Who responded to the survey?

A total of 232 respondents completed the survey: 92 percent current students and 8 percent faculty or staff (no alumni). However, approximately half of the respondents had not read The Scholar-Practitioner, which may be an artifact of them enrolling on a monthly basis and not being aware of the previous issues available and archived online. Several respondents commented that better marketing of the online publication might be in order. Also suggested was a direct link to student PSPs, which is in the works. Clearly, any notification needs to include where the previous issues are archived on the Walden Web site.

How frequently should The Scholar-Practitioner be published?

The majority (52%) of the readership preferred continuing a monthly publication, followed by every other month (37%) and quarterly (4%).

Who is the readership of The Scholar-Practitioner?

Interestingly, some readers come from the College of Social and Behavioral Sciences and other areas of the university, which suggests that the content of the publication would appeal to other students enrolled at Walden.

Table 1. Readership of The Scholar-Practitioner by Industry Employment.

Usefulness of the Regular Columns

Question 2. How useful have you found each of the following regular columns?

Table 2. Usefulness of the Regular Columns in The Scholar-Practitioner.

Note: Excludes those who had not read The Scholar-Practitioner.

Clearly from these totals, the readership varied in what corners they read. It was expected that certain corners would be more relevant to some and not to others, which the data reflect.

In combining the top three frequencies, ranging from somewhat useful to very useful, ranking from 93–95 percent were the following corners: Student (93%), Research (94%), Writing (94%), and Library (95%). Faculty was 82% and Scholar-Practitioner was 78%. All in all, these percentages reflect support continuing these corners.

Usefulness of Special Columns

In examining the results from the perspective of those who read the corners, using the top three ratings, the special corners resulted in the following percentages: Therapist (86%), Research and Counseling (95%), and Interdisciplinary Counseling from an Intercultural Perspective (88%). These percentages are comparable to the regular corners.

Also, the level of research demonstrated in the latter two corners was advanced and required a sophisticated user of research, which beginning students may have found difficult due to their inexperience. Nevertheless, publishing research that serves as models of practice remains an important challenge to be mastered by all students.

Question 3. How useful have you found each of the following SPECIAL columns?

Table 3. Usefulness of the Special Columns in The Scholar-Practitioner.

Note: Excludes those who had not read The Scholar-Practitioner.

Key * Interdisciplinary Counseling from an Intercultural Perspective

In Table 4, there is a comparison of student versus faculty/staff perspectives on the usefulness of the various monthly corners. Again, the number of non-readers was significant. Variations also occurred in assessment of corners by students versus faculty/staff, with the latter tending to see the greater usefulness of most corners.

Among those who did read The Scholar-Practitioner, the majority (90% of the actual readers) assessed the columns as useful (somewhat useful, useful, very useful) compared to those who did not (under 10% of the readers).

Table 4. Table Comparison of Current Student (n=202) and Faculty or Staff (n=17) Assessment of the Usefulness of The Student-Practitioner Corners.

Open-Ended Questions

Feedback on The Scholar-Practitioner
The results are presented by the frequency with which they were reported by the readership. The most frequent comments related to The Scholar-Practitioner itself (20%) and indicated that for the most part it was covering the kinds of topics that the readership wanted.

• The major issue raised was that many readers were not aware of the publication. Some of this lack of awareness was due to (a) the monthly starts, such as in the nursing program, and the timing of the release of each issue and (b) the PSP not including a direct link to The Scholar-Practitioner. Generally, when an issue is ready for distribution, students in all programs are notified via mailing lists for human services, health, nursing, public health, and psychology. In addition, the issue is placed online in the Alumni section of the Walden Web site.
• Knowledge Areas (17%) ranked second in terms of the most frequent topic suggestions and provided a number of potential areas for coverage.
• Ranked third was Fields of Practice (10%), those items related to development as professionals.
• Student-Related Suggestions (9%) was fourth, with ideas related to setting up local groups of Walden students.
• Research Ideas, possible topics for theses and dissertations, and Technical Suggestions, ways to enhance the presentation and availability of The Scholar-Practitioner, tied for fifth with 7%.
• Job Opportunities (6%) ranked sixth, with topics related to discovering job possibilities in new and emerging fields.
• Thesis and Dissertation topics (5%) ranked seventh, with ways to find topics, survive the process, and find committee members as examples.
• Eighth was School/Program-Related Suggestions (4%).
• Ninth, a tie occurred between Presentations and Publishing and Grants and Funding (3%). The latter was begun in the December 2005 issue, and the former will be a series beginning with this issue.
• Diversity Topics and Alumni Ideas ranked 10th with 2% each. Alumni information can be found both in the Walden Ponder (http://www.WaldenU.edu/c/About/Ponder_6944.htm) and Walden, the new alumni magazine (http://www.WaldenU.edu/c/Alumni_magazine
  /Alumni_Magazine.htm).
• Lastly, 11th was a tie between the Writing and Library Corners (1%). This last rating with few suggestions reflects that these columns are addressing readers’ concerns.

The items in this list will be addressed in subsequent issues of The Scholar-Practitioner.

What kinds of topics would you like to see addressed in future issues of The Scholar-Practitioner?

The following list of topics is ranked based on the frequency of responses in the content analysis.

• The most frequent comments related to positive sentiments about the current format of The Scholar-Practitioner as a mechanism for community-building (n=31 or 20%).
• Ranked second, Knowledge Areas defined as topics that readers wanted covered in subsequent issues (n=26 or 17%).

Third was Fields of Practice (n=16 or 10%), which included application of interventions in therapeutic settings, setting up a private practice, regulations around reimbursement, etc. Student-Related Suggestions were fourth (n=15 or 9%), including ways that students can help each other, developing study groups in different sections of the country, or cost-saving measures for residencies.

Ranked fifth, each with an n=11 (7%) were (a) Research Ideas, which included suggestions for studies that students were doing, identifying useful statistical software for different topics, and inviting researchers outside of the Walden faculty to publish “sound bites” about their work and (b)  Technical Suggestions, including ways to facilitate navigation, having a Scholar-Practitioner link on students’ PSPs, and links to blogs, and being able to print individual articles.

 
Sixth was Job Opportunities (n=10 or 6%) and referred to ways to assist readers in targeting potential job markets for their training.

• Ranked seventh was Thesis/Dissertation-Related Topics (n=9 or 5%), including practical advice on choosing a chair, different research topics, and skills for surviving and completing a degree.
• Eighth was School/Program-Related Suggestions (n=7 or 4%), including topics such as Walden’s international connections, how to encourage faculty participation on discussion boards, posting grades in a timely manner, updates on public health accreditation, and school or departmental sections.
• Tied for ninth were Grants and Funding along with Presentations and Publishing. As you will note in the December issue, we began a Grants and Funding Corner. This month’s issue begins a series on the latter.
• Tied for 10th (n= 3 or 2% each) were Diversity Topics and Alumni Questions. To address the latter, there is a new alumni magazine available at http://www.WaldenU.edu/c/
  Alumni_magazine/Alumni_Magazine.htm.
• Tied for 11th (n=2 or 1% each) were Additions to the Writing Corner and the Library Corner.

Thank you again for taking time from your busy schedules to provide your input to The Scholar-Practitioner. Future issues will address your suggestions. If you have any additional ideas, please let me know at marie.caputi@waldenu.edu.