Annotated Bibliographies

As appearing in Spring 1999, Journal issue 19(1)

Keywords used for the Index and Annotated Bibliographies . Use words found on this page to assist in searching the Index and bibliographies.  Search for articles using the "find" capability of your browser.

Allen, Tammy D. and Poteet, M. L. (1999). Mentoring Relationships: Strategies From the Mentor's Viewpoint. The Career Development Quarterly, 48(1), 59­73. Keywords: mentor, career.

This study intended to expand the understanding of the mentoring relationship in two ways. First, the authors examined the perceived characteristics of an ideal mentor and second, they investigated means mentors and proteges can use to facilitate the most effective relationships. These two broad areas of inquiry were deemed important to promote the effective functioning of formal and informal mentoring programs within organizations.

Qualitative interviews were conducted using 27 experienced mentors from five different organizations: municipal government, health-care, financial, communications, and manufacturing. The mentors were nearly evenly divided between men and women, were predominately Caucasian (85%), and had an average age of 42 years. Most (85%) had obtained a college degree. Participants were drawn from local companies that earned more than $50 million in annual sales/revenues and employed 250 or more people. Human resource offices assisted in identifying potential volunteers. Those selected had extensive experience as mentors and participated in a semi-structured interview. A three-step content procedure was used to analyze the data.

Listed in order of frequency, the following characteristics were identified for ideal mentors: have listening and communication skills, patience, knowledge of organization and industry; ability to read and understand others; exhibit honesty and trustworthiness; hold genuine interest and self-motivation; are people oriented; can provide structure and vision; have common sense; possess self-confidence; are open to suggestions; are willing to share information; have leadership qualities; can allow proteges to learn on their own; have versatility and flexibility; earned respect of others; provide reasonable goals; have the ability to teach; will provide feedback; and have fairness and objectivity. When asked what both mentors and proteges could do to make the most out of the mentoring experience, the following additional characteristics were listed by participants: establish an open communication system with reciprocal feedback; set standards, goals, and expectations; trust, care for, and enjoy each other; allow for mistakes; take training programs; be willing participants; be flexible, open, and comfortable; consider constraints to mentoring; learn from others; and work on common tasks. These results are discussed in the context of recruitment and training for mentors within an organization. As one method of training new advisors, this article offers some important considerations for developing and evaluating mentoring programs.

To determine the level of satisfaction with college, learning disabilities programming, and the accommodations most beneficial to students, focus groups consisting of male and female students (16­56 years of age) were conducted at five Midwestern colleges and universities (two community colleges, one public university, and two independent institutions). Participants included undergraduates and those taking graduate-level courses.

Almost 79% of participants indicated that course work accommodations (i.e., note takers, books on tape, proofreaders) and 76% said that testing accommodations (extended time, quiet location separate from other test takers, and having exams read aloud) were the most beneficial accomodations. Other important services mentioned included those of learning disability staff (63%) and peer support and study groups (45%). They also sited career guidance counseling (12%) and tutoring (from peers and learning-disability staff) as beneficial. In general, students from both the 2-year community colleges and 2-year independent institutions were positive about the services they received from the institutions' learning disabilities programs. However, students with disabilities at the public university were unaware of available services and often were not informed of them until after failing several tests.

Similarity was found among the types of learning disabilities services provided by the different Midwestern institutions. However, the results indicate that the quality of services differed between the 2-year and 4-year institutions. At public institutions, students with disabilities encountered the following difficulties: a) securing tutors and note takers, b) promptly getting books on tape, c) arranging meetings with learning-disability staff, d) securing time with career guidance counselors, e) gaining awareness of support or study groups, and 6) learning about institutional learning-disabilities programs. Both the size of the institution's learning-disabilities program and the learning-disabilities staff-per-student ratio impacted the quality ratings of services under study.

Because the research was conducted on a relatively small student sample in selected Midwestern postsecondary institutions, the author cautions against generalizing the study results to other populations. They recommend that learning-disabilities programs undergo evaluations by students to determine services in need of improvement.

Flynn developed distinctions and implications for higher education as it evolves from an instructional to a learning paradigm. As initially described by Barr and Tagg (1995), the instructional paradigm is characterized with the focus on the teacher, usually employing lecture as the primary method of delivering instruction. Other characteristics include independent, discipline-centered departments that interact with colleagues only occasionally. Significant resources and planning are committed to maintaining traditional values and systems, as well as keeping teachers current in their disciplines through professional development programs. To ensure that teachers have the requisite preparation to convey knowledge, minimum academic qualifications are required of potential faculty hires.

The shift to a learning paradigm changes an institution from one that provides instruction, to one that produces student learning. In an institution committed to student leaning, faculty members are designers of powerful learning environments, and curricula are based on knowledge students need in a complex world rather than on subjects that instructors know how to teach. Under a student-learning paradigm, colleges are judged not on the quality of the entering class, but on the quality of the aggregate learning possessed by its graduates. Compartmentalized departments are replaced by cross-disciplinary cooperatives.

Flynn argues that community colleges need to transform themselves into institutions that place learning first in every decision and action. He lists the following recommendations for colleges: a) reconfigure ways in which faculty interact with students; b) actively lobby state systems, accreditation bodies, and other regulatory agencies to seriously question the validity and practicality of semester or quarter systems; c) reexamine and redefine a faculty full-time load; d) keep faculty and staff up-to-date on the current external climate and competitive forces; e) incorporate institutional assessment into the culture of the college; f) give faculty training in identifying learning styles, modular curriculum development, and instructional technology and methodology; g) anticipate how the future job market will impact curricula development; h) streamline and shorten the cycle of curriculum development; i) in addition to maintaining the traditional core curriculum, develop programs in competency certification and partnering with the private sector; j) define what graduates should know and do to succeed in work and life, and design learning experience to achieve those ends; k) integrate all college employees into the core institutional training program; l) reconfigure instructional space into learning space; and m) become the community's technological gateway to the Information Age.

The learning paradigm is not a concept, the author concludes, that can be applied to one portion of the college. It must permeate all aspects of its structure, fabric, and culture to effectively complete the institutional shift from the institutional paradigm.

This study explored college students' perceived stress levels and persistence in college as a function of attachment style. It attempted to extend Tinto's Student Integration Model (1988, 1990) by exploring one psychological characteristic that may influence the ability of college students to become integrated into the social and academic systems of their higher education experiences. Attachment primarily regulates how individuals interpret, understand, and cope with negative emotional experiences.

Participants were 97 freshman, 30 males and 67 females, aged 18­52, enrolled in an orientation course at a midsize university in the southeastern United States. Students rated their attachment styles during the second week of the semester and their perceived stress level one month later. Persistence was defined as continued student enrollment for the fall and spring semesters or transfer to another college or university during the same period.

Results showed that students with secure attachment reported significantly less perceived stress than did students with insecure attachment. Also, fewer students with secure attachment quit college than did students with insecure attachment. Stress scores and grade-point averages suggest that the reasons students drop out of college may differ as a function of attachment style. These findings imply that for retention programs to be maximally successful, institutions need to recognize students' differential capabilities for managing stress.

Many believe that to enhance student learning and intellectual development, institutions should create learning environments that motivate students to devote more time to educationally purposeful activities inside and outside the classroom. Yet, researchers have found little consistent evidence that living in a residence hall enhances learning and intellectual development. To assess the value of formal-learning communities for freshman in residence halls, research was conducted at one Midwestern university.

The conceptual model used in this study contained four major elements: a) background characteristics of the students; b) college experiences that promote differentiation; c) college experiences that enhance integration; and d) gains in learning and intellectual development. The study was conducted during the fall of 1995 with 626 first-year students whose ages ranged from 18 to 22 years; were 70% female, 89% White, 6% African American, 3% Asian American, 1% Hispanic, less than 1% Native American, and 1% other. Students living in Residential Learning Communities (RLC) were compared to students living in Traditional Residence Halls (TRH). All completed the College Student Experience Questionnaire instrument (Pace, 1990) that uses different scales to assess involvement and integration. Background variables were drawn from the campus data on gender, minority status, ACT Assessment composite scores, and high school class percentile rank. Three types of residential learning communities were available to students living in RLCs: discipline based, theme-related floors in residence halls, and freshman interest groups.

Overall, several conclusions emerged from this study. Participation in learning communities directly enhanced students' involvement and interaction and indirectly promoted integration and intellectual gains; the nature of these indirect effects varied by outcomes. While the author discusses the limitations of this study with the warning of overgeneralization, he highlights the important implication that students' out-of-class experiences can have a positive effect on learning.

To determine common sources of stress among college students, 100 undergraduates (20 males and 80 females) were recruited from a national coed service fraternity at a Midwestern university. The researchers developed the Student Stress Survey, based on the Student Stress Scale (Insel & Roth, 1985), the Taylor Manifest Anxiety Scale (Taylor, 1953), and several other items that were identified by the researchers. The instrument consisted of 40-items divided into categories of potential sources of stress: a) interpersonal, b) intrapersonal, c) academic, and d) environmental. Within each category, stressors were identified as either daily hassles or major life events. The survey was administered during the spring quarter and participants were asked to check each item they had experienced during the current school year.

Intrapersonal sources of stress were cited most, comprising 38% of the stressors. The five most frequently listed stressors were change in sleeping habits (89%), vacations/breaks (82%), change in eating habits (74%), new responsibilities (73%), and increased class workload (73%). Financial difficulties (71%) and change in social activities (71%) were also frequently reported stressors.

While this study provides insight into understanding the sources of stress for college students, the authors emphasize the importance of conducting further research to determine the degree of stress resulting from each source and to explore which sources of stress are positive and motivating and which are negative. It is recommended that the results of this study be tested on a larger, more diverse population to verify the findings. Based on the potential impact of stress on academic performance and health, the authors encourage college administrators to incorporate stress-management training into orientation programs and activities.

The majority of the literature on predicting college success focuses on retention rates and indices of cogitative growth as student dependent variables. Few studies consider students' affective states as they bear on their college success. This study was part of a larger investigation of the antecedents of college students' success. The results reported address the following questions: 1. Do college students from different ethnic backgrounds and with different family histories of college attendance differ in their academic and social integration into the same 4-year environment? 2. Do they differ in their profiles of academic achievement and academic motivation? 3. Do they differ with respect to patterns of relationships between social and academic integration and levels of achievement and motivation?

Data were collected from 150 college students enrolled in a large, urban university in California. Participants completed the Student Attitudes and Perception Survey. Data analysis identified relationships among five indices of academic and social integration (academic confidence, social confidence, perception of oneself as a leader among one peers, a positive rapport with one's teachers, and an internal locus of control) and success and mastery orientation in that environment (as indexed by grade-point average, persistence, task involvement, and an incremental view of intelligence).

Correlational analysis revealed strong linkages between academic and social integration and student outcomes across ethnic groups and for first- and later-generation college students. Significant differences among Asian American, Hispanic, and White students emerged for most of the student variables. Results suggest that students from each of these backgrounds have unique patterns of strengths and liabilities as they face the exigencies inherent in their new milieu. Hence, the author suggests that one should not assume similarity among students from different minority groups. The author reported that the relationship between academic and social integration was much weaker than the relationship between achievement motivation and integration. In addition, significant ethnic group differences emerged in how positively students perceived rapport with instructors; yet this factor also emerged as the strongest and most uniform predictor of students ability to martial a "mastery" achievement orientation. The author suggests that college instructors must be available to their students and sensitive to cultural variations in patterns of communication and interaction.

As appeared in the Fall 1999 Journal issue 19(2)

Ancis, Julie R., Sedlacek, William E., and Mohr, Jonathan J. (2000). Student Perceptions of Campus Cultural Climate by Race. Journal of Counseling and Development, 78(2), 180­85. Keywords: Culturally diverse students, campus environment.

This study compared African American, Asian American, Latino/Latina, and White students' general perceptions and experiences of the campus cultural climate. It explored perceptions and experiences regarding multiple dimensions for the campus cultural climate, including those specifically related to race and ethnicity.

Participants in this study included 578 undergraduates (307 freshmen and 271 juniors) enrolled at a large mid-Atlantic university. These two groups were selected because they represent a range of exposure to the university campus. Participants' self-reported race-ethnicity was as follows: 136 African Americans (43 men, 93 women), 130 Asian Americans (72 men, 58 women), 77 Latinos/Latinas (34 men, 43 women), and 235 Whites (105 men, 130 women). The mean age of the participants was 20 years with a range of 17 to 42 years.

The Cultural Attitudes and Climate Questionnaire (CACQ) (Helm, Sedlacek, & Prieto, 1998) measures students' perceptions and experiences of university racial and ethnic climate on 11 factors: a) Racial Tension, b) Cross-Cultural Comfort, c) Diversity Awareness, d) Racial Pressures, e) Residence Hall Tension, f) Fair Treatment, g) Faculty Racism, h) Respect for Other Cultures, i) Lack of Support, j) Comfort with Own Culture, k) Overall Satisfaction. The CACQ was mailed to 964 first- and third-year students using stratified random sampling to ensure sufficient racial and ethnic representation. Follow-up mailings and telephoning resulted in an overall return rate of 60%.

A multivariate analysis of variance was conducted followed by 11 univariate tests for significance. Results of the perceptions of general racial and ethnic climate indicated: 1. African American students perceived and experienced significantly more racial conflict on campus and racial-ethnic separation than did Asian American and White students. 2. White students reported significantly greater faculty and student respect for different racial and ethnic groups than did African American and Asian American students. 3. White students experienced significantly greater overall satisfaction with the university than did African American and Asian American students.

Findings of the personal experiences of campus racism revealed that African American, Asian American and Latino/Latina students were significantly more likely than their White counterparts to experience pressure to conform to racial and ethnic stereotypes regarding their academic performance and behavior, as well as to minimize overt racial-ethnic group characteristics to be accepted. With regard to racial-ethnic comfort, African American and Latino/Latina students expressed a greater degree of comfort with both racially-ethnically similar and different faculty and students compared with White students.

Designing programs to meet the needs of a diverse student body is essential on today's college campuses. Counseling implications are discussed and strategies to increase awareness and understanding of differences are provided.

This study was designed to develop profiles of college students whose substance use resulted in an emergency medical or institutional intervention and to determine if first-year students abuse alcohol and other drugs (AOD) at a higher rate than their sophomore, junior, and senior peers.

The data were drawn from 255 students who required emergency medical or institutional intervention related to substance abuse during 1997­98 academic year at a 4-year college. Of the participants, 42% were first-year students; 26% were sophomores; 19% were juniors; 10% were seniors.

The primary substance of abuse was alcohol (79%). Fourteen students required hospitalization from alcohol abuse; slightly less than one half of the hospitalized group were first-year students. Thirteen percent of students needing emergency or institutional intervention had mixed alcohol with other drugs, such as illicit drugs, over-the-counter medications, and prescription medications.

The analysis of these data for the first-year cohort provides evidence of the impact of AOD on attrition. Of the students with substance abuse issues, 7% left at the end of their first year and represent 4% of the overall attrition rate for first-year students at the institution.

The results of the study clearly show that alcohol abuse and other drug use, to a lesser extent, are disproportionately evident among first-year college students. The authors suggest that prevention of AOD abuse among first-year students must be effectively addressed through cognitive and behavioral curricula during first-year students' social adjustments to the institution. They recommend using peer educators, enhanced substance abuse education prior to college, and changed living arrangements on campus to encourage greater interclass accommodations.

The authors discuss the formidable challenges of matching new graduates' capabilities with the needs and realities of available jobs. The purpose of this study was twofold: to compare college students' earning expectations with earnings reported by recent graduates with jobs and measure and assess intergender disparities in both expectations and actual earnings.

Earnings were reported by 219 recent college graduates along with earnings expected by 248 college seniors at a college of business in the southern United States. Earnings were estimated separately for men and women as a function of labor input, grade-point average, type of employer, type of job, location, and ethnicity.

The empirical evidence reveals that while students' expectations generally agree with the prevalent trends of recent graduates' marketplace experiences, they are only partially aware of what the market bears. Specifically, college seniors underestimate the earning outcomes of working more hours and overestimate the effects of age. Alumni report lower levels of earning when they work in large firms, an experience contrary to seniors' expectations of higher earnings. The model seems to describe the behavior of men better than the behavior of women. In conclusion, the authors found that the analysis underscored the importance of expectations in predicting earnings and understanding intergender diversity.

The purpose of this study was to investigate the relationship between students' prior work experience and subsequent success during the first year in an MBA program. The authors present both the traditional rationale for the use of work experience as a selection criterion and counter by presenting arguments that challenge the conventional wisdom. The arguments were presented in the context of a review of the training-readiness and the career-stage literature.

Data were collected from a unique sample of 230 MBA students at a Midwestern university. While controlling for such factors as the type of undergraduate program attended, undergraduate grade-point average, and total score on the Graduate Management Admission Test, prior work experience accounted for only a small portion of the variance in first-semester grades and was unrelated to academic performance in the second semester.

Taking these results and other existing empirical studies into account, little support exists for the view that previous work experience, as assessed by typical admission procedures, leads to higher levels of academic achievement. Implications for admissions policy, hiring companies, and those considering graduate study in business are discussed.

The purpose of this study was to determine the opinions of academic deans in the NCCCS regarding current and future applications of Continuous Quality Improvement (CQI) principles in the academic setting. An institutional self-assessment instrument based on the Baldridge Award and the Educational Pilot Criteria (EPC) was developed and used in a survey of 58 academic deans (or equivalent) at each of the colleges of the NCCCS. A questionnaire using a 5-point Likert-type scale was used as a self-assessment instrument to compare current and future conditions of each institution by relating CQI principles to seven assessment categories contained in the Baldridge Award guidelines. Survey participants were instructed to consider a 2-year period of time in assessing future conditions at their respective institutions. A panel of eight subject-matter experts critiqued the survey for face and content validity. The self-assessment instrument contained 21 specific statements that pertained to issues within the seven interrelated categories constituting the EPC. The seven interrelated categories of the EPC are a) leadership, b) information and analysis, c) strategic and operational planning, d) human resource development and management, e) education and business process management, f) school performance results, and g) student focus and student stakeholder satisfaction.

Four major findings are described as followed: 1. The majority of the academic deans (90%) were 50­54-year-old white men with 20 or more years of employment at their respective institutions. 2. No system-wide plans for implementing CQI existed across the state; however, individual community colleges have taken the initiative. 3. The vast majority of respondents reported some knowledge of CQI principles; therefore, some senior academic officers with at least some understanding of CQI principles could assume a leadership role in guiding quality efforts 4. Personal characteristics of senior administrators in the NCCCS do not affect perceptions of current and future application of CQI principles at their respective institutions.

In the last decade, the number of college students who work has increased. Many of these students are working to help pay college expenses, and a growing number of these students are working full-time. Student work patterns and their perceived impact on students' involvement in academic and nonacademic pursuits was the focus of this study.

Research was conducted using a stratified, representative, random sample of all students enrolled in a single, public institution during the fall semester. Out of a 1,200 student sample, 505 were successfully contacted and interviewed by telephone. The survey instrument contained 54 items developed from 17 broad areas of student development and campus ecology. For purposes of investigating the relationship of work to involvement in college, 23 questions were examined that focused on participation in organizations, financial concerns, and relationship with faculty.

Findings of this study indicated that the more involved students were in off-campus employment, the less connected they were to the institution. The more hours students worked, the more likely they were to report that their employment interfered with their academic progress. The results also indicated that the magnitude of off-campus employment increased the longer the student was enrolled, and the number of hours employed was also at its highest when students live in off-campus settings. In this sample, 59% of the students not working were residential students, while 91% of the students working full-time were off-campus students. According to this study, employment on campus appeared to have a positive effect on involvement with professors and in clubs and organizations. Students who worked on campus tended to work in their major department and therefore, had more opportunities to interact with faculty and to hear about extracurricular activities.

This research demonstrates the increasing trend among college students to work while pursing a college degree. A model for student learning that incorporates work along with classroom and cocurricular involvement is needed.

The number of individuals with disabilities who are attending colleges and universities is on the rise. To effectively work with these students, research on the career decision-making needs of students with disabilities is needed.

The researchers evaluate differences in college students' career decision-making attitudes and beliefs on the basis of disability status. One hundred twenty-one undergraduates (75 women, 46 men) at three different institutions in the Midwest (a large public, research university; a small, private, regional university; and a medium-sized state college). The age range of the participants was 18 through 51 and included 54 first-year students, 15 sophomores, 18 juniors, and 34 seniors. The most common disability reported by the participants in the study were specific learning disabilities (n = 50). Other types of disabilities included hearing and vision impairments, chronic asthma, autism, traumatic brain injury, other health impairments, emotional and physical disabilities, and multiple disabilities.

Students were invited to participate in the study and were asked to complete two instruments: The Career Decision-Making Self-Efficacy Scale-Short Form (CDMSES-SF) (Betz, Klein, & Taylor, 1996) and the Assessment of Attributions for Career Decision Making (AACDM) (Luzzo & Jenkins-Smith, 1998). The CDMSES-SF is a 25-item scale that measures an individual's confidence in his or her ability to successfully engage in the career decision-making process. The AACDM consists of three attributional domains: a) controllability focuses on an individual's sense of control over the career decision-making process; b) causality focuses on an individual's belief that forces within her or him are responsible for career decision-making; and c) stability evaluates an individual's belief in the degree to which career decisions remain stable over time.

Four separate one-way analyses of variance were calculated to determine whether differences existed between students with and without disabilities in terms of the CDMSE and the three attributional style factors. Results indicate that students with disabilities reported significantly lower levels of career decision-making self-efficacy and exhibited more of a pessimistic attributional style for career decision-making than did their peers without disabilities.

One explanation for these results may be the prominent role that teachers and parents play in making educational and vocational decisions for students with disabilities. While both groups are acting in the best interest of the student, frequently the degree of parental and teacher involvement can prevent students from learning decision-making skills and lead to learned helplessness with regard to academic and career development.

Career counselors need to engage students with disabilities in career exploration and planning activities that include completing an interest inventory, writing a resume, and doing a mock interview. Inviting students to share their career-related accomplishments and organizing a panel of recent graduates with disabilities to talk with students about the importance of career exploration and planning are also suggested.

This study examined differences between the college experiences of students with and without repeated policy violations. The College Student Experience Questionnaire (CSEQ) was used to survey 60 male students (30 disciplinary students; 30 nondisciplinary students) from a midsized, Midwestern, public university in the fall of 1998. The disciplinary group represented an exhaustive sample from the 1996­98 disciplinary files at the university. Six college experience variables were investigated: involvement with faculty, courses, the student union, clubs and organizations, personal acquaintances, and student acquaintances. Analysis of the data was predominately done with T tests to examine the differences between disciplinary and nondisciplinary students on the college activities subscales.

The results suggested that students who repeatedly violated campus policies might have difficulty finding the proper balance between competing priorities in their lives. Disciplinary students might be more involved in social pursuits than nondisciplinary students and less aware of academic forces in the college environment. The authors suggest that those students who violate campus policy may benefit from disciplinary sanctions designed to help them clarify their values, establish work toward academic goals, and become more involved in the intellectual environment of the campus. The association between alcohol use and repeated disciplinary involvement for the students in this study was consistent with prior research. Steps to help these students through proactive programming and appropriate sanctions were discussed. The authors suggested that student affairs professionals would benefit from future studies defining specific student subgroups' college experiences.

This study examined the differences in the retention rate and college grade-point average (GPA) of two types of scholarship students. One group of students was selected for scholarship based on high school GPA and ACT scores, while the other group was selected for a comparable scholarship based on leadership activities in high school or in the community.

Participants for this study were randomly selected from all first-year students receiving a leadership scholarship or an academic scholarship, with comparable compensation, in the academic years 1992­93 and 1993­94 at a large, public, urban university. The criteria for an academic scholarship were a minimum ACT of 26 and a 3.0 high school GPA. Those students who received a leadership scholarship had proven leadership accomplishments in high school or the community (e.g., student government president, yearbook editor, continuous volunteer commitment). The minimum academic requirements for the leadership scholarship were the admission requirements for the university (an ACT score of 20 and a 2.0 high school GPA). The leadership group consisted of 33 students with a mean high school GPA of 2.53, a mean high school GPA of 3.32, and a mean ACT score of 27.89. Samples for both groups were traditional-age students entering directly from high school.

At the end of the third year, retention and cumulative GPAs were examined. Statistical analysis indicated no significant difference between the leadership group and the academic group GPAs. More important, the retention rates for the leadership sample were higher than that of the sample of students selected for scholarship based on academic achievement.

Two limitations of the study were discussed. The leadership group was required to take a special section of "Introductions to the University," while the academic scholarship group did not have a special class and was not required to take an introduction class. Second, students selected for the leadership scholarship were required to participate in student activities. The authors emphasize that the participation requirement itself may have forced students to become more involved in the institution than they would have without the requirement. While these limitations may have influenced the results, the outcomes provide support that student involvement can positively influence persistence and student learning, even when involvement is required.

Bibliographies appearing in the NACADA Journal are compiled by George Steele and Melinda McDonald.