Hallmark Awards: HONORS in ACTION PROJECT

Hallmark Awards: HONORS IN ACTION PROJECT

Honors in Action Project Award Questions and Rubrics

Word Count Limit: The essay responses for the entire application cannot exceed 2600 words. No limit is given for each essay question, but to the application as a whole.

QUESTIONS

Provide a brief abstract or summary of your Honors in Action project including the following components: academic research and analysis, leadership roles, leadership development, action, collaboration, reflection and outcomes.
Competition in politics has a way of distorting the truth, and the news media that cover politics are not immune to this competition or distortion.
During presidential elections in particular, voters are inundated with tainted data from sources that affect unbiased reporting while forwarding their own agenda at the expense of the truth. Consequently, voters are often left, at best, misinformed, and, at worst, disheartened and apathetic concerning the entire voting process, as voter turnout rates continue to decline.
“The Informed Voter” project and presentation sought to address this issue concerning competition in politics by researching and then presenting (10/25/12) to the college community impartial information on the 2012 presidential candidates. In particular, we researched the history and tenets of the political parties and then focused on 5 main issues in this election: economy, education, environment, foreign policy, and health care. Our main objective was to allow student-voters to make an informed choice, in light of competition’s negative effect on politics and political news coverage.

What theme in the current Honors Program Guide did your chapter focus on?
THEME #4: Politics: "Everybody Wants to Rule the World: Competition & Politics"
Why did you choose this theme?
This was a presidential election year, with political topics pervasive.
Many of the officers had strong political opinions.
David and Alemu attended the Honors Institute and were intrigued by the ways this theme in particular was approached in the breakout sessions.
While not all members of the HIAP group loved the idea, the vast majority voted on it.
Notions of hosting a debate between local candidates immediately formed.
List the 8 academic/expert sources that were most valuable to you in your examination of the Honors Study Topic Theme you selected. Briefly explain why these were the most important sources and what you learned from each of them as you researched your Theme.
For websites, provide a document title or description, a date (either the date of the publication or the date of retrieval from the Internet), and a web address (URL). Whenever possible, identify the authors of a document as well. For individual or group resources, list contact person's name, email address and/or telephone number, job title, and place of employment. (Example included in the application.)
What conclusions did your chapter reach based on your research?
confirmed IV focus:
5 issues
Education
Environment
Foreign policy
Economy
Health Care
order of presentation
Reactions were of surprise andrecollection:
surprised at
the number of 3rd parties
surprised at how far out there some of them go
surprised at the similarity of stance candidates had on certain issues
edification:
didn’t know the history of the parties
tenets of the parties
how the tenets shape stance on issues
how tenets often conflict with reality – theory vs. practice
jackass and elephant symbols
d
candidates’ stances on the issues
d
reasons to vote
electoral college
myths about not voting
recollection:
remembered from a history class –
Summarize your objectives for this Honors in Action project and the process by which the chapter set these objectives.

After attending the national convention and its HIA-related seminars, attending the Honors Institute, participating in regional webinars, studying the Honors in Action booklet, and following given models, officers collaborated on the following objectives with their advisor:

TO:

complete a HIAproject as part of our 5-Star Development Plan, overall chapter goals
take informed action “designed to make a lasting impact and contribute to the betterment of society”
improve and demonstrate skill development –
advance leadership skills by creating “opportunities for leadership and learning as leaders through service and advocacy”
sharpen critical thinking skills by academically researching substantial expert materials on a significant societal issue that impacts local, state, national, and international affairs and drawing research conclusions to develop project ideas
gain and show awareness of how using multiple perspectives augments understanding and improves decision-making
hone problem-solving skills “by developing an in-depth, action-oriented project related to Honors Study Topic research”
hone problem-solving skills by overcoming logistical obstacles, varying political ideologies
enhance collaborative skills by collaborating with other campus clubs/organizations
strengthen analytical skills by quantitatively and qualitatively analyzing this project and assessing future opportunities
increase the Phi Theta Kappa presence on campus
meet the college president’s challenge for “something political” during this presidential election year
continue “supportive relationship” with the administration by assisting their meeting the following LCCC “institutional goals”:
“Provide a foundation of core knowledge and skills
Develop contributing and culturally competent members of society
Design a quality educational experience accessible for all learners
Develop partnerships within the community to contribute to the […] social advancement of the region”
combat voter apathy, in particular among college students
convince students to vote, that their vote counts
create informed voters, short-term (this election) and long-term (lifetime)
share essential, unbiased data so student-voters may make up their own minds
ultimately address the campus’ culture of complacency by fostering, within our chapter and throughout the college, “a stimulating environment for intellectual growth and challenge”

With whom did you collaborate for this Honors in Action project?
On campus, Beta Iota Rho reached out to the SGA, Psi Beta (psychology) Honor Society, History Club, and ACLU Club. In the end, after the rest backed out, only the SGA collaborated with us.
Other campus personnel we worked with included the Master Scheduler, Maureen Ryneski (room reservations), Food Services Manager, Sheldon Owens (pizza), Printer Office Manager, Kathy Goeringer (posters), and the Student Activities Director, Mary Sullivan (coordination).
We also reached out to all professors and deans to help promote our event in their classes (extra credit).
Off campus, for the originally planned debate, David’s team had been in contact with the candidates for Pennsylvania’s 11thCongressional District seat, challenger Gene Stilp directly and incumbent Representative Lou Barletta through his office. When this project folded, they contacted State Representative Eddie Day Pashinski, 121st Legislative District, who graciously appeared at our presentation.
Describe the leadership roles undertaken by the chapter that contributed to the development and implementation of this Honors in Action project. Leadership roles are not necessarily those that come with "titles."
Leadership Roles =
Panel Leaders:
David, Ryan, Dana
Rainy, Emily, Leah
Panels/Teams:
Tenets (Ryan)
Reasons to Vote
Education (Leah)
Environment (Rainy)
Foreign policy (Emily)
Economy (Dave)
Health Care (Dana)
Research and logistical team leaders were Ryan Flaherty, David Fox, Leah Kowlaski, Rainy Boyle, Emily Lynch, Dana Williams, Mary Sullivan, and Dr. Housenick.
Panel Leaders were Ryan (tenets and reasons to vote), David (economy), Leah (education), Rainy (environment), Emily (foreign policy), and Dana (health care). They would lead the research teams, coordinating Society members and outside club members.
We assigned these Panel Leaders based on strengths and interests; people volunteered for the issues related to their majors and major interests.
Because David had contacted Barletta and Stilp, he'd be the one to contact Pashinski.
Due to school policy, Dr. Housenick would have to secure permissions from Academic Affairs and other administrators.
As for the media (advertising and releases), Ryan, Dana, and Leah assumed these leadership roles.
Describe specific leadership development actions taken that helped chapter members be more effective leaders for this Honors in Action project.
First, a small group of officers and members attended the 2012 National Convention and participated in the various skill development seminars and HIA-themed sessions.
Also, David, Alemu, and Dr. Housenick attended the Honors Institute held at King’s College this past summer.
Officers led Information Sessions during each semester’s membership drive.
All officers designed and headed fall and spring Induction Ceremonies.
Individually, officers brought in new members by promoting the Society in their classes and social circles.
Two officers also spoke at faculty in-services as the student-speaker, to promote in part the Honor Society.
Describe the service or "action" components of this Honors in Action project that were inspired by your Honors Study Topic research. (Action can also include advocacy.)
Our primary objective was to create informed voters, so our project action was an informational presentation, The Informed Voter, held on October 25, 2012, less than two weeks before the general election.
We utilized PowerPoint to display the material in a convenient, palatable manner. We also printed copies of the PowerPoint so people could take notes and take the knowledge with them and so others with hearing or seeing problems could follow along at their seats. We distributed these handouts that day and also placed them around campus afterward. An electronic version was placed on our chapter Web site.
We also made pamphlets, using Publisher, to distribute the same information in a shorter format. We gave these out at the presentation, placed them around campus, and put an electronic version on our site.
We also designed, made, and distributed voting-themed buttons.
Prior to the presentation, we laid the groundwork. First, we encouraged students to register to vote before the deadline. We used the school’s intranet to broadcast messages and asked instructors to mention it in class. We supplied the forms – at several places around campus) – and even (confidentially) collected and mailed them in bulk. Similarly, to advertise The Informed Voter presentation, we used the same methods; additionally, we designed posters and hung them around campus. Dr. Housenick increased the allure with “free pizza” messages. He also bought the “patriotic” decorations for the room and made signs from our PowerPoint. We also hung around campus explanatory posters on the Pennsylvania Voter ID Law.
After the presentation, we placed posters, signs, decorations, and pamphlets on our bulletin board. We also donated leftover pizza and soda to our campus food kitchen.
What were the quantitative and qualitative outcomes of your project, including the lessons learned by your chapter members and others?
5 officers worked on the project – research, PPT development
3 officers (+ Dr. Housenick) delivered the Informed Voter Presentation
44 students, 6 staff/faculty attended the event
staff photographer photo-documented the event (picture and report were submitted to the newspapers, but not yet published)
2 non-students
55 pamphlets made
30 PPT copies
50 buttons distributed
10 large pizza pies
3 2-liter sodas
50 exit surveys made, 29 completed
??????
0 deans/administrators who were invited (scheduling conflicts)
pleasantly surprised by the turnout
free pizza and extra credit
favorable responses afterward re: the information, the objectivity, the appreciation of and need for more unbiased political information (how “refreshing” it was to hear)
got PTK out there, associated with leadership, scholarship, fellowship, and service
admin. sees PTK as college servants, fulfilling its mission

By the numbers:

5 officers worked on the project (research, writing), and 3 officers (+ Dr. Housenick) delivered the Informed Voter Presentation (the other officers were sick). In attendance were 44 students, 2 non-students, and 6 staff/faculty; 0 administrators could attend (though all were invited).
The staff photographer photo-documented the event, and a picture and report were submitted to the newspapers but not yet published.
In terms of resources, we distributed 55 pamphlets, 30 hard copies of our PowerPoint, and 50 buttons. We ordered 10 large pizza pies and 3 remained uneaten; we also served 3 2-liter of soda.
Although we supplied everyone with an exit survey, only 29 were completed.
the majority learned of the presentation through the “free pizza” intranet messages
prior to our event, most attendees were going to vote anyway
after our event, their “voting attitudes” were basically the same but “going to vote now that I have more information” was higher
in terms of “voting experience,” the majority hadn’t voted before
to explain low voter turnout, they responded that the 2 biggest reasons were “lack of favorable candidates” and “disenchantment toward the system”
most believed that “competition in politics” was “extremely important” but “unfair”
most said their “level of informativeness” rose because of this presentation, from “not informed at all” to “very informed”
thus, they agreed that informational sessions like this were “extremely necessary”

Qualitatively

We were pleasantly surprised by the turnout (probably due to the free pizza and extra credit).
Still, many students came up to us afterward, while getting and eating their pizza, and offered favorable responses regarding the information, the objectivity, and the need for more unbiased political information. Some noted how “refreshing” it was to hear; others shared their appreciation for the lack of "usual political BS."
Also, we again got the Phi Theta Kappa name out there, associated with leadership, scholarship, fellowship, and service.
Also, while not in attendance, the administration was aware of our project and that we continue to help them fulfill the college's mission.

Further, doing this project helped us grow as scholars: having to wade through heavily biased material was eye-opening; we discarded a good deal of sources because of this, but it honed our research abilities.
Because of the obstacles (below), the officer team formed a closer bond and learned how to deal with other groups, other students, administrators.
Ultimately, the process of planning, presenting, speaking publically, problem-solving, and analyzing has helped us become better leaders. These soft skills will help us stand out on the campus and in our individual fields.
The group has agreed that the most valuable aspect of the entire project was the information itself – not only did the voters become informed but the presenters did as well. This has taught us about the history of our political system, party ideologies, media bias and the influence of competition,and the candidates’ personal views.
Those of us who weren’t thrilled with this topic have gained a deeper appreciation for politics and for voting, and those who liked it from the beginning have had their goal to reach more people strengthened.
In terms of obstacles, we encountered them from unexpected places. First, our original plan was to host a debate on campus between 2 local candidates; the challenger was willing but the incumbent proved more difficult. Although we were persistent in our contact, we ultimately had to switch to The Informed Voter project in the interest of time. Then it was dealing with the unions on campus to square away a room for us to hold our presentation. Dr. Housenick had to help with this. Another obstacle was when we reached out to other campus organizations to collaborate and form research teams. Initially they were eager to participate, but when they learned of the amount of research and the objective nature of our goals, they grew silent and unresponsive. Throughout it all, however, we kept our focus and determination, and we persistently assumed more responsibilities to achieve our ends.
Lastly, as with all chapter projects, we continue to battle the pervasive culture of complacency. It’s a hard to fight to get people involved. Sadly, only a small minority on campus want to do/learn more than is absolutely necessary.
at least 2 politicians
one from each side of the aisle, from 2 main parties
3, for each party
(although EDP was spot on to our objectives & remained objectives)

What is left undone or what opportunities remain for the future?
develop an online component (chapter Web site, school site, social media sites)
to reach more students – those off campus, those with conflicting schedules, those too lazy to attend
to display materials
to store materials for future reference
to conduct the survey
to conduct follow-up (post-election) surveys
get more clubs involved
get more administrators to attend
get more chapter members involved
in the research
in the presentation
bigger room (would we get the same turnout for local politics?)
better pizza
yearly event
do each fall, general election
local candidates
local voters:
research area
historical and current demographics
LCCC voters:
have our own “exit poll”
utilizing online technology
number of voters, new voters
whom voted for
challenge the culture of complacency
unless free giveaway or extra credit, students do not get involved or attend such presentations
2 walked out when we told them the pizza was after the presentation
Although we're pleased with the overall project, we realize there's plenty of room for improvement. Most notably, we want to develop an online component (chapter Web site, school site, and especially social media sites). This would allow us to reach more students (those off campus, with conflicting schedules, too lazy to attend). Perhaps we could simulcast via Skype or videotape and upload to YouTube. An online presence would also be a convenient and attractive way to display and store our materials.
We'd like more administrators to attend, too. We invited the president, vice-president, and all the deans, but none could attend. Perhaps we need to plan such events sooner to accommodate all schedules.
We also need to find ways to get more clubs involved. We invited four campus organizations to collaborate with us, and only one ended up helping. The others originally expressed interest but then balked at the work involved and at our leadership.
Similarly, we must get more chapter members involved, in the research and in the presentation. Once again, the officers did all the work.
On a lesser note, we may need a bigger room (although we wonder if we'd get the same turnout for local politics). Also, while the lure of pizza was very strong, we need better pizza; using a local pizzeria could also spread our influence into the community.
If we want to influence lifelong learning habits, we'll need to host this event each year. While each election may be too much, perhaps focusing our energies on the general election would be better. We could also focus on local candidates, too, concentrating on the most contentious battle.
Perhaps more research could be done on our area, its historical and current demographics and voting habits. Perhaps we'd gain a deeper sense of community by researching more than the national tendencies, or perhaps the local research would enhance the national.
One thing that was left undone was an "exit poll" of LCCC voters: We did all this work up to the election but need to follow-up on the election -- how many voted, for whom did they vote, did our presentation have any effect on their decisions. This goes back to our first point: Utilizing online technology would help us make use of this opportunity.

What's also left undone (both opportunity and obstacle), for all chapter activities, is to continue to challenge the campus' culture of complacency. Perhaps this is related to the previous need for getting more students involved - Society members, other clubs, and the general student population. It's a shame that unless free giveaways or extra credit is used as bait, students do not get involved or attend such presentations.