brother Maffitt has been at the church for 2 weeks, preaching and praying. The altar is crowded every night with mourners and many have joined the Society. Notwithstanding all of this there seems to be an apathy, a coldness in the church that I cannot account for, and I think if you could make our city a visit just now, your presence would give life and energy... Abstract Number - 133https://digitalcommons.owu.edu/finley-letters/1131/thumbnail.jp

Pfiesteria: Review of the Science and Identification of Research Gaps. Report for the National Center for Environmental Health, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

In connection with the CDC National Conference on Pfiesteria, a multidisciplinary panel evaluated Pfiesteria-related research. The panel set out what was known and what was not known about adverse effects of the organism on estuarine ecology, fish, and human, health; assessed the methods used in Pfiesteria research; and offered suggestions to address data gaps. The panel\u27s expertise covered dinoflagellate ecology; fish pathology and toxicology; laboratory measurement of toxins, epidemiology, and neurology. The panel evaluated peer-reviewed and non-peer-reviewed literature available through June 2000 in a systematic conceptual framework that moved from the source of exposure, through exposure research and dose, to human health effects. Substantial uncertainties remain throughout the conceptual framework the panel used to guide its evaluation. Firm evidence demonstrates that Pfiesteria is 1oxic to fish, but the specific toxin has not been isolated or characterized. Laboratory and field evidence indicate that the organism has a complex life cycle. The consequences of human exposure to Pfiesteria toxin and the magnitude of the human health problem remain obscure. The patchwork of approaches used in clinical evaluation and surrogate measures of exposure to the toxin are major limitations of this work. To protect public health, the panel suggests that priority be given research that will provide better insight into the effects of Pfiesteria on human health. Key gaps include the identity and mechanism of action cf the toxin(s), the incomplete description of effects of exposure in invertebrates, fish, and humans, and the nature and extent of exposures that place people at risk