The UCLA Grant Study will allow us to take a fresh look at the Harvard Grant Study of Adult Development and it is our task to apply its findings to a new cohort of individuals who will make up the graduating classes of 2017 through 2021. We will be expanding our area of interest by analyzing the experiences of traditional versus transfer students. Therefore, we will be able to fully comprehend what resources must be provided on campus to help build a sense of community which offers a lasting social capital. This study will consist of multiple surveys and ethnographic interviews to follow up with the participants through the course of fifty years. By looking into multiple groups often overlooked in these previous studies we are hoping to gather
…show more content…
According to Marvel Lang’s article obstacles for minority students must be evaluated by the higher education institutions to promote achievements within education which are needed if schools are to figure out a way of representing their needs better. Programs implemented by the federal government such as No Child Left Behind seek to assist the academic challenges students may encounter in schools that lack the resources to help every student master the basic writing and reading skills which affects them as they progress and school subjects only increase in difficulty. This plays a significant role in their educational background because so little is known on why there are more students transferring in to public institutions once their general education courses are completed …show more content…
Vaillant’s article we know that the Harvard Grant Study of Adult Development created a specific criteria of what a successful life should look like from the ages of 60 to 80. Their decathlon of flourishing seemed to hold a few irrelevant statements that could not necessarily help measure the level of happiness felt over the last fifty years. Since originally the Harvard Grant Study of Adult Development took place on an élite campus it may seem that be included in Who’s Who in America would be an unsuitable indicator of happiness here at UCLA considering the opportunity and connections would not necessarily be comparable to those of Harvard. The upward mobility an élite institution could provide cannot be measure to what social capital a public institutions may provide. Another point that seemed unrelated was earning an income found in the study’s top quartile because we are less concerned with monetary possessions and value health, love, and guidance for future generation more. By taking the designated ten points in their decathlon and minimizing it to only eight indicators as well as adjusting the ages to 50 to 65 perhaps the averages of individuals feeling satisfied with themselves would increase the averages of 2 or 3 points the Harvard Grant Study indicated
According to Marvel Lang’s article obstacles for minority students must be evaluated by the higher education institutions to promote achievements within education which are needed if schools are to figure out a way of representing their needs better. Programs implemented by the federal government such as No Child Left Behind seek to assist the academic challenges students may encounter in schools that lack the resources to help every student master the basic writing and reading skills which affects them as they progress and school subjects only increase in difficulty. This plays a significant role in their educational background because so little is known on why there are more students transferring in to public institutions once their general education courses are completed …show more content…
Vaillant’s article we know that the Harvard Grant Study of Adult Development created a specific criteria of what a successful life should look like from the ages of 60 to 80. Their decathlon of flourishing seemed to hold a few irrelevant statements that could not necessarily help measure the level of happiness felt over the last fifty years. Since originally the Harvard Grant Study of Adult Development took place on an élite campus it may seem that be included in Who’s Who in America would be an unsuitable indicator of happiness here at UCLA considering the opportunity and connections would not necessarily be comparable to those of Harvard. The upward mobility an élite institution could provide cannot be measure to what social capital a public institutions may provide. Another point that seemed unrelated was earning an income found in the study’s top quartile because we are less concerned with monetary possessions and value health, love, and guidance for future generation more. By taking the designated ten points in their decathlon and minimizing it to only eight indicators as well as adjusting the ages to 50 to 65 perhaps the averages of individuals feeling satisfied with themselves would increase the averages of 2 or 3 points the Harvard Grant Study indicated