I ALUMNUS:
UNDERSTANDING EARLY ALUMNI IDENTITY
By
Barnaby Pung

A DISSERTATION
Submitted to
Michigan State University
in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of
DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY
Higher, Adult, and Lifelong Education
2013

ABSTRACT
I ALUMNUS:
UNDERSTANDING EARLY ALUMNI IDENTITY
By
Barnaby Pung

This dissertation sought to provide a better understanding of early alumnus identity at a
public Midwestern university. Unlike a majority of alumni studies, this study used a qualitative
case study methodology to examine alumni identity among participants through the use of
personal interviews. Participants were 10-11 years post graduation from the same large
Midwestern public university. Interview questions examined their identity as an alumna or
alumnus through discussion of their level of engagement at their alma mater during their
undergraduate years, their level of engagement with formal and informal alumni activities since,
and their overall satisfaction with their professional and social experiences since graduation. The
qualitative methodology allowed for deeper examination of the significant factors contributing to
a salient alumni identity while still allowing for other themes and factors to emerge from the
data. The theoretical frame for analysis was based in the Identity Salience Model of Relationship
Marketing Success proposed by (Arnett, German, and Hunt, 2003). Based on their conclusions,
those who exhibit higher identity salience as an alumnus (as a function of participation, prestige
and satisfaction) are more likely to donate to and promote the institution. Given their findings,
the results of this dissertation on early alumni identity have implications for fundraising.
The key findings of this dissertation are as follows: 1) PMU alumni describe their
experience as alumni primarily in terms of informal peer-social groups (i.e. close friends); 2)
Alumni perceptions of academic and work preparation appear to play an important role in how

they understand their college experience and frame their experience since graduation; 3) Other’s
perceptions of PMU appear to influence alumni perceptions of institutional quality and value.
Implications of the findings and recommendations for practitioners can be found at the
conclusion of the study.

Copyright by
Barnaby Pung
2013

DEDICATION
I would like to dedicate this dissertation to my wife Melissa Milton-Pung. I could never
have done this without you. I also dedicate this to my children, Oliver and Charlotte, who
understood that sometimes Daddy needed to work on his dissertation for a while before playing
ball in the hallway. This is really for you.

v

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

I would like to acknowledge those individuals who in one way or another contributed and
extended their valuable assistance in the preparation and completion of this dissertation through
their support and contributions.

First and foremost Melissa Milton-Pung served as a draft editor, taskmaster and all around moral
support. Her wrangling of children and juggling household on top of her own career and work so
that I could do what I needed to do was amazing. A truer partner will never be found.

Dr. Steve Weiland, my advisor and dissertation committee chair, helped me get back on track
and stay there after having been on the short list for stopping out. He reminded me that a
dissertation is at its core a paper with an attitude that is best when finished.

My dissertation committee, Dr. Marilyn Amey, Dr. Roger Baldwin, and Dr. Rick Cole who
provided great feedback and suggestions throughout the process and were willing to work with
my ideas and thoughts. Your input was always considerate, appropriate and helpful. My work is
better for your contributions.

Dr. Carin Barber, as my supervisor at Eastern Michigan University, you provided
encouragement, friendship, and constant support for my doctoral studies. By sharing your own
journey toward doctoral completion, you reassured me it could be done.

vi

Special thanks to the Pung and Milton families for their ongoing support and faith in me, and
understanding that some holidays and weekends had to be given up for the sake of research.

Lastly, but certainly not least, I would like to thank God for providing me with a solid support
network of friends, family, and colleagues to help get me through. For lifting me up when I was
down, for blessing me with the jobs I needed when I needed them, and making sure I was where
I most needed to be when I most needed to be there. All things happen in your time and on your
plan.

vii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

LIST OF FIGURES

xi

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION
Introduction
Statement of the Problem
Purpose
Significance of the Study
Conceptual Framework
Research Questions
Key Definitions
Data Collection and Limitations
Organization of the Study

1
1
2
3
3
5
7
7
8
10

CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW
Introduction
Review of Literature: Alumni Studies
The Alumni Group
Alumni Giving
Public Good Theory
Social Exchange Theory
Expectancy Theory
The Life Cycle Hypothesis
The Investment Model
Organizational Theory
Systems Theory
Resource Dependency
Literature Review: Identity Theory
Identity Theory Introduction
Psychology
Social Psychology
Sociology
Identity Theory
Identity Salience
Identity Salience Model of Relationship Marketing
Introduction
Prestige
Participation
Reciprocity
Satisfaction
Non-Relationship Variables

11
11
12
12
13
14
15
15
16
17
17
17
19
20
20
21
21
24
26
29
32
32
35
36
38
39
40

viii

Income
Perceived Need
Conclusion

40
41
42

CHAPTER 3: METHODOLOGY
Research and Design
Population and Background
Institutional Background
Population Background
Conceptual Framework
Introduction
Conceptual Framework
Qualitative Procedures
Identifying Participants
Interview Protocol
Data Collection
Data Analysis and Role of the Researcher
Summary

43
43
43
43
45
46
46
46
49
49
50
51
51
53

CHAPTER 4: RESEARCH FINDINGS
Introduction
Organization of Analysis
Descriptive Characteristics of Participants
Analysis of Data by Research Question
Undergraduate Experience
Activities and Defining Moment
Satisfaction
Alumni Experience
Informal Social
Formal Social
Feelings
Making Meaning of Other’s Perceptions
Prestige versus Reputation
Managing the Party School Reputation
Preparation
Felt Prepared
Not Prepared
Neutral
Good Enough
Summary

54
54
54
55
64
64
65
68
70
71
76
77
80
80
85
87
88
91
99
103
103

CHAPTER 5: CONCLUSIONS, DISCUSSION, AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Introduction
Summary of the Study
Purpose and Overview
Conceptual Frame

105
105
105
105
106

ix

Methods and Analysis
Revisiting the Research Questions
Research Findings
Introduction
Summary of Findings
Informal Social Connections
Perceived Preparation
Good Value
Conclusions and Discussion
Discussion of Limitations
Implications for Practice
Enhancing Development
Recommendations for Future Research
Conclusion

107
108
108
108
109
109
110
111
112
117
121
123
124
127

APPENDIX

129

WORKS CITED

131

x

LIST OF FIGURES

FIGURE 1 The Identity Salience Model of Relationship Marketing Success

33

FIGURE 2 The Identity Salience Model of Nonprofit Relationship Marketing Success

34

xi

CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION
Introduction
Why do some people wear clothing sporting their alma mater every chance they get while
others wouldn’t buy a shirt from the dollar bin? What types of college experiences cause some
alumni to talk about their alma mater at the drop of a hat, while others are reluctant to name their
institution? Do alumni feel they got what they expected from their alma mater? During a job
interview, what are the chances that one’s role as an alumnus of their specific institution will
play a role in the hiring decision? These are some of the questions motivating the study
presented here. One of the most important resources that universities and colleges have is their
alumni. Universities are constantly communicating with many audiences for a variety of
reasons, but one of the most important, and possibly misunderstood, audiences is their alumni
(Levine, 2008).
How much does it really matter to an individual that they had their college experience at
a specific institution? The admission brochures at most institutions sell the institutional
experience over the college experience. They are not in the business of encouraging students to
attend college. They are in the business of selling why students’ should attend their institution.
Why should a prospective student choose one institution over another? Once a student makes a
choice and becomes a part of the institution, they further self select into other groups such as
their academic major, formal social and professional activities, and informal social and academic
groups. As they progress through their college experience and integrate into academic and social
groups they develop a new sense of self that determines their trajectory toward graduation, and
presumably their success afterward.

1

Much of the literature in the area of student development places a strong focus on
individual development during college (Torres, Jones, and Renn, 2009), but fails to address how
development of identity, specifically as it relates to the institution and graduates’ role identity as
an alumnus, continues to develop after graduation. Much like current student development
literature seeks to understand student identity development with an end toward improving the
student experience and enhancing student learning, this dissertation uses identity theory and
relationship marketing in an effort to better understand early alumni identity.
Statement of Problem
Alumni are often viewed as members of a single group that share traits through virtue of
having attended the same university (Baade, 1996; Clotfelter 2003). However, many practicing
alumni relations professionals and recent alumni literature demonstrate that this is not the case
(Simone, 2009; Sun, Hoffman, and Grady, 2007; Tsao and Coll, 2005; Von Kotzebue and
Wigger, 2010; Weerts and Ronca, 2007). Alumni are a varied and unique group of individuals
connected through a common or shared sense of place or nostalgia (Putnam, 2000). The
challenge then is how to reach individual alumni on a personal level that respects the larger
group membership yet ties in closely to the personal and role identities associated with their
experience within that shared place.
The problem of better understanding alumni has been most often the purview of
development offices. The relationship primarily consists of solicitations for donations,
satisfaction surveys, and event invites (Levine, 2008). These efforts address the symptoms of
alumni engagement and avoid trying to fully understand who these people are as individuals as
well as a group. The challenge is that it is believed to be much easier to profile donors and work
backwards to identify alumni who meet that specific profile, than it is to thoroughly investigate

2

other avenues. A very small segment of literature has indicated that identity as an alumnus is a
significant factor in defining the nature of graduates’ relationships with their alma mater (Arnett,
German, and Hunt, 2003; McDearmon & Shirley, 2009). This dissertation seeks to better
understand early alumni identity. Research in this area will have implications for alumni
associations, development offices, and student affairs practitioners.
Purpose
As public universities become more dependent upon outside resources due to reduced
state and federal funds, dependence upon alumni fiscal contributions increases (Johnstone,
2011). The challenge for the institution then becomes the act of keeping alumni involved and
engaged as a means to increase the likelihood of giving. However, as Mael and Ashforth (1992,
p.106) state, “surprisingly little is known about the factors which affect alumni attachment and
involvement.” The consideration of alumni as simultaneously a financial resource and as a
promotional agent calls for a lens that can help one understand the multiple layers of the
relationship more clearly (Johnson, 1995). This dissertation adds depth to the understanding of
early alumni identity and has implications for development work, enrollment, and student affairs.
The specifics of these implications are discussed in Chapter 5. Individual interviews with alumni
who graduated from the same institution in 2001 or 2002 will be analyzed using the theoretical
frame of Arnett et al (2003). The conceptual frame is specific enough to adequately guide
analysis, yet open enough to allow for other factors to emerge.
Significance of the Study
In today’s university environment, the act of continued nurturing of alumni on the part of
the university primarily consists of requests for donation or graduate placement (Cabrera, 2005;
Taylor and Martin, 1994; Van Dyke and Williams, 1999; Volkwein, 2002). Most targeted

3

communications come from the alumni relations office, the specific college or degree program,
or in conjunction with some athletic event. Beyond this arm’s length relationship, most
information received about the alma mater comes from social networks and the media. While
there is much written about why alumni donate to their alma mater (Tsao and Coll, 2005; Weerts
and Ronca, 2007, Taylor and Martin 1995), little of it examines alumni identity as a factor, and
even less examines how early alumni understand their own experience since graduation.
Literature in the area of alumni studies has only begun to recognize the need to consider
multiple variables at play in the decision for alumni to donate to their alma mater in the past five
years (Simone, 2009; Sun, Hoffman, and Grady, 2007; Tsao and Coll, 2005; Von Kotzebue and
Wigger, 2010; Weerts and Ronca, 2007). While these works examine more than one variable in
their search to identify alumni donor patterns, potential donors, and to predict who will make
donations, they still utilize empirical data analysis to do so. The end goal remains fiscal
contributions. The relationships and systems of interaction that coalesce to form alumni who are
willing to donate are much more complex than these researchers would suggest. As such, new
models have begun to emerge that explore the connections between an alumnus’ identity and
their decision to contribute to their alma mater (Arnett, German and Hunt, 2003; McDearmon
and Bradley, 2010). Even these fail to truly consider what the individual factors that shape an
individual’s identity look like within individual alumnus and alumnae. Understanding how
college graduates understand themselves in the context of their alma mater is an important first
step in redefining how institutions approach their alumni. This study seeks to better understand
those factors that contribute to early alumni identity so that researchers can refine the measures
of identity used in future studies. Fully understanding early alumni identity will enhance an

4

institution’s ability to focus their efforts on nurturing the formation process, resulting in more
engaged and connected alumni.

Conceptual Framework
In a unique study, the Identity Salience Model of Relationship Marketing Success
proposed by Arnett, German, and Hunt (2003) employs a relationship marketing model for
understanding contributions to non-profit agencies. They specifically examine alumni
contributions in the form of donation to their alma mater and promotion of their alma mater.
They use a relationship marketing model in an effort to simplify the understanding of the
multiple complex relational and non-relational interactions at play. Arnett, German, and Hunt
(2003) propose that a number of relationship focused factors, when taken together in the form of
a salient alumni identity, can help predict likelihood of contribution to alma mater. Their model
places the salience of alumnus identity at the heart of the matter and adapts the identity salience
instrument used by Callero (1985) to provide their own empirical measures.
While the results of the Arnett et. al. (2003) study is consistent with other alumni studies,
Michalski and Helmig (2008) point out a valid concern regarding the measurement instrument.
While the instrument appears to provide a valid measure of the presence of an alumnus identity it
is not in the purest sense a measure of salience. “…the focus of the research design was not to
measure the rank of a given identity in the hierarchy of an individual” (p.55). Michalski and
Helmig continue by explaining that the measure as situated within the work of Callero (1985)
“did not measure the object of interest satisfactorily because there was no relative component in
the methodological approach” (p.56). In other words, one cannot measure relative hierarchy of
identities without multiple identities considered or presented in contrast. Michalski and Helmig

5

recommend a paired comparison scaling as an alternate methodology. While their concerns have
merit, they can be mediated by considering that there are two frequently used definitions for
identity salience.
The definition used by Arnett, German, and Hunt (2003) is grounded in identity theory
(Burke, 1980; McCall and Simmons 1978; Stryker, 1968) and posits that people have several
identities, and that salient identities are more likely to affect behavior than those that are less
important. The modified Callero (1985) instrument provides a measure of identity where
salience is shown to be present through the corresponding action of donation or promotion. If a
strong identity leads to action it is salient. Given this definition and approach, the measurement
instrument allows for a valid measure. The second definition more strongly considers the
concept of identities as internalized role expectations that are internally organized within the self
in a salience hierarchy. Salience is further defined as “the probability that an identity will be
invoked across a variety of situations or alternatively across persons in a given situation”
(Stryker and Burke, 2000; p.286). This more refined definition gets at both the hierarchical
nature of salience as well as the resulting behavior in the form of invocation. This study will use
the second definition to guide its conceptualization of identity salience and will use the model
proposed by Arnett, German, and Hunt (2003) to guide the interview questions and subsequent
analysis.
The Arnett et. al. study is important in framing this dissertation. First, this study has the
distinction of being the only one to have confirmed empirically “the fact that identity salience is
a key mediating construct for (nonprofit) relationship marketing success” (p.59). This means
that identity has the potential to impact the ongoing relationship between the individual and the
institution in ways that result in taking actions that demonstrate commitment to the institution. It

6

provides empirical evidence to support the assertion that alumni identity salience is a significant
factor (at p<.01) in determining alumni contributions. Second, it allows for building beyond
current alumni studies situated in more traditional frameworks such as distinctly sociology,
psychology or human development. It accomplishes this by taking areas that have been shown to
be significant in identifying likelihood to donate such as participation (Monks, 2003), prestige
(Holmes, 2009), and satisfaction (Weerts and Ronca, 2003) and demonstrates that those factors
are correlated with a salient alumni identity. Participation and prestige demonstrate a positive
correlation at p<.01 while satisfaction shows a positive correlation that is not statistically
significant. Third, the model proposed by Arnett et. al. considers multiple theoretical
perspectives in its construction, which is the direction in which alumni studies must head if they
are to be relevant in the future.
Research Questions
The current study was guided by the following questions:
1. How do alumni who graduated between ten and eleven years ago from the same
alma mater understand their undergraduate experience?
2. How do alumni who graduated between ten and eleven years ago from the same
alma mater describe their experience as alumni?
3. How do alumni who graduated between ten and eleven years ago from the same
alma mater describe others’ perceptions of their alma mater?
Key Definitions
Alumna(e): refers to a female college graduate(s).
Alumni: refers to two or more male graduates; may be used when referencing male and female
graduates simultaneously.

7

Alumnus: refers to a male college graduate.
Identity: How people act to protect and verify their conceptions of who they are. (Burke and
Stets, 2009 p.5)
Identity Salience: The probability that one of many identities will be invoked across a variety of
situations or alternatively across persons in a given situation (Stryker and Burke, 2000).
Meaning Making: The process by which individuals interpret signs and symbols in a given
situation to determine their response according to existing identity standards (Burke and Stets,
2009).
Participation: Reflects the extent to which alumni were involved in the college culture while
they attended.
Perceived Prestige: This is the extent to which alumni want to be associated with their alma
mater based on the meaning they give to others perceptions of their alma mater.
Perceived Reciprocity: When something is given, something of equal value is received in kind.
In the case of non-profits (such as education) psychological joy derived from donation. (Perhaps
this accounts for participation post graduation?) (Arnett, German, and Hunt, 2003)
Satisfaction: The extent to which the collegiate experience of alumni reaffirms their identity.
Data Collection and Limitations
This is a developmental study that seeks to add depth to the small body of research that
exists around the identity of college alumni by seeking to better understand those factors that
contribute to a salient alumnus identity. Personal interviews were conducted with alumni of
Public Midwestern University who graduated within a given time period to provide insight on
the salience of their alumni identity. As this is a case study with a small sample size, these data
are not able to be generalized to the entirety of college alumni or necessarily to all alumni of

8

PMU. The purpose of this study is to provide a deeper understanding of the role individual
factors appear to play in forming a salient alumnus identity and to identify any patterns that may
provide areas of interest for future empirical studies.
The findings presented in this study are based upon open-ended interviews with eleven
college graduates who were identified as Public Midwestern University alumni through social
networking with primary contacts of the researcher. These participants were a snowball sample
(Creswell, 2003) gathered by the principal researcher through Facebook, LinkedIn and email
requests for participation and colleague and alumni referral. Facebook and LinkedIn served as a
contact point for those interviewed and served as a mediated introduction site through which the
primary researcher could directly contact individuals to whom he had been referred. No efforts
were made to control for race or ethnicity, socioeconomic status, marital status, or any other
factors other than alumni status and time of graduation. While the sample size is limited, the
purpose of the study is to achieve depth with the results over breadth. A single institution case
study of this size will not be generalizable to all alumni populations and will have limited
generalizability to alumni at the same institution. However, the themes identified in the study
results will be helpful in framing future empirical studies that can test the findings on a larger
scale. Interview questions have been framed in such a way that demographic variables can be
considered if they emerge during the interview process as a significant trend, but are never
directly addressed. Using social networking tools to obtain the convenience sample also
provides some limitations in that the sample may be very homogenous, is limited to only those
with computer access, and relies upon the size and scope of the researcher’s primary and
extended networks. As always, research bias can play a role in the study. As an alumnus of the
school being studied, the primary researcher is not without bias. While the familiarity with the

9

institution can provide bias, it also allows for a deeper rapport with subjects during the interview
and an increased ability to understand answers and probe for more information in meaningful
ways.
Organization of the Study
This dissertation is organized into five chapters. Chapter 1 has framed the study for readers by
focusing on establishing the problem and research questions in a context and providing
definitions and limitations to guide the reading of the rest of the document. Chapter 2 provides a
focused review of pertinent literature in the areas of alumni studies, identity theory, and
relationship marketing to build a case for using a relationship marketing approach to better
understand early alumni identity. Chapter 3 describes the research design and methodology used
in this qualitative study. Institutional background, sampling, data collection and frame for
analysis are addressed in this chapter as well as any limitations related to the study methodology.
Chapter 4 provides an overview of the qualitative data analysis and discusses the findings
through the voices of the study participants. Participation, prestige and satisfaction as factors
present in the theoretical frame will be used to frame the analysis. Any additional themes or
patterns will also be identified and discussed in this chapter. While the study does not provide
the hierarchical ranking necessary to asses specific level of identity salience, open ended
participant responses will be used to demonstrate the extent to which factors that contribute to a
salient identity are present. Chapter 5 will present the key findings and place them into the
context of the larger body of work in the field. Recommendations for future research and
practice based on the findings will also be presented.

10

CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW
Introduction
This study seeks to better understand those factors that contribute to a salient alumni
identity. While there is a large amount of literature on alumni in the context of philanthropy and
engagement (Bekkers, 2007; Simone, 2009; Sun, Hoffman, and Grady, 2007), there is very little
research surrounding alumni identity (Mael and Ashforth, 1992 ) and even less that considers
the identity salience of alumni. The literature surrounding identity provides a wealth of
information grounded in sociology (Mead, 1934; Stryker, 1968; Stryker and Burke, 2000),
psychology (Erickson, 1959/1994), and social psychology (Burke and Stets, 2009; Tajfel and
Turner, 1979). There is also a significant body of identity research represented in the humanities
and social sciences in the form of multidisciplinary studies that consider the multiple facets of
self (Torres, Jones, and Renn, 2009) as they co-exist. The concept of identity salience is well
represented throughout this body of literature, but has been less prominent in the field of higher
education in recent years as multiple identity theories (Torres, Jones, and Renn, 2009) taking a
more intersectional approach (Bowleg, 2008; McCall, 2005) have become more dominant.
Intersectionality has taken the idea of a hierarchical ranking of identities and turned it on its head
by focusing on the complicated relationships that exist between and within any number of given
identities (Bowleg, 2008; McCall, 2005). While this is a valid frame for consideration in future
analysis of alumni identity, the multiple identity research focused specifically on intersectionality
does not inform this study as the singular identity focus of this study results in a lack of the
intercategorical complexity necessary for such literature to apply (Bowleg, 2008; McCall, 2005).
Understanding that these identities are highly dependent upon social relationships and
how the individual makes meaning of the social relationships in the context of their own

11

perceptions of self and their role within a given number of groups, a model that considers an
individual’s response to relationships in terms of a specific identity is helpful. For this reason a
relationship marketing model is useful in adding depth to the understanding of the relationship
based factors that factor into the development of an alumnus identity. Taking this into
consideration, the current study focused on better understanding the elements of an alumnus
identity that are most impactful in determining the prominence of an alumnus identity as defined
within a relationship marketing model for non-profit engagement. The following review of the
literature will provide a review of pertinent literature in the areas of alumni studies, identity
theory, and relationship marketing to build a case for using a relationship marketing frame to
better understanding the factors that influence an alumnus’ likelihood of invoking their alumni
identity.
Review of Literature: Alumni Studies
The Alumni “Group”
All college graduates hold the title of “alumni.” At the most general level, this is a nongroup with little defining features until one starts breaking it into smaller elements. Start with
institution, then divide by degree type, then by college, then by school or program within the
college and presumably one ends up with something that resembles a group with similar
characteristics. This statement alone illustrates one of the challenges in studying alumni, as the
“group” is manifest purely around earning a degree and typical group dynamics are often
assumed not to hold true. The current usage of the term “alumni” applies to any graduate of a
college or university in a mixed gender group containing at least one male. According to The
Oxford English Dictionary, the English word "alumnus" comes from the Latin noun "alumnus"
meaning ‘nursling’ or ‘ward’. The word alumnus comes from pre-literary Old Latin alomenos,

12

meaning “one who is being nurtured." With understanding of the root of the word comes the
question, what exactly is meant by nurturing? The etymology of the word implies ongoing
nurturing, a continued relationship, even after the student is no longer in the student role.
Alumni Giving
In his 2009 dissertation, Examining the Influence of Selectivity on Alumni Giving at
Public Universities: a Dynamic Panel Model Approach, Sean Simone identifies seven broad
theoretical perspectives that make up the bulk of previous alumni studies. As stated earlier, the
bulk of the literature in alumni studies is focused on alumni giving or is generated with the
expressed purpose of relating the information back to donations, volunteerism, and engagement.
Thus, an understanding of the breakdown of the literature on alumni giving is paramount to
moving forward in any studies on alumni that may have implications for engagement in any
form, which includes this study.
The seven theories dominating alumni giving literature as broken down by Simone are as
follows: (1) public good theory, (2) social exchange theory, (3) expectancy theory, (4) the life
cycle hypothesis, (5) the investment model, (6) organization theory, and (7) Neoclassical
economics (Simone, 2009, p. 19). While this breakdown is representative of the literature
another way to categorize these is by disciplinary approach: 1) Sociological 2) Psychological 3)
Organizational and 4) Economic. When the literature is examined in this fashion it highlights the
diverse theoretical lenses that have been utilized in approaching the problem of understanding
alumni philanthropy. The next few sections of this paper will briefly define each theoretical
approach in terms of the literature and its relevance to alumni giving, ultimately leading to
identifying the need for new approaches in this area.

13

Public Good Theory
The public good theory essentially assumes that the best needs for society as a whole are
being considered as the primary motivation for donations (Batson, Ahmad, & Tsang, 2002). In
the case of alumni literature the good of the institution is considered as the collective good. This
concept of “public good” assumes a high level of altruism. In short, alumni give to their alma
mater because it makes them feel good to help others. This highlights one of the criticisms of the
public good theory. There is little, if any, predictive power in this theory and it does not
adequately consider the individual in the equation as a consumer. Kotzebue and Wigger (2010)
highlight the work of Andreoni (1990) about ‘warm glow’ as a means of positing an expansion
on the public good theory around the idea that altruism is at its best impure and as such public
good is not a truly valid motivator for contribution.
In reaction to the lack of predictive power the standard approach displays, Andreoni
(1989, 1990) extends the model by a component he addresses as warm glow. Warm glow
describes an abstract feeling of personal gratification arising from the act of giving itself.
This sentiment is not altruistic in character, even though it might seem so from its
definition. In fact, the donation is driven by the (essentially egoistic) wish to consume a
purely private good, namely warm glow. The fact that an individual’s donation also
benefits others is due to the non-rivalry property of collective goods, and not to her inner
propulsion, which remains strictly utility-maximizing (Kotzebue and Wigger, 2010, p
372).

The public good model is important to understand as it highlights that even apparently altruistic
actions such as donations have warm glow effects that benefit the individual through recognition
or improved self-concept. The inherent flaw combined with the difficulty of measuring altruism
has caused most alumni studies to shy away from this approach. The individual benefit as
deeper motivator supports a need to more closely examine the aspects of the individual that drive
the warm glow effect. This paper examines alumni identity and the verification of that identity
(Burke and Stets, 2009) as more likely motivators than altruism or public good.
14

Social Exchange Theory
Though this theory has its roots in economics as a transactional theory, it is currently
rooted in the field of sociology (Emerson, 1976) and is commonly applied to alumni studies.
Social exchange, not unlike its economic counterpart, requires at least two parties. In the case of
alumni giving the two parties are the institution and the alumni. The typical economic lens is
that one party provides money in exchange for goods or services. The sociological lens as
presented by Kotler (1972) takes a broader view and defines the transaction as one where values
are exchanged. In many cases consumers derive benefits from transactions that have little to do
with economic gain and everything to do with social status or self-concept.
Using this lens, alumni donors fall into one of four categories identified by Cermak, File,
and Prince (1994). The first category is affiliators. These individuals are motivated by social
ties and human factors. They really want to be part of a certain group or at least appear that way.
The pragmatists consider the tax advantages as primary. If there is no tax benefit then there is no
donation. Next, dynasts donate purely out of a sense of family tradition. Grandfather went here,
so grandson goes here, and therefore, donates as an alumnus because grandpa does. Lastly are
the re-payers who donate out of a sense of having benefited from charity in the past. This alumni
group often contributes directly to scholarship funds of specific offices and is more likely to
donate than those who did not receive non-loan assistance (Monks, 2003). The re-payer is very
much a participant in the pay it forward model of fiscal support. In all cases the donor receives
something of value to them while the school receives some sort of fiscal benefit.
Expectancy Theory
This theory works under the premise that alumni are motivated to give for much the same
reasons that employees are motivated to contribute at work. Weerts and Ronca (2006) indicate

15

that this functions similar to a work group seeking to meet a goal. In this theory, alumni
contribute because they want to see a specific goal met be it the creation of a new scholarship or
the construction of a new lab.

Typically, this theory is used in conjunction with another

framework such as public good or the investment model. The drawback in this theory when
working with alumni is that there is not always a tangible outcome. Donations made from this
frame also tend to result in restricted funds that are limited to the expected use of the donor.
Institutions prefer unrestricted funds as they are more flexible to meet a variety of institutional
needs.
The Life Cycle Hypothesis
The life cycle hypothesis regarding alumni giving posits that the older alumni are, the
more they give (Olsen, Smith, and Wunnava, 1989). This is consistent with findings in
consumer literature that indicates that people in general spend more as they age. Many empirical
studies have been done on this to demonstrate a simple correlation. This theory is important to
understand as it means that either 1) age plays a role in the identity of alumni as donor or 2) that
those who are older, or further away from graduation, may have more income to donate. Those
studies that have a life cycle hypothesis as their theoretical root (Lindahl and Winship, 1992;
McDearmon and Shirley, 2009) tend to look at alumni from the perspective of young alumni, or
older alumni often referred to in terms of presumed place in career or associated by generation.
The work of Dan McAdams (1992, 2001) considers the life cycle hypothesis from a slightly
different conceptualization of generativity. This concept essentially relates that beyond only age,
life roles and identity roles play a part in determining the extent to which an individual has
concern about the future and their life legacy. This theory is pertinent to the understanding of
alumni giving as it provides a link to the theoretical frame for this study in its consideration of a

16

fluid salience of identity. For the purpose of the current study, alumni were selected based on
time since graduation so that differences in age would not be a factor that would influence the
findings to either extreme. The choice to interview alumni ten years after graduation places the
subjects in a middle age group that is highlighted in the life cycle literature (McAdams, 1993)
and has little presence in the alumni literature.
The Investment Model
Weerts and Ronca (2007) view the relationship between the institution and alumni as an
investment with donations as an ultimate return. Logging the time upfront, while individuals are
still students, pays off in the long run in this model. The cultivation of this relationship works in
tandem with the literature about alumni engagement. It is important to note that the investment
in question is relationship based not fiscal. The theoretical frame being used for this study places
a strong focus on these relational factors, with particular focus on the existing relationships, or
lack thereof, between the individual and the institution and the individual and other alumni.
These relationships can be formal or informal. The key point in the investment model is that the
relationships are the determining factor, whereas in the relationship marketing model applied in
this study the relationships are treated as a contributing factor of identity.
Organization Theory
Organization theory with regard to the alumni giving literature focuses on resource
dependency and systems theory, which are discussed in greater detail in the following pages.
Systems Theory
Alumni giving is an example of an open system where all of the elements are embedded
in complex relationships (Scott, 2003). Monge (1977) focuses on Laszlo’s thoughts on a natural
systems approach to communication and provides Laszlo’s four organizing principles.

17

First, the system must be a whole with irreducible parts. The whole is not just the sum of
the parts. In fact, the sum of the parts creates a unique entity that has qualities that do not exist
in any of the individual parts. Monge uses the example of friends and lovers not having all of the
qualities that are present in the relationship. When one element is removed it does not merely
affect the system it destroys it.
Second, the system must be able to maintain itself in a changing environment. The
system will have a desirable state that is seeks to maintain. The system is in effect selfregulating in response to external environmental properties.
Third, systems create themselves in response to challenges of the environment. This is
where the concept of the emergent phenomenon comes into play. Systems can grow, change and
adapt to the environment. Systems may also give rise to new systems should the environment
demand it. The mechanisms that allow for this regulation to occur must be clear and hold some
amount of structural permanence (Monge, 1977).
Lastly, hierarchical imbeddedness is necessary to hold all of the parts together. Complex
systems have many parts with different hierarchical levels that interact. The properties that
allow these systems to operate on different levels are necessary to facilitate the other organizing
principles.
While systems theory is arguably the strongest theoretical perspective to use to approach
alumni giving, it is in fact the least used. This is in part due to its complex nature and difficulty
to represent in a linear fashion. Relationships are not proportional because of the non-additive
nature of systems models. If a researcher can get past these concerns though, systems models
have the best likelihood of explaining phenomenon as they exist in the “real” world as opposed
to the statistically neat ones empirical research tend toward. The theoretical frame for this paper

18

is a systems approach to the problem of alumni giving. Specifically, the emergent phenomenon
of identity salience as it relates to readiness to donate is explained in a systems based adaptation
of a relationship marketing model (Arnett, German, and Hunt, 2003).
Resource Dependency
The power dynamic created by frequent requests by universities for donations and
employment of graduates creates a resource flow where alumni provide resources for a variety of
often less than tangible rewards (Johnson, 1995). As public universities become more dependent
upon outside resource due to reduced state and federal funds, dependency upon alumni fiscal
contributions increases (Cabrera, Weerts, and Zulick, 2005). The challenge for the institution
then becomes keeping alumni involved and engaged to increase the likelihood of giving.
However, as Mael and Ashforth (1992, p.106) state, “surprisingly little is known about the
factors which affect alumni attachment and involvement.” While there is more information
available regarding these factors today than in 1992, there remains less information available
regarding alumni involvement than compared to other external factors.
The consideration of alumni as simultaneously a financial resource and as a political
change agent, calls for a lens that can help one understand the multiple layers of the relationship
more clearly (Johnson, 1995). Resource dependence looks at power differentials resulting from
the flow of externally based resources into the organization. This theory provides a base way of
understanding the relationships that form around resource allocation and the impact on decision
making resulting from the contextual power dynamics (Johnson, 1995).
There are several ways in which institutions tend to think of alumni when considering
them as generators of, or manifestations of, externally based resources. An early scan of the
literature about alumni research provided three main categories of data and data collection:

19

outcomes based, alumni engagement focused, and alumni gifts (Cabrera, Weerts, and Zulick,
2005; Fisher, 1988; Melchiori, 1988). Most institutions utilize these areas of focus in a variety
of ways that benefit the institution or department, but do little for the alumni (Cabrera, 2003).
The benefits appear very one sided in a majority of cases, thus the resource dependency model
may not be the best lens for viewing alumni giving. The power dynamic is such that the
institutions depend on the alumni more than the alumni depend on the institution. In this sense
the burden falls to the institution to convince the alumni that the value of their degree depends
upon the prestige of the program or institution as a whole. Thus the alumni perceive a need to
continue the economic relationship. This lens is particularly useful when considering that the
power in the giving relationship is really in the hands of the alumni. This dissertation will serve
to enhance the usefulness of this approach, as better understanding of alumni identity will
provide insight into how best to connect to the alumni resource.
Literature Review: Identity Theory
Identity Theory Introduction
There is a vast amount of literature on the subject of identity and identity theory. To truly
do the subject justice would require a much more thorough approach than what can reasonably
be covered in this literature review. As such, this section of the literature review takes a
truncated look at identity theory with the goal of better situating the theoretical frame within the
context of this study area. All of the literature is consistent in noting that identity theory draws
most significantly from psychology (Erikson, 1950), and then takes up residence in sociology
(Mead, 1934), social psychology (Ashforth and Mael, 1989; Tajfel and Turner, 1979) and human
ecology (Burke and Stets, 2009; Stryker and Burke, 2000; Torres, Jones and Renn, 2009). This

20

section of the literature review will examine the literature in terms of these categories and
highlight key concepts throughout that contributed to the formation of identity theory.
Psychology
According to the Online Etymology Dictionary (2001), the word psychology quite
literally means “study of the soul.” The term itself demonstrates a desire to know the inner
workings of individuals. The eternal questions of what makes one tick, why do people behave as
they do, why do they think as they do, and other questions drive studies in the area of
psychology. While there are a number of early psychologists in distinct areas of study, Erik
Erikson had one of the most significant influences in areas of psychology that concern identity.
Erikson’s (1959/1994) work on identity, rooted in Freud’s concept of the ego identity, really
introduces the concept of a psychosocial identity that develops in stages. Rather than focus on
the psychosexual elements as did Freud, Erikson (1950) proposed a psychosocial approach
where the impact of socialization on sense of self is the central construct. Each of Erikson’s
eight stages places an emphasis on the physical age of the individual, the social context and
interactions, and the psychological development within the larger context of the lifespan.
Erikson’s work on the impact of social interactions on the development of the individual
provided much of the ground work for developmental and social psychiatric studies. This work
also set the stage for the development of a psychological approach to identity that considers
society.
Social Psychology
Social psychology is defined as “the scientific field that seeks to understand the nature
and causes of individual behavior in social situations” (Baron, Byrne & Suls, 1989 p. 6). This
definition is of particular interest to the current study, given that identity is a function of behavior

21

in a specific situation in relation to the perceived self. The theoretical frame (Arnett, German, &
Hunt, 2003) provides evidence to better understand how identity plays a role in individual
graduate’s decision to donate money to their alma mater. The individual is the alumnus and the
behavior is donation or engagement of alma mater in social situations where those behaviors are
options. McLeod (2007) indicates that while there was little social psychology research in the
early 20th century, it wasn’t until after World War II that much of the key research in social
psychology developed. During this time period, government researchers became much more
interested in the behavior of individuals when grouped together and in social situations. This
research trend makes sense when the formal and informal social structures of the time are taken
into consideration. In the aftermath of WWII the scientific community was determined to figure
out how the atrocities of the Nazi party could have come to pass. The expansion of housing into
the first suburbs in the 1950’s (Putnam, 2000) also lead to greater interest in understanding the
intersection of group social behavior and psychology.
The years immediately following World War II saw an increase in formal and informal
social engagement that was unprecedented in American history (Putnam, 2000). This increase
held steady until the 1980’s when it began to taper off before crashing in the late 1990s. Putnam
offers no convincing conclusions as to why this occurred. Although his historical data on
involvement and perceptions surrounding involvement and community are sound, his efforts at
prescribing causality are too vague to provide any answers with scholarly value. What his work
does well is create a sense of how engagement in social groups is a fluid part of society that
changes. His challenge in understanding these changes and discussing them is that he never
really considers the social psychology literature available to him to better measure the nature of
the individual in the context of social situations. When the nation is engaged in group social

22

activities like never before, it makes sense that social psychologists would be curious about the
phenomenon and want to find ways to explain and understand it. Thus the social historical
context supports the increased interest in social psychology post World War II.
Social identity theory (Tajfel and Turner, 1979) is a direct result of the research produced
in social psychology in the 1960s and early 1970s. Tajfel and Turner’s (1979) work takes the
vast amount of research that is associated with identity formation and development from that
time period and distills it down to a single theory of the self as driver of social activity and
mediator of the social environment. They propose that group membership is in fact a part of the
individual not an external construct. An individual truly IS black, white, male, Jewish, an
athlete, etc. It is not a role as often conceptualized in early sociological studies in role identity
(Stryker, 1968). Their work is important in establishing the concept of an internal locus of
identity as it is most commonly used in current literature (Burke ad Stets, 2009). An identity is
developed and reaffirmed through categorization, identification and comparison. Individuals
place all things in categories including the self. Once an individual has categorized the “other”
and the self, identification occurs when the self is categorized. This categorization takes place
by comparing groups to each other and the self and determining if individuals are part of the “ingroup” or “out-group”. It is important to remember that the social group itself is a situational
context that is an expression of the self in psychological terms. Thus the self creates an “us” and
“them” dichotomy.
This concept is at work in alumni relations and fundraising today. Whenever fundraisers
engage in competitive fundraising efforts they are invoking social identity approach. Weerts and
Ronca’s (2006) work in expectancy theory with alumni identifies a similar us versus them
dynamic that can come into play in organizational identification. The quality of school as

23

perceived by students has been found to correlate with alumni giving (Baade and Sundberg,
1996). This reinforces the inherent competition between in-group and out-group that is a key
aspect of identity as first explored by Tajfel and Turner (1979). A dynamic where perceived
excellence has to be maintained in the face of a close competitor can encourage donations and
promotion. There are examples of this found everywhere from blood drives where one school
competes with another for most blood given to ticket sales and game attendance at sporting
events. It can also be seen in academic realms when job placement numbers and U.S. News &
World Report rankings are invoked. Headlines such as “Big State University outranks
University of State for third consecutive year” invoke pride related to quality that engages the ingroup identity and makes donation and participation more likely. However, the ranking and
pride are not enough. What is it that makes one even care about their alma mater in the first
place? Social psychology in particular is of importance in understanding this as it provides a
means of looking at the bridge between the internal processes and the group social environment.
It also establishes the idea that the social identity is integral to the concept of self and identity,
and that a better understanding of sociology can guide research to find ways of better
understanding those factors that establish the identity base on which future actions build.
Sociology
It is important to take a brief look at some of the pertinent literature in sociology of
identity before moving from social psychology into identity theory. Perhaps two of the most
important individuals in the area of identity studies in sociology are George Herbert Mead and
Sheldon Stryker. One of Mead’s (1934) many contributions to sociology is the concept of
“symbolic interaction”. Although the concept is Mead’s, the term itself comes out of the work of
Herbert Blumer (Snow, 2001). A significant portion of Blummer’s work is in fact a presentation

24

of his understanding of Mead’s unpublished teachings (Snow, 2001). In remaining consistent
with citing this literature in the area of sociology, this paper will discuss Mead’s work as
presented in his posthumous book, Mind, Self, and Society (1934).
Mead considered the mind/self as embedded in society and developed through interaction
with the environment and other individuals within the environment. It is important to note that
in this field there is an assumption that the mind is able to reflexively recognize the self and treat
the self as an object much like any other object in the situation (Burke and Stets, 2009). This
distinction is important because it allows for the mind/self to think about itself the same way it
thinks about others. This implies that the mind has the ability to process the self both objectively
in the context of the environment and subjectively with full consideration of personal bias. Mead
frames this as the “I” and the “Me”. The “I” is what drives action to achieve a desired result.
The “me” is the social self that takes into consideration knowledge beyond individual perception.
The process is not ordinal in that actions (“I” driven) are taken based on perceptions (“me”
driven) in a continuous process of interaction between the two similar yet distinct aspects of self.
Stryker (1968, 1980 [2002]) expands on the work of Mead and others and develops a
concept of symbolic interactionism based in social structural context. Lynn Smith-Lovin
(2003) provides one of the best summaries of the importance of Stryker’s work:
He reasserted the ability of the basic symbolic interactionist principle—
that society shapes self which then shapes social behavior—to inform a
powerful theoretical view of how social structure and the individuals that
exist within it effect and constitute one another. Following role theory in
concentrating on the stable, reoccurring interactions in our social system,
Stryker once again made social psychology relevant to the mainstream
concerns of our discipline. By linking the role patterns with the
internalized meanings that roles had for individuals, he provided the
connection between social structure, meaning and action that drives
structural symbolic interaction today (p. 167).

25

Stryker’s work in this area leads to his formation of identity theory as it is conceptualized in
modern literature. It is not only the role identities within a social construct, but the meaning
given those roles and actions taken based on that meaning, that contribute to a full understanding
of individual identity. Stryker’s theory accounts for both the sociological and psychological
aspects of identity. Within this model is consideration for multiple agencies or identities that
may exist within a single individual. The “self” or “person” serves to mediate and link the
various identities. Once a frame with multiple identities is accepted there needs to be a means
for understanding how these distinct identities interact and manifest in different situations or
contexts. The salience of a given identity then becomes a more important consideration in
understanding how identity plays a role in the actions that one takes to verify their concept of
who they are. Stryker’s work in symbolic interactionism provided the base for his future studies
on identity and in turn laid the empirical ground work necessary for identity theory to become a
unique area of study in its own right.
Identity Theory
The influence of Mead and Stryker’s work on identity can be seen across research on
identity theory including the theoretical frame for this study. The interaction between the “I” and
the “me” as explained by Mead can be seen in the Arnett, German, and Hunt (2003) model in the
manifestation of participation as a factor in identity salience. Participation is the involvement of
the individual in the activities and groups that define the “college experience”. What kind of
person am I? This question drives the individual to seek out groups that reinforce the answer to
that question. The social cues given by group members inform the individual’s decision to act
by affiliating with a given group. Acceptance by the group validates the choice and thus the
identity becomes more prominent and has an increased chance of becoming more salient. Arnett

26

et. al. argue that there are certain areas where this process results in a salient alumnus identity.
Meaning that the individual identifies as an alumnus to the extent they invoke that across unique
situational contexts. These areas are participation, prestige, satisfaction and reciprocity. These
will be discussed in more depth in later chapters.
One of the base concepts of identity theory is symbolic interactionism. Stryker suggests
that:
When entering interactive situations, persons define situations by applying names
to it, to the other participants in the interaction, to themselves, and to particular
features within the situation, and use the resulting definition to organize their own
behavior accordingly (Burke and Stets, 2009 p. 27)
Given that identity has to do with acting on an identity construct, Stryker’s consideration
is important in that it brings together the internal process, action, and societal structures
in an understandable way. All individuals classify their environment both consciously
and subconsciously. This classification process involves identifying, categorizing, and
naming. Through the basic act of living in a named social construct called civilization, a
bulk of the physical and social aspects have been named for us and carry with them
socially defined meanings and behavioral expectations that are cross referenced with
individual experiences with those aspects that either verify or conflict the social
expectations. The level to which one understands and can verify the social expectations
should parallel the level to which this situation supports an aspect of their identity. As a
patient there are expectations of self as “patient” and of the health care provider as
“doctor.” The more the doctor plays the role in a socially accepted manner the more
likely the individual is to accept the role of patient.

27

Structural symbolic interactionism does a fine job of explaining the base way in
which individuals interact with the world around them. It lays out a way for
understanding how identities are constructed by both social structures and the self
through the meaning making process (Burke and Stets, 2009). Although this helps
understand how individuals make sense of themselves in the context of social structures it
does not necessarily address how two distinct individuals will make sense of the self in
the context of another self or in the absence of societal others. McCall and Simmons
(1978) sought to address this through their research on how the self influences behavior.
The concept of role identity is central to their research. How the self interprets the
various role identities of the individual resulting in specific behaviors is the key question
driving their research.
McCall and Simmons (1978) define a role identity as ones “imaginative view of
himself as he likes to think of himself being and acting as an occupant” (p. 65). This is
an important next step in the development of identity theory. McCall and Simmons uses
Stryker’s concepts of how self and society name and create meanings for societal
structures and provide a way of understanding how the self operationalizes the meanings
through ownership of various roles as identities. McCall and Simmons (1978, 2005)
recognize that in enacting role identities through role performance that improvisation is
necessary to fill in gaps for which there are no social structures or preconceived symbolic
structures in place. This is important in that their work indicates that roles drive action
and interactions. The challenge is that individuals have multiple roles in society and
therefore must have multiple role identities. This harkens back to work done much

28

earlier by James (1890) that was the first literature to seriously address the concept of
multiple identities.
Identity Salience
Recent Literature almost unilaterally accepts the concept of multiple identities
(Bowleg, 2008; Burke and Stets, 2009; McCall, 2005; Torres, Jones, and Renn, 2009)
and much of the focus is from the perspective of role identities. Even research whose
approach is more humanistic, owes its intellectual heritage to an understanding of
multiple identities as role identities formed by the complex interaction of internal and
social processes. McCall and Simmons (1978) maintain that in the presence of multiple
identities there must be a construct that determines which identity is most present, or
prominent, in a given situation. McCall and Simmons assume that, much as social
structures exist in Stryker’s models, there must be an internal hierarchical structure at
work with regard to the multiple role identities of the self as well. The measurement of
self in role against the ideal in role, and then compared to other roles, determines the
prominence of an identity within the internal prominence hierarchy.
Support, commitment and reward are identified as the three factors that influence
the prominence hierarchy, or ideal self as it is otherwise known. Support is the level of
support for an identity provided by others as well as the self and experience.
Commitment refers to the level of investment in a given identity. Rewards, be they
intrinsic or extrinsic, reinforce acting out the role behavior and contribute to higher levels
of prominence in the rewarded identity. The extent to which each of these factors
influences a given identity in an individual is not constant and changes for each
individual (McCall, 2005).

29

Although the place in the hierarchy with regard to ideal self is referred to as
prominence hierarchy, there is often need for a situational identity that has more to do
with the social context and situational self than the ideal self. McCall and Simmons
(1978) refer to this as the salience hierarchy and it is designed to take into account the
situational self. Four factors influence the salience of an identity in a given situation:
prominence, support, rewards, and perceived opportunity structure. Prominence has
already been discussed, but it is important to note that the extent to which an identity
reflects the ideal self plays a role in its likelihood of being invoked. Prominence has been
found to be the most significant factor in determining salience. This is important in the
current study where interview questions seek to understand both the salience of an
alumnus identity in part through qualitative indicators of its prominence in their life.
Support plays a role in boosting the hierarchical level of a salient identity in a
slightly different way than in prominence hierarchies. In a salient identity individuals
will choose to invoke an identity based on prior support in similar situations. If a prior
identity has been unsupported in the past, individuals will instead choose another identity
that has received greater support in similar situations. For example, a recent college
graduate from a working-class family will often downplay their educational based
alumnus identity in lieu of other identities that fit better in the social situation of their
family.
Much like how support appears different in a salience hierarchy, rewards as a
factor also look different. Whereas more rewards increase the prominence of an identity,
both more than expected and less than expected rewards influence salience. More
rewards support the identity and greater rewards become expected in that context,

30

however if less rewards than expected are received then the identity is more likely to
become salient in the pursuit of those rewards. An alumnus who got exactly what they
expected out of their education is less likely to engage that identity because they feel
there is nothing outstanding about it and nothing to work for either (Weerts and Ronca,
2007).
The perceived opportunity structure is a factor that is unique to the salience
hierarchy. The perceived opportunity cost is in essence the cost benefit analysis of the
adoption of a role identity with regard to the rewards and the perceived costs to affecting
the role. I f the cost of engaging a specific identity is perceived as too high, then an
individual will not invoke that identity. Typically this assessment is not done in isolation.
McCall and Simmons (1978) stress the importance of noting that a salient identity is
always enacted in terms of an interaction with a counter identity. Husband supports wife,
teacher instructs student and so on. The challenge with this is that the costs and rewards
are highly perceptual and can differ greatly from person to person. There is also the
challenge that in interactions with others there are expectations of the self in a role and
expectations of the other in that role and that they may not match up. This concept is
reminiscent of the challenges highlighted by Stryker (1968) regarding structural symbolic
interactionism, and certainly shows its influence on this theoretical concept. Institutions
have expectations of their alumni and individuals have expectations of themselves as an
alumnus. The extent to which these mutual expectations are expressed, understood, and
acted upon influences the actions of both the individual and the institution. The concept
of perceived opportunity cost sees some discussion in the alumni literature with regard to
social exchange theory (Weerts and Ronca, 2007) and expectancy theory (Monks, 2003)

31

as discussed earlier, but is not fully examined in terms of how that concept is manifest in
the formation and verification of an alumnus identity. One of the only pieces of literature
that considers all of these multiple factors within a social context that considers perceived
opportunity cost as a relational factor in identity salience is the “The Identity Salience
Model of Relationship Marketing” by Arnett, German, and Hunt (2003). This is the only
published study that “explicitly measures the impact of identity salience on relationship
marketing success” (Michalski and Helmig, 2008). Although future empirical studies
would be useful in confirming the findings of this study, the current qualitative study
provides insight into better understanding how individuals make meaning of the
contributing factors, which will allow for better quantitative measures to be developed in
the future.
The Identity Salience Model of Relationship Marketing
Introduction
Thus far this dissertation has provided a broad overview of the influences on identity
theory that frame the concept of identity salience and on the literature in alumni studies that has a
particular focus on alumni giving. This section contains a detailed review/overview of the
theoretical frame used in this study in the context of the supporting literature. It is important to
note that while the theoretical frame has a focus on identity as a mediating factor in donation and
promotion, this dissertation does not focus explicitly on those aspects of the study. The aspect in
which the work of Arnett, German, and Hunt,( 2003) serves as a guide is in those factors that are
shown to contribute to a salient alumni identity. These factors, explained in detail below, have
been used to frame the interview protocol and data analysis for this dissertation.

32

Identity salience can be defined as the extent to which certain facets of one’s identity are
a part of their overall self concept and definition of self and influences actions and behaviors
(Arnett, German, and Hunt, 2003; McCall and Simmons, 1978). In the framework for this model
identity salience is treated as an emergent phenomenon that is made up of four systems or
factors: participation, reciprocity, prestige, and satisfaction. Each of these areas is discussed in
detail below.
At its core, identity salience is concept within social identity theory that focuses on
connections among the self, personalized roles, society, and role performance. Identity theory is
a micro-sociological theory that examines people’s identity-related behaviors (Hogg, Terry, and
White 1995). The relationship between the self and social structure is central to furthering the
understanding of social behaviors in the context of alumni giving.

As can be seen in Figure 1 (Arnett, German, and Hunt, 2003), identity salience is a function of
relationship inducing factors in this model. Figure 2 from Arnett et. al. (2003) goes into greater
detail regarding the relationship inducing factors contributing to identity salience.

33

While this diagram is still a linear model, it does adequately illustrate the conceptual idea
of the four subsystems coming together to create an emergent salient identity. What this diagram
is lacking is the emergent state between identity salience and donation. Michalski and Helmig
(2008) have suggested that the inclusion of paired comparison scaling into the salience measures
as another contributing factor. Another possibility is to add competing hierarchical and
situational identity measures as mediating factors between the identity and donating and
promoting choice. The central hypothesis of this model is that when the alumni identity is
salient, there is a greater likelihood of support actions that result in donation or promotion. The
extent of the action is determined by the level of salience of the alumnus identity. This
dissertation does not measure the salience of the participants, but instead seeks to better

34

understand how alumni understand and describe those factors as they see them at work in their
life and decisions since graduation.
Prestige
A common argument in the literature is that alumni donate to their alma mater because of
the prestige of giving (Volkwein,& Sweitzer, 2006). That being said, Holmes (2009) found that
prestige is more influential as a factor in giving for young alumni as compared to older alumni.
Thus it was interesting to see this played out in the current study where participants are no longer
“young” alumni, but are not yet a generation removed. One indicator of prestige has often been
selectivity. However, Simone (2009) found that not to be the case. “The statistically insignificant
relationship between selectivity and alumni giving challenges a major paradigm in the literature
regarding the influence of this measure of prestige on alumni giving (Simone, 2009).” How does
one reconcile numerous empirical studies that show a statistically significant relationship
between prestige and giving with a theoretically more methodologically sound dynamic panel
model that invalidates those previous findings? This is where the current study comes in. Both
can be correct in a more complex model that takes identification and identity salience into
consideration. Empirically, prestige has an impact on alumni donations because prestige has an
impact on the formation of a strong alumni self concept (identity salience), which in the context
of a relationship marketing success model impacts readiness to donate and increases the chance
of acting on that readiness via a contribution. Selectivity is not statistically significant because it
is only a portion of the prestige system. Thus while selectivity may not have a direct impact on
donations, it does have value as it relates to prestige. Selectivity is a key aspect of institutional
prestige and a significant factor in determining a more homogenous campus culture (Holmes,
2009), which reinforces institutional identity through peer and institutional values alignment.

35

The more prestigious the institution, the more likely it is that there will be a stronger campus
culture that will reinforce a salient identity as an alumnus.
What is most important in this model is the consideration given to the parts that
contribute to a strong self concept as alumni and an alumnus identity that is more likely to be
invoked than not. Mael, and Ashforth, (1992) found a positive relationship between
organizational identification and institutional prestige. Universities are complex organizations,
making this relationship important to keep in mind. Arnett et.al. (2003) also found a significant
positive correlation at p<.01 between prestige and identity salience, which is in turn positively
correlated with donation at the same p value. One example of how an institution can change
prestige without touching selectivity is name changes. When Beaver College changed its name
to Arcadia University in 2001, perceived prestige was a significant motive (Owston, 2007). In
Romeo and Juliet, Shakespeare writes, “What’s in a name? A rose by any other name would still
smell as sweet.” In this case the Bard is incorrect. Increased prestige matters. It translates into
increased self concept of students which in turn contributes to greater salience of the alumni
identity.
Participation
In this model participation refers to participation during attendance at the institution.
This is typical for most measures of participation (Arnett, German, and Hunt, 2003). A review
of literature shows that if the participation refers to current involvement of alumni it is more
often termed engagement (Sun, Hoffman, and Grady, 2007; Tsao, and Coll, 2005; Weerts, and
Ronca, 2007). The challenge with using participation as a factor is that it relies upon memory,
and as such is less trustworthy as time passes (Sun, Hoffman, and Grady, 2007; Tsao, and Coll,
2005; Weerts, and Ronca, 2007). Sun, Hoffman, and Grady, (2007) indicate that “alumni who

36

were treated more favorably as students, who were satisfied with their academic experiences, and
who believe their college education contributed to their career success are more inclined to give
as alumni than those with less favorable feelings and beliefs.” Arnett, et al, would argue that this
favorable experience contributes to an overall greater positive sense of self and would contribute
toward a more salient alumni identity. Although satisfaction is mentioned in the context of
participation it will be discussed as an individual factor later.
The belief that one’s education contributed to career success as a function of participation
is of specific note. McDearmon (2010) indicates that the concern over career preparedness is
very present feedback from young alumni. His qualitative study found that themes related to
career services were prevalent among open ended responses to an alumni questionnaire. This
study asked specifically about the impact of being an alumnus of a specific institution on
professional paths and also identified some trends in this area. Considerations of career
achievement and support as valid participation concerns, makes sense when considered in terms
of participation in undergraduate experience from the academic perspective. Tinto (1993) found
that academic participation and integration are of the utmost importance in remaining engaged in
college and persisting through to graduation. Although social integration is indicated as an
important factor as well, academic integration is given greater consideration in his approach
specifically for its influence on career aspirations and professional integration post graduation..
The self concept is what drives both the prominence hierarchy and salience hierarchy of
role identities (McCall and Simmons, 1978). Participation is the root experience leading to the
development of the alumni role identity, and serves as the base from where other identity
concepts start (Sun, Hoffman, and Grady, 2007).

37

Reciprocity
Perceived reciprocity has been found to lead to greater volunteerism (Arnett, German,
and Hunt, 2003). While this is not directly related to readiness to donate fiscally, it contributes
to greater salience of the alumni identity only to the extent that it is a factor supporting
satisfaction, which has limited influence on identity. It can be argued that volunteering at the
institution brings alumni in closer proximity with the institution. Proximity is another
significantly related factor in readiness to donate and the creation of an alumni identity (Von
Kotzebue, and Wigger, 2010). If an individual feels that they are “getting something out of the
deal” just by being an alumnus they will be more likely to take the next step and become more
engaged. Interestingly enough, reciprocity was not shown to have any relationship to identity
salience of an alumnus identity in the Arnett et al study.
Perhaps, the nature of reciprocity can explain this in part. Reciprocity is a current state
that is not dependent on the past experiences of the alumni, but focuses on the here and now.
This is a spot where institutions as environmental factors, have in the past placed much focus in
the hopes of influencing their alumni (Sun, Hoffman, and Grady, 2007). Specific rewards such
as a key chain or sweatshirt may engage the individual enough to donate one time, but will they
build a personal culture of donation? Arnett, German, and Hunt (2003) were clear that there was
no relationship between reciprocity as measured and identity salience while indicating that this
appears to conflict with other donation literature. McDearmon (2010) also indentifies this area
as one that needs closer examination. He found that young alumni identified incentives for
giving as important in encouraging gifts; however he also indicated that there is a possibility of
some other psychological factors at work citing Holmes et al (2002) work in that area.

38

Essentially, what the institution has to offer are good feelings, and good feelings, while
they may influence giving, do not appear to influence identity. The end result is a relationship
based primarily on social exchange that needs much more study before being considered a viable
factor in a salient alumni identity. Given the findings of Arnett et al. and the conflicting
literature on reciprocity, as it relates to identity development, this factor was not directly targeted
in constructing the measurement instrument.
Satisfaction
Satisfaction is an important factor that leads to organizational identification (Mael, and
Ashforth, 1992). It is important to remember that identification is different than identity
salience. Identification has to do with the oneness or strength of bond to an object or the extent
to which that object defines ones sense of self. This process of linkage to an object, person,
organization etc. can lead to identity formation. Where that identity falls in a hierarchy related to
other identities is identity salience. Thus, while satisfaction makes people feel good and can
reaffirm an identity, it doesn’t necessarily influence the hierarchical placement of the identity in
a significant fashion.
Arnett, German, and Hunt (2003) hypothesized that alumni who are satisfied with their
university experiences are more likely to place a university identity higher in their hierarchy of
identities. However their findings proved otherwise. In the identity salience model of
relationship marketing, satisfaction appears as a low correlation factor that is not significant.
They did note that prestige and reciprocity were likely to influence satisfaction. They also note
that the satisfaction may be much more complicated and prone to influence by other factors to be
accurately measured in this specific context. Nostalgia for the past college experience and
cognitive dissonance between the expectations during college and the experience after can

39

influence perceived satisfaction in difficult to predict ways. Given the literature on giving and
relationship marketing it is clear that satisfaction plays a role in social exchanges and donation.
However, there is room to explore its role in the salience of the alumni identity. This study does
ask specific questions of its respondents regarding their overall satisfaction with their college
experience and how that may have changed over time. This study is looking to better understand
this factor with conflicting value with regard to the development of early alumni identity.
Non-Relationship Variables
In traditional linear models non-relationship variables are more often than not utilized as
controls for other factors. Prior research indicates that there is a positive relationship between
donation and perceived need, and donations and income. In short, people who have money tend
to be more likely to give and they prefer to give it to those they feel need it (Arnett, German, and
Hunt, 2003). This study asked about employment and career, but did not control for income or
ask about perceptions of need. The focus of this qualitative study is on the factors contributing
to identity salience, not those related specifically to donation. Future studies will need to further
examine the role of income and perceived need in this model.
Income
Income is one of two identified non-relationship variables in the model. Why include
what is normally a control into a complex systems model? In this model income is more than a
control. Income is a non-relationship variable that is impacted by the economic environment
external to the system. It is also another factor that can impact self concept and thus mediate the
effects of identity salience (Weerts and Ronca, 2006; 2007). A great example is an individual
who has a good paying job because, as they perceive it, of their college degree. In this case the
income has a positive relationship with identity salience. However, if the opposite were true, and

40

the individual blamed their low income on their alma mater as a function of poor advising or
academic preparation, there would be a negative relationship. Income, like perceived need and
identity salience, appears as a dominant factor in decision to contribute to alma mater.
Perceived Need
Perceived need behaves much like income in terms of its role in the model compared to its
typical use. Perceived need is related to identity salience in that the alumni reaction is different
depending on the personality of the individual. Alums who identify strongly with their small
liberal arts school may perceive there to be a greater need than actually exists. Other alumni may
see no demonstrated need at all. Although perceived need is less closely related to identity
salience, it is closely linked to income. One may perceive a need and not have the income to
follow through, but another may have income, but no desire to donate or not perceive the need as
valid.
Much how income has a relationship with self concept so can perceived need with regard
to perceived worth (Weerts and Ronca, 2006; 2007). An individual who had a negative college
experience may perceive a need, but not feel that the institution is worthy of their contribution of
time or money. Like Income this area, while categorized as non-relationship inducing, has a
relational component with self concept and the environment. In the case of perceived need the
media can play a role in impacting this perception. As an environmental factor media messages
can elicit responses from alums that reinforce a positive self concept or a negative self concept
with regard to the salience of their alumni identity. Positive messages that reinforce a positive
self concept such as winning the NCAA college basketball tournament may increase the desire to
present the salient alumni identity in more situations, whereas a negative media message may
have the opposite effect.

41

It could be argued that non-relationship inducing variables influence the identity salience
of the individual. Given the supporting literature it is a distinct possibility as non-relationship
structures still depend highly on perceptions based in social interactions with an organization.
For the purpose of this study, only those factors identified as relationship inducing factors of
identity salience (Arnett, German, and Hunt, 2003) will be considered.

Conclusion
There is a wealth of literature that seeks to understand how individuals conceive of
themselves, why individuals exhibit the behaviors they do, and what motivates those behaviors.
People are complex; and researchers in psychology, sociology, social psychology, and identity
theory have been trying for many years to understand these complexities of the individual in a
measureable way. Some have had more success than others, but every study provides more
insight into better understanding the concepts surrounding ones identity. This literature review
provides a historical context for the study of identity and specifically builds a case for better
understanding identity salience as the mechanism that mediates which identity will take the front
line in any given situational context. The next chapter provides institutional and participant
background and explains the methodology that this study employs to add to the body of literature
surrounding identity and alumni donations by improving understanding of those factors that
contribute to a salient alumni identity which has been shown to lead to increased likelihood of
donation to or promotion of alma mater. The Arnett, German and Hunt (2003) article reviewed
above provides the theoretical frame that has guided the instrument creation and analysis of data
in this study.

42

CHAPTER 3: METHODOLOGY
Research and Design
Alumni studies are stuck in a reactive pattern, housed in fundraising, where those who
have given before define those who will be asked to give in the future. By taking a closer look at
the experiences alumni had while in college and in their life since, this study seeks to better
understand how alumni make meaning of these experiences. Understanding how alumni engage
their alma mater in the meaning making process can help researchers and practitioners
understand how individuals develop an alumnus identity over time.
Using a case study approach (Creswell, 2003), interviews were conducted with twelve
alumni of Public Midwestern University (PMU) who graduated within a given time period to
provide insight on their identity as an alumnus or alumnae as expressed through the context of
their college engagement and their engagement since. While these data are not able to be
generalized to the entirety of college alumni, or even all alumni of Public Midwestern
University, they are useful in providing a deeper understanding of how early alumni make sense
of what it means to them to be an alumnus or alumnae.
Population and Background
Institutional Background
The institution that provides the setting for this study has been masked to protect the
identity of the institution and the study participants. Public Midwestern University has been
classified as a research university by The Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of
Teaching. The campus population is around 25,000 students. The student body is primarily
Caucasian, with minority students comprising 18% of the population and international students,
from nearly 90 different nations, represent roughly 5% of the total. More than 20% of the

43

overall population is pursuing graduate studies. There are 240 academic programs offered, 101
of which offer graduate studies and 30 of which lead to a doctoral degree. The main campus has
the capacity to house nearly 5,500 students and is in fairly close proximity to the downtown of
the city. Some of the highlights of campus are the large, well-equipped student recreation center
and state-of-the-art facilities for business, chemistry, science research, health and human
services, and visual and performing arts.
Public Midwestern University has been recognized as among the top-100 public
universities in the United States by U.S. News & World Report for over a decade. In addition,
the university has its own chapter of Phi Beta Kappa, the oldest and most widely recognized
academic honor society in the nation. This is a significant honor as fewer than 100 public
universities in the country have been selected to shelter a chapter. PMU has a highly rated
engineering college, a nationally recognized aviation college, and thriving business and
education colleges.
Alumni are one of the top two sources of additional funding for colleges and universities.
In 2011 on average, the two largest sources of gifts were “alumni (25.7 percent of gifts) and
foundations (28.6 percent). Non-alumni giving made up 18.6 percent of all gifts, followed by
corporations (16.6 percent), other organizations (9.4 percent), and religious organizations (1
percent) (Kiley, 2012; p.2). When looking exclusively at gifts, 25% of total contributions does
not sound too awful. However, when real numbers come into play the picture becomes far less
optimistic. One must be aware that 25% of gifts is not the same as 25% of overall budget or
even close to assuming that 25% of alumni give. These percentages hold true for PMU as well.
According to PMU’s Budget Office website (which I will not cite further as it would reveal
the study institution), the total General Fund budget for 2010 was over $323,000,000. Tuition

44

revenue made up about 64%, state appropriations made up almost 34% and all other revenue
including gifts and auxiliaries made up nearly 3%. Does this mean that alumni giving accounts
for one half percent of the general fund? Not really. Most alumni funds at PMU are restricted
and as such cannot be used in the general fund unless specifically directed. This is at once a
boon and a burden. The benefit of restricted funds is that they must be used to meet the
intentions of the donor. This means that a gift to the library will actually be used for the library.
The burden is that people give to what they care about, not what the institution cares about or
needs funding for at the time.
Population Background
Participants for the study were selected based on their year of graduation from Public
Midwestern University. All twelve of the respondents graduated in the year 2001 or 2002 with
an undergraduate degree from Public Midwestern University. The participants ranged in age
from 31 to 35 years old. This study did not control for gender or biological sex, however all of
the participants self identified throughout the course of the interview. This resulted in a
breakdown of four female and eight male participants. Gender was not used in analysis of the
data.
Perceived prestige, participation, and satisfaction with degree were expressed in terms
of degree and career across all of the participants. As such, program of study and subsequent
career are important to consider in the analysis and a brief summary of the relationship between
degree and current occupation will be provided to add context to the data analysis and results
sections in Chapter 4. A more complete personal profile of each participant will also be
presented in chapter 4. Three of the participants currently work in the same field in which they
received their undergraduate degree. Four of the participants work in affiliated fields where they

45

use their degree, but their undergraduate area is not their primary job responsibility. Another
three of the participants stated they are using what they learned in their degree program, but not
in the field of their degree. The remaining two participants currently do not work outside the
home as they are the primary caregiver for their children. Seven professional degree areas are
represented among the twelve participants, with business represented three times. Engineering,
history, and communication are all represented twice, while aviation, chemistry, and music
theatre performance are represented once.
Conceptual Framework
Introduction
The conceptual frame driving this study is rooted in the Identity Salience Model of
Relationship Marketing Success (Arnett, German, and Hunt, 2003). While this framework is
predominantly linier in nature, it still accounts for multiple factors playing their roles
simultaneously with consideration of multiple relationship inducing and non-relationship
inducing factors. The current study examines the relationship inducing factors only and does not
examine the non-relational factors. These factors are used as a framework for analyzing
individual interview data from alumni who graduated within the same time frame from the same
institution. Examination of the data with consideration of these factors is necessary to better
understand their contributions to the formation of an alumnus identity, which will be helpful in
the construction of more complex models in the future.
Conceptual Framework
The concept of identity salience is grounded in research on identity theory (Burke and
Stets, 2009; Laverie, Kleine, and Kleine 2002; McCall and Simmons, 1978; Stryker 1968, 1980;
Turner 1978). Identity theory is essentially the concept that individuals maintain several

46

identities based on their self-concept that define their lives and the actions they take. These
identities are arranged hierarchically and those that are more salient are also more prominent and
therefore more likely to impact behavior than those that appear lower in the hierarchy. Arnett,
German, and Hunt (2003) propose that identity salience plays a significant role in the success of
relationship marketing efforts regarding non-profit organizations such as postsecondary
education institutions. Their quantitative study results indicate that this holds true. Individuals
who demonstrate a more salient alumni identity are more likely to donate to their alma mater and
promote it. This is different from other studies surrounding relationship marketing because:
1) the relationship is between an individual and an organization where there is already an
established relationship, and 2) the reciprocal factor is not concretely economic in nature.
The current study takes the findings of Arnett, German, and Hunt (2003) and expands
upon them by examining the relational factors in their Identity Salience Model of Relationship
Market Success to better understand the extent to which they contribute to a salient alumnus
identity.
While the results of the Arnett et. al. (2003) study are consistent with other alumni
studies, Michalski and Helmig (2008) point out a valid concern regarding the measurement
instrument. While the instrument appears to provide a valid measure of the presence of an
alumnus identity, it is not in the purest sense a measure of salience. “…the focus of the research
design was not to measure the rank of a given identity in the hierarchy of an individual” (p.55).
Michalski and Helmig continue by explaining that the measure as situated within the work of
Callero (1985) “did not measure the object of interest satisfactorily because there was no relative
component in the methodological approach” (p.56). In other words, one cannot measure relative
hierarchy of identities without multiple identities considered or presented in contrast. Michalski

47

and Helmig recommend a paired comparison scaling as an alternate methodology. While their
concerns have merit, they can be mediated by considering that there are two frequently used
definitions for identity salience.
The definition used by Arnett, German, and Hunt (2003) is grounded in identity theory
(Burke, 1980; McCall and Simmons 1978; Stryker, 1968) and posits that people have several
identities, and that salient identities are more likely to affect behavior than those that are less
important. The modified Callero (1985) instrument provides a measure of identity where the
salience measure is represented by the corresponding action of donation or promotion. If a
strong identity leads to action, it is salient. The second definition more strongly considers the
concept of identities as internalized role expectations that are organized within the self in a
salience hierarchy. Salience is further defined as “the probability that an identity will be invoked
across a variety of situations or alternatively across persons in a given situation” (Stryker and
Burke, 2000; p.286). This more refined definition gets at both the hierarchical nature of salience
as well as the resulting behavior in the form of invocation. This study will use the second
definition to guide its conceptualization of identity salience and will use the model proposed by
Arnett, German, and Hunt (2003) to guide the interview questions and subsequent analysis.
The Arnett et. al. study is important in framing this dissertation. First, this study has the
distinction of being the only study to have confirmed empirically “the fact that identity salience
is a key mediating construct for (nonprofit) relationship marketing success” (p.59). It provides
empirical evidence to support the assertion that alumni identity salience is a significant factor (at
p<.01) in determining alumni contributions. Second, it allows for building beyond current
alumni studies situated in more traditional frameworks such as distinctly sociology, psychology
or human development. It accomplishes this by taking areas that have been shown to be

48

significant in identifying likelihood to donate such as participation, prestige, and satisfaction and
demonstrates that those factors are correlated with a salient alumni identity. Participation and
prestige demonstrate a positive correlation at p<.01 while satisfaction shows a positive
correlation that is not statistically significant. Third, the model proposed by Arnett et. al.
considers multiple theoretical perspectives in its construction, which is the direction in which
alumni studies must head if they are to be relevant in the future.
Qualitative Procedures
Identifying Participants
The findings presented in this study are based upon open-ended interviews with twelve
college graduates who were identified as Public Midwestern University alumni through social
networking with primary contacts and the broader social networks of the researcher. These
participants were a convenience sample gathered by the principal researcher through first person
requests through Facebook and LinkedIn messages requesting participation, as well as requests
posted to PMU Alumni Facebook and LinkedIn groups. Social network sites were also used as a
contact point for those interviewed and served as a mediated introduction site through which the
primary researcher could directly contact individuals to whom he had been referred. Email was
also used to schedule interviews and send and receive documents. There are no controls for
demographic data in this study excepting for graduation date and alma mater.
No efforts were made to control for race or ethnicity, socioeconomic status, marital
status, or any other factors other than alma mater and year of graduation. While the sample size
is limited, the purpose of the study is to achieve depth with the results over breadth. Using social
networking tools to obtain the convenience sample also provides some limitations in that the
sample may be very homogenous and is limited to those alumni who use social networking sites.

49

An assumption was made that those who are willing to sign up to be a part of an alumni social
networking group would be more likely to respond to an invite to participate in the study. This
did not turn out to be the case though. A majority of participants were identified as a result of
snowball sampling from suggestions made by the first two interview participants, who are part of
the researcher’s own social network groups on LinkedIn. As always, research bias can play a
role in the study. As an alumnus of the school being studied, the primary researcher is not
without bias. While familiarity with the institution can provide bias and frame the analysis of
data, it also allowed for a deeper rapport with subjects during the interview and an increased
ability to understand answers and probe for more information in meaningful ways.
Interview Protocol
Once interview subjects meeting the appropriate criteria were identified using the
researcher’s social networks either directly through interpersonal connections or through social
networking sites such as Facebook or LinkedIn, these individuals were contacted, and asked to
return a Research Participant Information and Consent Form with contact information and
preferences for interview times if they were interested. Interviews ranged in time from one half
hour for the shortest to almost 2 hours for the longest. The average interview time fell around 80
minutes. The interviews opened with a brief discussion of the study and a verification of
participant consent and progress into the open ended questions. It is understood that a limitation
of the methodology is that it is highly reliant on self concept and memory, and as such has little
external validation. The number of participants and questions are both consistent with the nature
of the study. The twelve interview questions used to guide the interview protocol can be found
in the Appendix. Miles and Huberman (1994) recommend one or two central questions with five
to seven follow-ups resulting in no more than a dozen research questions total. The conceptual

50

frame used to guide generation of the questions lead to three main areas of questioning with three
to four sub-questions each. The interview questions provided a well fleshed out picture of the
individual alumnus’ and alumnae’s undergraduate experience, experience as an alumnus, and
perceptions of how others see their alma mater.
Data Collection
Interviews were conducted in person or over the phone. The researcher took notes during
the interviews and was careful to indicate specific quotes. The shorthand notes were typed up
following the interviews and fleshed out. Any uncertain notes were followed up with the
participant via phone or email for clarification. One-third of the interviews took place in person.
All of these in-person interviews were recorded to augment interview notes. A comparison of
interview notes to interview recordings found that the researcher notes were very reliable in
identifying the main themes and tones of the conversation, and that specific quotes indicated in
notes were accurate to the recordings as well. Recordings have been stored in a secure location
and are not associated with the participants’ real names. The identity of all interview subjects
has been masked using a pseudonym generated at random through an online baby name
generator. The researcher is the only individual with access to the key indicating the
participant’s real name. This practice in conjunction with the masked institution, and limited
demographic and personal data, provides maximum confidentiality for the participants.
Data Analysis and Role of Researcher
The data analysis was conducted using a line by line textual analysis of the interviews.
The first step was to analyze the interview data for each participant as a unique entity. During
this analysis, the researcher identified main ideas, supports, themes, and also noted any
emotional responses or patterns within the interview data (Stake, 1995; Wolcott, 1994). Brief

51

summaries of the individuals’ narratives are developed out of this analysis. After the general
themes and patterns are noted, a more focused secondary analysis was conducted with the
general themes in mind. The purpose of this analysis was to identify any themes or trends within
the broader theme. For example, if participants all indicated dissatisfaction with their college
experience as a general pattern the researcher needs to go back and look at the data for patterns
explaining this dissatisfaction. The same process was followed across each individual interview
question as well.
Once themes and patterns were identified, the results were examined in the context of the
conceptual frame. Are these results consistent within the framework? Are there outliers that are
not explained or supported by the framework? Are there inconsistencies? As the research
questions for this project were generated with the theoretical frame in mind, an analysis of the
data by research question was helpful in conducting this portion of the analysis. It also clearly
defined those responses that fell within the theoretical frame and those that emerged from the
data as unique.
The researcher engaged in several processes to address the validity of the identified
themes. First, it is important to note that the researcher is an alumnus of the institution being
studied. This is of particular note as this is a study of alumni of that institution. Given this fact,
there is the potential for an inherent bias towards or against the institution. The researcher has
taken steps to assess the validity of the study and the findings through using a qualified peer
debriefer (Creswell, 2003) in the field to review the entire project at various stages to help
minimize this possibility. Even though the researcher graduated two or three years prior to the
participants, there is an overlap where the participants and the researcher may have been at the

52

institution at the same time. In this case the proximity to the experience can serve as a type of
validating process.
The researcher’s familiarity with the target institution provides insider knowledge that
allows him to act as another source for triangulating data. For example, the researcher could
confirm the inauguration of a new president, the riots that occurred, the activities of certain
student organizations, etc. that provided additional source support. The researcher was present
for several major university events mentioned and is familiar with the places and locations
discussed during the interviews. These familiarities lead to the researcher being able to ask
follow up questions that garnered deeper data than outsiders may have been able to achieve. As
an alumnus, the researcher remains associated with other alumni and was able to share the
themes and findings of the study with several of these others as a means of further checking their
accuracy.
The researcher also engaged in some member-checking regarding the identified themes.
One quarter of the respondents were contacted with follow up questions on notes that needed
clarification. During this conversation, the researcher discussed the preliminary findings with
the participants and asked whether they felt these were accurate. All participants asked felt that
the themes identified were accurate and appropriate.
Summary
At the outset, this study promised to have useful results. The challenge, as always, is to
find the right way to approach the problem. The qualitative procedures outlined in this chapter
resulted in the findings presented in the following chapter. Chapter 4 will provide a brief
personal profile of each participant, present the data and provide an analysis of the data by
research question.

53

CHAPTER 4: RESEARCH FINDINGS
Introduction
The true joy of research is in its results. The purpose of each project varies, but all
studies share one commonality: discovery. When the results are exactly what were expected this
can be a wonderful validation of the process for the researcher. When the results offer
something unexpected, the richness of the qualitative approach allows space for the unexpected
to emerge from the interview process. This is when the possibility of something truly unique
comes into play. The results of this study offer both support for existing literature and something
new to consider.
In spite of all of the literature on identity and alumni, universities still have limited
understanding of the role identity plays in alumni engagement through promotion or donation.
One way to begin to explore this problem is to find ways to better understand alumni identity and
those factors that contribute to its salience. Identity is at its base a function of meaning making
(Burke and Stets, 2009). How individuals make meaning of their experiences and of themselves
in the situational self, as represented through a given salient identity, is invoked based on
perceptions of need in a specific situation. The specific context for this study is being an
alumnus or alumna of a specific university from a specific graduation date time frame. This
chapter will provide an organization of the data analysis, unique characteristics of each
respondent via a brief personal profile, as well as analysis of the data by individual research
question and discussion of the emergent themes.
Organization of Analysis
This chapter will begin with a brief personal profile of each of the respondents. The
descriptions will provide a snapshot of the individual to provide context for their responses used

54

throughout the analysis section and the rest of the paper. The findings of this study will be
broken down and organized by individual research question. The research questions are as
follows:
1. How do alumni who graduated between ten and eleven years ago from the same
alma mater understand their undergraduate experience?
2. How do alumni who graduated between ten and eleven years ago from the same
alma mater describe their experience as alumni?
3. How do alumni who graduated between ten and eleven years ago from the same
alma mater describe others perceptions of their alma mater?
Within each question general themes that pertain to that area will be addressed using specific
quotes and paraphrasing from interviews with respondents. While academic and career
preparation were not asked about in the interview process, themes in this area were so prominent
in the interview data as an emergent trend that this area will be discussed as a separate section in
the same way as the data directly pertaining to the original research questions.
Descriptive Characteristics of Participants
This section provides brief profiles of each of the individuals who were interviewed for
this study. The purpose of these profiles is to provide the reader with a context for individual
responses and to illustrate that the alumni who participated in the study, by providing their
insights on their own experiences, are real human beings with genuine unique experiences as
individuals. The uniqueness of the individual experience is particularly important when a study
is exploring individual identity in the context of a possibly larger social situational identity
(Bowleg, 2008). As this study places emphasis on those factors that contribute to the salience of
an identity, understanding the differences and similarities of the individual respondents gives any

55

trends that appear across different personal experiences and individuals more weight as shared
meaning making. As mentioned in the methods section, respondent names have been masked
and a new name has been randomly generated for each individual. The information provided
about each individual will be specific enough to paint a picture of the individual yet broad
enough such that they will not be able to be identified based on the description. Combined with
the fact that the institution is also masked, this should provide the confidentiality explained to
respondents in the consent form for this study.
Alex
Alex grew up in a rural area of the same state as PMU. He decided to attend PMU
because it was smaller than the large state institutions yet larger than the smallest ones. He had
family in the region that only lived a couple of hours away. Given that he had a moderate ACT
score and GPA, he was admitted to the institution on probationary status. Alex majored in
business administration and HR management. He always wanted to go into business and did not
want to waste his time with anything else. Alex was involved in intramurals at the recreation
center, but really focused on his academics so that he could improve his GPA and meet his
probationary status. Alex spent his first year building his friendships and relationships in an
informal capacity. Upon graduation Alex found the job market to be “horrible.” After working
manual labor jobs for a little over a year, Alex pursued graduate studies in HR Labor Relations
which is the field he currently works in. Though he still keeps in contact with some of his
friends, he does not see them often and is not involved as an alumnus in any other way.
Jason
Jason grew up on the opposite side of the same state as PMU and attended an elite public
high school. Jason decided to attend Public Midwestern University because of its paper

56

engineering program. This program has a rather strong reputation at this university and as such
was a draw for him. His primary goal when he started college was to make money. Jason is
very close to his family and chose PMU because of its proximity, within a few hours, to them.
He was a member of the student organization for the paper program, but didn't fit in very well.
He also engaged in intramural bowling, yet found most of his social interactions revolved around
his engagement in his residence hall community where he lived for 2 1/2 years. The friends he
made in the residence halls remain a close social group of his today. This is also where he met
his wife through friends of friends. After graduation, Jason did not go to work for a paper
engineering company. He instead pursued work in the area of environmental engineering. This
is an area that he had gained an interest in during his undergraduate years. He still works in this
field and has advanced into management. While he is not an active alumnus, he does purchase
the PMU alumni license plate for his car.
Jim
Jim was an aviation flight science major at PMU. He selected this program because of its
national reputation in this field. While there are private flight schools that can also provide a
pilot's license and appropriate training, PMU offers a more robust education that he felt provided
greater opportunity. Jim was a member of a fraternity and was pretty active in that organization
until his senior year. He is still close with his fraternity brothers. Jim and his wife remain
connected to his PMU friends by attending birthday parties, life events, and social gatherings for
these friends and their friends’ children. As a pilot, he travels for a living so does not get back to
his alma mater too frequently. He feels that being a PMU alumnus has been helpful in his field
and enjoys the affiliation with his alma mater.

57

Simon
Simon went to college because it's just what you are supposed to do. The goal is to go to
school, get a good job, and make a living. The desire to get a good job influenced his degree
choice and his school choice as a result. PMU offers a highly rated mechanical engineering
program and offered him more scholarship money than other more prestigious competing
schools. PMU was by far the best value of his choices in state. Simon was involved in marching
band for four years. Combined with the liberal arts requirements for his degree, this offered him
a more well-rounded experience than some of his peers who attended strictly engineering
schools. After graduation Simon went to work for the naval surface warfare division in the
defense industry. He later moved for his wife's educational pursuits and worked for a short time
in electrical engineering, for which he had very little training. Another move later, and he has
been back to work with the Navy ever since. Simon currently resides in Washington, DC. While
PMU does not have much of a presence or reputation in that area of the country he does work
with some fellow alumni and finds it amusing that PMU’s football rival has a satellite office near
his home. Though he has been invited to play in the alumni band for homecoming, he has not
felt inclined to do so yet.
Chip
College was always assumed for Chip. He was part of a cohort of students that were very
academically oriented in his high school. This previous academic success combined with his
parents’ expectations and encouragement sent him originally to a prestigious four-year research
institution. After 2 1/2 years, he transferred to PMU due to reduced cost and a change in major.
While completing his undergraduate experience, he joined the historical honor society and was
president his senior year and wrote for the college newspaper. One of the things that really

58

stands-out to him about his undergraduate experience is his conversations with faculty and the
support they offered. As a result of these faculty interactions, he was very engaged in his
academic major. Their encouragement, combined with several personal experiences, lead to his
pursuit of graduate study at PMU. Chip continued his academic success by completing his MA
and returning to his original, more prestigious, institution as a doctoral student. His early
experience as a doctoral student left him feeling that his academic preparation at PMU was far
less “robust” than that of his peers from other institutions. After completing his doctoral studies,
Chip currently works as faculty at an elite public research institution.
Ariel
Ariel went to college because her parents told her she had to. Many of her friends from
high school were at PMU; however, they did not end up keeping in touch. Ariel majored in
business management as it seemed like a very useful and flexible degree. During her time in
undergrad, Ariel went on an alternative winter experience, was involved in residence hall
government, and really embraced and enjoyed living in the residence halls. She met and
connected with a close knit group of friends in the residence halls. These friends are still close to
her and her husband, whom she also met in the residence halls, to this day. After graduation,
Ariel combined her degree with an interest in culinary arts and worked at a restaurant as an
assistant manager for a few years. Dissatisfied with her work experience, Ariel did not return to
work after the birth of her first child. Ariel currently stays at home with her two children and
works part-time as an administrative assistant.
Ryan
Ryan went to college because it's just what you do after high school. His parents insisted
that he attend the small private Christian school that his father attended. This experience did not

59

work for Ryan and he transferred to PMU, where his best friend attended, at the end of his first
year. Ryan was a pre-med major until a frank conversation with his advisor landed him in
chemistry where he thrived. Ryan got married within his first year of enrolling at PMU and had
a child soon after. His social engagement and campus involvement were limited due to work and
family commitments that took up most of his time outside of classes. His academic success led
to several jobs in chemistry while in school that counted as internships, as well as provided
support for family. Shortly after finishing at PMU, Ryan went through a divorce. Unhappy with
his work and in need of a change, Ryan pursued a second bachelor’s degree in 3-D art. He
currently works at a ceramics studio as a ceramic glaze formulator and ceramic artist where he
actively uses both his chemistry and art degrees. Ryan keeps in touch with his friends from his
year in the residence halls at PMU. While he remains fond of PMU, he has found his affiliation
with his second institution much more beneficial in his work.
Marc
Marc comes from a family of educators, so college was always in the plan. He wanted to
go into engineering and considered elite institutions in the state. PMU was the only institution
that offered engineering graphics and an industrial design track. Marc had attended a summer
engineering camp at PMU that was also influential in his decision to attend. He was a member
of his high school solar bicycle team which encouraged him to work with the solar vehicle team
at PMU. Despite his academic success in engineering, Marc did not feel like he fit in with the
other engineers. Marc was also a member of a fraternity where he became president of
Fraternity Council and later president of another student organization. Marc's involvement with
his fraternity and his dissatisfaction with the engineering culture led to a change of major during
senior year. He switched to a student planned curriculum that closely resembled

60

communications and was able to graduate without a delay thanks to the support of his advisor.
After graduation, Marc pursued his master’s degree in higher education and student affairs at a
different university. He is still formally involved with the PMU fraternity chapter, has been a
dues paying member of the alumni association, and is informally involved in many other ways.
Overall, he is proud of having attended PMU. He currently works in student affairs
administration.
Michelle
Going to college was not a guarantee for Michelle. Due to the nature of her father's very
mobile job following military contracts, Michelle had been homeschooled for a number of years.
After completing her homeschooling requirements for graduation, she spent one year at a private
liberal arts college before transferring to PMU for their public history program. While at PMU,
Michelle was a member and then president of a student organization in history. Prior to her
senior year, she was selected as a recipient of a prestigious history fellowship. She is one of the
only students from the Midwest to have ever been admitted to this program; fellowships are
typically awarded to students from Ivy League schools. This fellowship inspired Michelle to
pursue graduate studies in materials culture and architectural history in another region after
graduation from PMU. Though she was a Presidential Scholar, inducted into Phi Beta Kappa,
and graduated at the top of her class at PMU, she still felt underprepared for the academic rigors
of graduate education. While in graduate school, Michelle married a fellow PMU alumnus that
she met through friends of friends in the residence halls. She and her husband remain connected
to these mutual friends to this day. Currently, Michelle works in government and is president of
a statewide nonprofit in her professional area.

61

Alan
It was not really a matter of if one was going to college, but where, in Alan's family.
Alan was interested in aerospace engineering and applied to an elite in-state university. After not
being accepted, PMU was his second choice. Academic challenges led to a major change to
communications and public relations with a focus in journalism. Alan was very involved in
campus activities. He was part of the campus student government, lived on campus for 4 1/2
years where he was also a part of residence life staff, and was voted Homecoming King. He was
also loosely connected to a campus ministry student organization. His work in residence life led
to his going on a mission trip immediately after graduation where he met his wife and decided to
pursue campus ministry as a calling. Alan currently works in campus ministry at his alma
mater's rival institution, a fact that is not lost on his students. Though he “feels pretty good
overall” about his PMU experience, he does find his alma mater’s reputation as a “party school”
challenging at times. Alan is not specifically working in his degree field, yet he uses the
education that he received in his work every day.
Emily
Emily chose PMU because it was close enough to home, but still far enough away, and
had a business program with a strong reputation. She was a business and finance major and
actively participated in marching band and as an usher at the campus professional auditorium.
Emily was engaged in the honors college and found those courses to be most rewarding. After
graduation, Emily signed up and worked for the Peace Corps for two years. This experience led
to a deeper interest in non-corporate work environments. The challenge for her is that PMU did
not provide a very sound academic base for her to work in this area. While her finance education
has been a benefit, most of her value has come from post baccalaureate work experience more

62

than any social or academic connections from PMU. She has spent the last 10 years traveling the
world in various positions and professional capacities. Her vast experience abroad has left her
feeling that PMU has little influence outside of the state and immediate region. Emily is
currently in the first semester of her MBA in sustainability at a prestigious private research
university this year. Emily has very few connections to PMU as an alumna outside of surface
interactions on social media sites.
Ella
Ella never thought that she wouldn’t go to college. She attended an elite high school
where 99% of her peers went on to college, and her father is an immigrant who was the first in
his family to attend college. Everything in Ella’s environment told her that college was the next
step. Public Midwestern University was actually Ella’s last choice until she visited campus. She
got a “good vibe” from the theatre department, loved the facilities and appreciated that there
were greater opportunities to perform than at many of the elite private schools she had
considered. As a music theatre performance major, being involved was less a choice than a
requirement. Ella was in a show every semester she was at PMU, yet still found time to be
involved in the theatre fraternity, women’s theatre board, and serve as an orientation student
leader in the summers. Her positive experience, and the local opportunities in her field available
to her through her undergraduate education, encouraged her to remain at PMU for her MFA in
non-profit administration. While working, Ella remained connected to PMU and even
participated as an Alumni Ambassador. Ella worked and resided in the city where PMU is
located until she moved to another state for her husband’s education in 2010. She currently stays
at home with her new child, volunteers in her church, and continues to wear her “obscene
amount of PMU gear.”

63

Analysis of Data by Research Question
Undergraduate Experience
The first research question outlined earlier in the paper asks: How do alumni who
graduated between ten and eleven years ago from the same alma mater understand their
undergraduate experience? Several of the open ended interview questions ask the participants to
think about their undergraduate experiences. Participants were asked specifically about their
formal and informal involvement in extracurricular activities. They were asked to make meaning
of these experiences by explaining their most defining moment or activity and how their overall
college experience has impacted their life today.
The theoretical frame proposed by Arnett, German, and Hunt (2003) framed the initial
analysis of the data. The area of undergraduate experience is framed with consideration of the
Arnett. et. al. definition of participation as formal and informal engagement with the institution
and others at the institution, while enrolled as a student. Sun, Hoffman, and Grady (2007) argue
that participation is the root experience leading to the development of the alumni role identity,
and serves as the base from where other identity concepts start. This is further supported by a
unique study on attachment decay by Burt (2001) that indicates that embedded relationships to
peers while attending college determine attachment to the peers and institution throughout the
rest of the lifespan. Line by line analysis, and question analysis of the interview notes with
specific regard to participation yielded a consistent representation of social participation through
engaging close informal friend groups as the dominant theme in this area. Also of note is a
theme of greater specificity of social interactions being recalled by those who engaged in more
structured formal social and work groups, such as residence life staff, marching band, and
fraternity membership.

64

As noted in the review of literature, the challenge with using participation as a factor is
that it relies upon memory, and as such is less trustworthy as time passes (McAdams, 2001; Sun,
Hoffman, and Grady, 2007; Tsao, and Coll, 2005; Weerts, and Ronca, 2007). However, when
considering that the participants are only ten years out from college this is less of a concern than
when studying mid-life or older alumni (McAdams, de St. Aubin, and Logan, 1993). Given the
level of detail and ease with which participants were able to recall specific experiences, there is
little concern for excessive recall error due to time lapsed or other factors in this study.
In general, most participants spoke positively about their undergraduate experience.
Every individual provided at least one positive social experience regarding friend groups or
extra-curricular group involvement and half reported similarly positive experiences surrounding
their academic programs. While specific experiences at PMU were often spoken of fondly, the
questions about how the individuals have understood these experiences over time were often
quite neutral in tone. As a means of focusing in on the activity which holds the greatest meaning
for the participant, and as such is most likely to be related to an alumnus identity, participants
were asked to identify what they would consider the most defining moment in their
undergraduate experience. Clarification was offered if asked for by asking them to talk about the
one thing that most defines their college experience.
Activities and Defining Moment
What was most surprising about the responses regarding participation in extracurricular
activities was their overall lack of depth. Participants were asked to identify the organizations
and activities that they were a part of and discuss their level of activity within those. The
researcher expected that the participants would be more interested in talking about their
undergraduate involvement than they were. Despite the lack of anticipated depth regarding the

65

organizations and specific memories, some patterns still emerged. While it should be noted that
extracurricular activities are not the same as a defining moment, every participant stated that
their most defining moment happened in the context of their involvement in one of their
previously identified activities. Those who reported more depth in their involvement in an
organization or activity were also more likely to refer to that activity more frequently throughout
the interview. This applied to both formal and informal activities.
An analysis of the activities cited and the activities that formed the context for the
defining moment reveals four primary activity types. Five people cited academic related
involvement as a primary extracurricular activity and as the context of their defining moment.
Three people cited their involvement in the residence halls as a resident or as residence hall staff.
Two people specifically cited their involvement in their fraternity. Two people cited their
participation in marching band as central to their experience. Examples from each of the
identified four activity categories will be used to paint a picture of how the defining moment is
couched within the context of college participation.
The largest showing for correlation between participation in an activity and defining
moment is in academic engagement. Alex and Ella’s experiences were the most direct. Alex
said that because he was admitted under academic probation, he had to focus on his GPA and
that was where he put most of his time. He also said that earning his way off of probation in his
first year was his most defining moment, because it proved he had the academic ability to be
successful at PMU. Ella stated quite simply that, “As a music theatre performance major,
theatre rules your life. I still got to have the full college experience, but everything else was built
around performing. Performing defined my undergraduate experience.”

66

Chip and Michelle also identified their most defining college experience in the context of
their academic involvement. Chip said that, “My relationships with, and conversations with
faculty really stand out in my experience. I think fondly of my work at the student newspaper
and it certainly helped me learn how to construct a well written argument, but the relationships
with people in the history department were most meaningful.” Both Chip and Michelle identified
that they were involved in leadership of history student organizations that helped facilitate
connections with faculty advisors. Michelle’s engagement with faculty lead to her selection for
participation in an elite student fellowship, which she cited as her defining moment. Michelle
and Chip’s engagement will be discussed in more detail in other sections of this chapter.
Involvement in the residence halls was the second most represented activity that resulted
in a defining moment. Ariel spoke often about her experience living in the residence halls. She
identified that while she was involved in other activities like alternative winter break and floor
council, they were time limited or one time experiences. Her primary activities centered on her
social interactions in the residence halls. “Living in the halls makes you more open to new social
situations.” The residence halls are also where she met her husband through her friends. Alan
said that he was a member of the residence life staff at PMU. This experience was a defining
moment for him because it connected him to campus and student services. The work in student
services, combined with his work in campus ministry, lead him to go on the mission trip where
he met his wife and decided to pursue campus ministry as a career. Jason tried getting involved
in a number of student groups without much investment. He found that his social involvement
with friends from the residence halls was his most sustained and fulfilling extracurricular
activity. Jason states that, “Without a doubt, meeting my wife was the most defining moment of
my undergraduate experience. We met through friends of friends in the residence halls.”

67

While less represented, the paths in the last two categories are the most direct. Both
fraternities and marching band are more formal types of extracurricular activities and their innate
structure contributes to their potential for impact. Jim and Marc were both not only in a
fraternity, but held leadership positions in it as well. Both cited this as their primary
organizational involvement and as their defining moment. Neither offered a specific instance in
this organization that made them feel this way, but said that it was the overall impact of being a
member of such an organization that is significant. Jim stated, “Being in a fraternity is not like
being in a club. It is very in-depth. It is a whole different way of knowing people.” Marc
expressed similar sentiments adding that, “the sustained association makes it more meaningful.
It doesn’t end when you graduate. I am still formally involved with my fraternity to this day.”
Simon and Emily were both in the marching band. They both felt it was a valuable social
departure from their academic studies, and looking back, both found the friendships they made in
that context had more meaning than any other relationships at PMU. Simon described a
particular experience traveling with the football team to the conference championship. “It was
just amazing. There was so much energy and team spirit and I really felt connected to it all right
in that moment. That was what college was supposed to feel like.”
Satisfaction
Satisfaction alone is not enough to motivate alumni to donate or promote the institution
(Arnett, German, and Hunt, 2003). The relationship between satisfaction and donation is not
statistically significant. The data collected from participants in the current study supports the
earlier empirical findings of Arnett et.al. where a number of participants indicated moderate to
high satisfaction yet have low promotion and donation. Only four individuals in the current
study indicated that they had ever given money to PMU. Only one of these gives regularly.

68

Although most participants indicated they would recommend PMU to a prospective student, only
three have ever taken an active role in promoting the university. Satisfaction can be correlated
with identity salience, which in turn has a statistically significant relationship to both donation
and promotion at p<.01 (Arnett, German, and Hunt, 2003). This suggests that if you want
alumni to donate and promote, they need to understand their satisfaction in ways that impact the
salience of their identity as alumni.
The results of this study support the idea that there is a relationship between satisfaction
and identity. Those whose responses suggested a higher level of satisfaction also seemed to
exhibit stronger identification with their alma mater. Even though this is expected based on a
majority of the literature (see Chapter 2), Arnett, German, and Hunt (2003) did not find a
significant correlation between satisfaction and identity salience. The findings of this study
dispute that, and imply a direct relationship between satisfaction and identity. For example
Ariel, who resides in the same state as PMU, indicated that her and her husband (also an
alumnus) purchase the University license plate option when they buy and renew their automobile
plates at the Secretary of State’s office. A percentage of their plate renewal fees go toward
supporting their alma mater and they drive around with the PMU logo on their vehicle. Jim and
Ella both said that they wear PMU gear any chance they get and are always willing to talk about
the school. This is consistent with other identity literature on the subject of identity based
decision making (March, 1994). When given the option to promote their identity as alumni these
individuals often choose to do so. On the other side, those who expressed less satisfaction with
their alma mater are understandably less likely to make the identity choice in favor of promoting
an identity as an alumnus.

69

Most people spoke of their satisfaction in terms of how they felt about the institution, or
as an expression of perceived quality of education in the context of how well it prepared them for
their life post degree. This made the analysis of this particular subcategory difficult. Arnett,
German, and Hunt (2003) indicate that satisfaction is positively correlated to both prestige and
reciprocity. Although the current study does not examine reciprocity, elements of that factor are
present in the interview results. The complex nature of satisfaction as it emerged throughout the
interviews has led the researcher to discuss it in the context of other factors. Satisfaction as it
relates to prestige, feelings, and academic and social preparation, is discussed in detail in the
following sections of this chapter.
Alumni Experience
The second research question asks: How do alumni who graduated between 10 and 11
years ago from the same alma mater describe their experiences as alumni? Several of the open
ended interview questions ask the participants to share their experience as an alumnus regarding
their relationships with their alma mater and other alumni in both formal and informal ways.
While formal and informal relationships as alumni are often seen as more distinct in practice
than undergraduate activities, they remain intertwined by the nature of their origin and the way in
which perceptions of relationships change over time (Palmer and Koenig-Lewis, 2008). These
social roles are important in verifying the social role identity aspects of an alumni identity. The
more the experiences as an alumnus verify the alumni identity, the more likely it is that the
alumni identity will be salient and prominent (Burke and Stets, 2009). Participants were asked
specifically about their formal and informal involvement in alumni activities and activities
involving other alumni. They were asked to make meaning of these experiences by expressing
how they feel about being an alumnus of PMU and the extent that it is important to them.

70

Though feelings were not a focus of the Arnett, German, and Hunt 2003 article,
satisfaction is accounted for in it. As mentioned in the literature review, satisfaction exhibits a
positive correlation with identity salience, but not at statistically significant numbers. This is
contrary to much of the relationship marketing literature in for-profit sectors that often relies
upon satisfaction as the key mediating factor in brand loyalty and affiliation (Michalski and
Helmig, 2008). Despite this, Arnett, et.al. stated that it appears that satisfaction is a complicated
factor that warrants further consideration in future studies as an emergent phenomenon related to
prestige and reciprocity in non-profit environments. Feelings about being an alumnus were
considered as they can serve to demonstrate whether identity verification is happening in the
meaning making process (Burke and Stets, 2009; Palmer and Koenig-Lewis, 2008). Those who
have positive feelings toward their alma mater are more likely to have found their experience as
alumni matches their perception of what it means to be an alumnus.
Informal Social
The most common response regarding formal and informal involvement with other
alumni was by far that individuals had maintained close friendships with friends from their alma
mater. The depth and frequency of these social interactions ranged from infrequent and casual to
“we see our friends as often as we can.” What is interesting about the relationships as described
to the researcher is that there were some patterns that emerged from the responses. Most
importantly, those that expressed that they had maintained close connections with their friend
group from PMU said that these friendships originated in the residence halls or through
membership in a fraternal organization. Given that fraternity involvement is membership based,
this aspect will be discussed in the formal social section in greater depth.

71

A number of individuals stated that their experience living in the residence halls is what
connected them to the PMU friend group they are still in contact with today. Ryan states, “I still
hang out with the people I lived with in the dorms. Even though I moved off campus after my
first year at PMU, because I got married, I would still see my friends who lived on campus.”
He continued to share that his marriage while in college did not help his social integration. “I
wish I could have engaged more. But, socially, getting married, having kids, and then getting
divorced – was not so good. It’s not PMU’s fault though – I could have made those mistakes
anywhere.” Ryan stated that his best friend from high school lived and worked on campus so it
was easier to stay connected because “the effort was not a one way street.” Nearly two-thirds of
the participants cited that living in the residence halls played a role in facilitating their
relationships. Ariel summarized it best when she said, “Living in the halls makes you more open
to new social situations. You don’t want to do it forever, but there is something about being
young, in the dorms, with your friends – you only get one shot at that.”
It is important that she did not highlight the formal residence life programs or hall
activities as the primary drivers of those relationships, but spoke of them as part of the overall
environment. This is consistent with Tinto’s (1993) observations on the interplay of formal
systems (i.e., the residence hall structure and policies) and the informal (i.e., the day to day
interactions in that setting) as they influence student retention. Ariel comments on this indirectly
when she talks about feeling more satisfied with her experience when she lived on campus than
when she ultimately moved to an off campus apartment. Several respondents commented on
“reverting to dorm behavior long after graduation” when they socialized with their residence hall
friend group. Michelle summarized this concept best. “When we get together, it seems like we
mimic the setting of the residence hall by hanging out together in the same small room in the

72

house to talk, eat, play games, etc. I mean here we are- adults, with the large house or apartment
we wanted while we were in school, and we still tend to gravitate to socialize together in a single
room, like being back in the dorm.”
Another observation is that those participants who remained in the state or region have on
the whole maintained stronger ties with their PMU friend group than those who have left the
region. Jim stayed in the state and lived in the immediate area for seven years before moving to
the other side of the state. As a pilot, he travels for a living so does not get back into town often,
but he does frequently see his friends that live in state. His friend group attends each other’s
weddings, graduations, kids’ birthdays, and other life events. When a friend recently got married
in the PMU area, he and his wife made a week out of it and stayed in the area. Ariel made
similar observations about distance and friends. “My husband and I are both alumni and we
share a friend group. We have other friends, but our closer friends are those that went to PMU
with us.” This is the type of feedback institutions like to hear from alumni. It is evidence that a
social bond occurred with other students while in attendance. That bond is interpersonal though
and not institutional. The institution is viewed as a setting. She, like several others, stated that
her friends were all at each others’ weddings, have kids of similar ages, and they support each
other in life events. She also commented that it is interesting to look at a couple of her friends
who went to graduate school out of state and then returned. She noticed that they stayed in
contact, remained close and saw each other every few months, but that these friends had added a
new group that she didn’t know at their grad school. Currently these friends live very close and
they get together as frequently as children and work will allow.
Ryan is one of the participants who remained in the region for a couple of years after his
time at PMU and then spent many years out of state before returning back to the region and then

73

recently to PMU’s home state. He stated that while he maintained contact with friends, “moving
away certainly posed logistical challenges that limited the frequency of contact.” Proximity as a
factor in facilitating attachment has been explored in other literature to a limited extent (Burt,
2001). While it is assumed to have an impact on the embedded relationships, the strength of the
relationship while in school far outweighs the impacts of relocation. Emily and Simon have both
moved from the Midwest to opposite coasts or even abroad, as in Emily’s case, for a time.
Emily left for the Peace Corps right after graduating and has, “a few close friends I keep in touch
with, but don’t see often.” She was quite specific that the benefits of informal engagement are
very local, short of close friendships. This is consistent with PMU alumni numbers, where 67%
of alumni live in state and 96% reside in the USA. This also reflects that PMU’s focus is close to
home. This is discussed in greater length in Chapter 5. Simon also commented that “outside of a
handful of PMU grads in my office workgroup, I don’t run into other alumni.” Simon did note
that his colleagues and he would have dinner with one of their professors when he came into the
area for work, but the professor has since passed away and they don’t do anything regular as a
group anymore. Like Emily and Simon, Chip indicated that he has a few close friends, three,
that he keeps in contact with regularly, usually via phone call or social media. Every single
participant indicated that they used social media to remain connected with their close friend
group regardless of distance. This is certainly an area that should be considered in greater depth
in future studies.
Those who are married and spoke of family during the interview were also more likely to
have expressed stronger ties with PMU friend groups. As mentioned above, Jim and Ariel both
expressed a high level of interaction and engagement with their friend group from PMU. Both
indicated they are married and that family and life events are shared with this peer group.

74

Similar comments to varying degrees were made by Jason, Michelle, Ella, Alan, and Ryan. All
are married, with the exception of Ryan, and expressed their friendships in terms of extended
family. Ryan said that having gone through a bad divorce at a young age likely brought him
closer to his friends. They were there for him and serve as surrogate family. Studies in this area
are somewhat conflicted and limited (Burt, 2001; McAdams, 2001). In some cases life-events
have been shown to enhance the connections to alma mater, while in other cases family can
detract from the relationship with alma mater.
The most interesting thing about the informal relationships discussed in the interviews is
that PMU is, in most cases, framed as the context for the initial contact, but is not necessarily the
tie that binds. Several individuals commented that they would have likely made friends no
matter where they went to school. Ryan states, “I could have done it elsewhere, but I didn’t, and
I can’t make any speculations or what-ifs.” These close friend groups made up of alumni keep
individuals anchored to the institution by virtue of shared experience and sense of place.
Nostalgia and personal life stories come into play. Personal loyalty and a sense of extended
family are also present. The themes identified in this section are consistent with findings in
Burt’s 2001 case study about attachment decay in alumni. “As expected, attachment declines
across the years after graduation (linearly for the first twenty years to about half its initial level),
and decay is inhibited when connections with GSB [program] graduates are embedded in stable
relations of family, work or long-term friendship.” Those in this study who express greater
stability in long term connections with other alumni also expressed stronger emotional
connections regarding their alma mater. Everything an institution wants to see in its alumni
groups is present in these informal friend groups, except formal engagement. While nearly all
recipients mentioned informal friend groups, very few mentioned formal activities related to

75

their alma mater such as attending formal university events or watching athletic events as central
to their socialization.
Formal Social
Very few individuals mentioned formal social engagement with other alumni. Only three
out of the twelve spoke about their formal engagement and of those only one went into any
significant detail. Jim and Marc were both in a fraternity. They both indicated that they are still
affiliated with their respective fraternity as alumni members. Both also indicated that their
fraternity brothers are part of their informal friend groups as well. Jim indicated that he has
returned to the frat house for homecoming weekends and reunions and that he enjoys reading the
PMU alumni news online. He stated that he “wishes he could be more involved, but his travel
for work makes it difficult.” Marc is still closely involved with his fraternity in formal and
informal ways. He has participated in a variety of formal roles with his fraternity since
graduating and participated in alumni events. Marc also tried to get a Latino Alumni Association
group going, but did not have much success. “Sustained involvement was difficult to maintain
and interest has never seemed to last long enough to be viable.”
Ella is perhaps the most formally engaged with her alma mater out of the group. Ella
lived in the same city as PMU for eight years after graduation and was very involved with her
alma mater and even worked for PMU at various points. She worked at the State Youth Arts
Festival hosted by PMU for eleven years, attended PMU athletic events and theatrical
productions regularly, and served as an Alumni Ambassador until leaving the state in 2010. Ella
stated that, “As a former orientation leader and after having been in so many productions at
PMU, it just felt like I should stay involved.” She also expressed the strongest positive

76

emotional reaction to her alma mater, which is consistent with other studies that demonstrate
proximity to alma mater can influence emotional connection to it (Burt, 2001).
Feelings
Participants were asked how they felt about being an alumnus of PMU. As noted by
Palmer and Koenig-Leiws (2008), “O’Shaughnessy and O’Shaughnessy (2003) note that
emotional displays may contain the ‘true self’ on the basis that what people get emotional about
reveals what they consider to be particularly salient” (p 66). Given this consideration in the
context of the scope of relationship marketing studies, emotion may be as reliable a factor to
consider in identity salience as satisfaction. Even though they were asked about their overall
satisfaction earlier in the interview, several people gave very similar responses for both
questions, as was expected. Asking about ones feelings is still a cognitive approach that is
different than engaging an emotional response. That was not the goal of this study, but may need
to be a consideration in the future as greater differentiation between satisfaction and emotional
response could be of use in understanding those factors which contribute to a salient alumni
identity.
The challenge is to look at how an individual feels about being an alumnus as distinctly
different from satisfaction with education (Volkwein and Sweitzer, 2006). Several subjects had
a neutral response to the question, such as Alex. “I’m not ashamed I went there. Compared to a
new, online for profit school, I appreciate the history of the institution. The traditional bricksand-mortar school. It gives it weight.” These are not necessarily the expressions of warm
feelings that institutions hope to hear from their alumni. Chip echoes these feelings when he
says, “I have mixed feelings. Overall I’d say it was good enough”. Simon starts out neutral, but
ends a little more positive. “I will always have an affinity toward the school. I still have a love

77

for the school and what it gave me.” Even though participants stated how they felt, it still, in
many cases seemed to be an extension of satisfaction with their experience. Despite a significant
felling of neutrality that permeated responses from all participants, there were moments in each
interview where stronger emotions prevailed.
Those individuals who had a more negative or neutral response tended to be those
individuals who had experienced some challenges as a result of their post baccalaureate pursuits.
Those who were most positive enjoyed sustained direct benefits from their college experience
post-degree. Ariel expressed her feelings about being a PMU alumnae quite simply, “Positive
and happy. I am always happy to pass along a recommendation to go to PMU.” Ryan shares, “It
was a good experience. I am happy I went there and as time goes by I find new ways to
appreciate it.” Alan is also positive and finds some humor in maintaining a positive glow in his
current work. “I feel good about it. Overall, positive. I am not embarrassed by it, even though I
work at the rival school.” Jim goes beyond expressing his love of the school verbally and shares,
“I love being able to make the PMU connection such as when I am wearing T-shirt or sweatshirt
or hat. I received the education I needed and the social connections I formed are still valuable
and active.” He not only appreciates his education, but due to the professional benefits of being
associated with PMU as a pilot he advertises his affiliation by sporting PMU gear. Ella shares a
similar comment, “I have lots of PMU pride and an extreme crazy love for the school. I have an
obscene amount of gear I still wear. I just love my school.”
Ella was by far the most positive of the participants, yet she is disappointed in her alma
mater’s communication with her. “The only thing that disappoints me is that they don’t seem to
love me as much. I gave them eleven years between school and work and volunteering and all I
get are requests for money. Not even so much as a keychain.” There was certainly a conflict in

78

her response. Ella is the ideal for any college program. She was engaged, motivated and sure of
her academic path. She excelled in her undergraduate studies, stayed with PMU for her master’s
degree, and was an active alumna. What happened? PMU didn’t bother to say “thank you” in
any way that mattered and Ella noticed. The question for PMU needs to be, “How many other
‘Ellas’ are out there feeling the same way?” The situation does not improve upon further
probing.
When the interviewer asked to talk about more about the perceived one-way relationship,
Ella made a good observation. “I just, sometimes feel they love to claim your success, but not
really you. If you do something noteworthy it will make the newsletter and benefit them, but
they make it feel a bit like you succeeded because of them not because of your personal merit.
They should be sending the message that high achievers chose PMU.” PMU provided a setting
for success, but failed to seize an opportunity to strengthen the relationship between individual
and institution. Ella ended by asking a question. “Are they really responsible for all of that
though, or are maybe our expectations of what they should be doing too high?” Where does the
responsibility lie? The feeling of not really knowing what is expected of them as alumni was
prevalent in the group. Emily stated a common sentiment when she said, “I felt that we were
never taught how to be alumni or what it means to be a college graduate beyond having a
degree.” Is this because PMU did not do it, or because the subjects did not know where to look,
or that they needed to look?
Those who felt more negative about their experience still appreciated their education, but
found it lacking in the context of life after college. Jason shares, “Oftentimes I think it was a
mistake to go to PMU. There are many things lacking. At the time it was recognized as a top
undergraduate institution and I'm not so sure about that anymore. The school is a good deal. It

79

is a good value but you get what you pay for.” Jason implies that the quality of the institution
may have changed, but that he is not sure. He even questions his decision to have gone there.
His statement reflects frustration with perceived lack of preparation over a dislike for the
institution. There is an emotional give and take that is present throughout the interviews.
Essentially participants feel that they received a fair education, that there were some things they
were not happy with, but they enjoyed their time at PMU and feel an affinity for the institution.
Making Meaning of Others’ Perceptions
How do alumni who graduated between ten and eleven years ago from the same alma
mater make meaning of others’ perceptions of their alma mater? Several of the open ended
interview questions ask the participants to share experiences as an alumnus where group
membership or alumni status played a role in their life. Participants were asked specifically
about the perceived prestige of their alma mater and to share any experiences where others’
perceptions of their alma mater played a role in their life positively or negatively. They were
asked to make meaning of these experiences by explaining how they feel about being an alumnus
of PMU and to relate experiences that support their feelings.
Prestige versus Reputation
Do you believe that those you interact with view PMU as prestigious? The response to
this specific interview question was consistent across all participants who expressed some
variation of the same response. Every person paused before answering, as if uncertain of how to
respond or that speaking their perceived truth was somewhat conflicting. Then, with resolve,
each participant answered with some form of “no” followed by a qualifying explanation about
the school’s value and highlighting those programs that have the highest positive reputation in

80

general. Those who graduated from one of the flagship programs hesitated the longest before
answering and gave the most comprehensive follow-up explanations.
Several programs at PMU were noted as having a very strong reputation and being well
respected. As indicated in the institutional profile in Chapter 3, PMU has a highly rated
engineering college, a nationally recognized aviation college, and thriving business and
education colleges. The programs identified by the participants as being “well respected” and
having a “great reputation” are identical to those listed. This consistent observation lends
credibility to the participants’ responses as it indicates a shared perception that is validated by
third party rankings and professional assessments. This also creates a sense that the perceived
lack of prestige noted by the participants may also be more valid than expected. The perceived
lack of prestige is often noted in comparison to other state institutions that are perceived as
prestigious. Jason commented that, “In the state overall it is usually Land Grant State University
and Elite Public University that compete for prestige. I chose PMU for the paper engineering
program, which they don’t really have at Elite Public University. PMU isn’t necessarily
prestigious as a whole, but I would say the paper engineering program is high prestige, it has a
solid national reputation.” This statement embodies the idea that while the institution as a whole
may not be viewed as prestigious, there are programs that are perceived as meeting that standard.
Jim expressed similar feelings regarding the aviation and flight science program. Jim is a
graduate of that program and currently works as a pilot. He stated that PMU’s program is “One
of the best in the country for aviation. It has a great reputation. Really the biggest competitor is
Private Aeronautical University, but PMU is, even if they are similar in reputation, PMU is much
more affordable. It is a better value.” Again, a specific program has a certain amount of
prestige, but that prestige is not connected to or transferred to the institution as a whole. Simon,

81

another engineering student, made similar observations as Jason regarding the prestige of PMU
compared to other schools in the same state. However, unlike Jason, Simon currently works in
his field outside of the Midwest. Simon noticed that, “Those who know the field, who know
engineering, know the school, and it, the engineering program, has a good amount of respect.”
Chip noted that in his experience others very clearly do not view PMU as prestigious. The only
exception he noted is, “…in the very rare occasion that I meet someone who is in aviation or
paper science.” Chip’s observation further supports that programmatic reputation and prestige
far outweigh perceptions of institutional prestige in the eyes of alumni and others.
Those who attended graduate school and those who left the state or region reported more
specifically on the lack of prestige than those who did not attend graduate school or remained in
state. This perceived lack of prestige by others was made tangible when individuals were in an
academic setting with others who attended more prestigious institutions for undergraduate study
or lived outside the region. Ella lived and worked in the region for eight years after graduating.
She graduated with an MFA from PMU and worked in her field the whole time. “Being a PMU
graduate worked in my favor while I was living in [the city],” shares Ella. “I was already
connected through my undergraduate work. There was a real sense of community – a hometown
feel to it.” Despite the positive feelings and tangible benefits of attending PMU while living
local, Ella still feels that she would not call PMU prestigious and that others would not as well.
Like others, Ella brought up Elite Public University as “the prestigious one in the state.” This
was further supported when she moved to another region where, “Nobody knows PMU.” After
having lived in such close proximity to PMU and having a close relationship with her alma
mater, the difference is “stunning”. Her experience at PMU has in some ways been reduced by
leaving the region, “When people hear ‘master’s degree,’ that’s all that matters.”

82

Emily stated her experience in the Peace Corps as eye opening in more ways than one.
“It is important to realize that the world is not where you went to school, which is a good thing,
because PMU has no overseas presence.” She spoke at length about how the further away from
PMU one is the less people know about it let alone where it is. Emily also discussed how in
seeking employment alumni of other institutions would often show some favoritism toward
fellow alumni, but that this is not the case with PMU alumni. She stated, “PMU grads do not
value PMU grads. We could use a little more nepotism; it gives other schools an advantage we
clearly don’t have. Outside of [the state] it is nothing but a big old state school.”
Emily’s observations based on others’ lack of reaction or institutional knowledge of her
alma mater is not uncommon. Chip and Michelle both indicated a very distinct lack of respect
for their undergraduate degree from PMU on the whole while they were pursuing graduate
studies at more prestigious institutions (by their own and others’ reckoning). Chip noted that
being a PMU alumnus “is not an icebreaker that having attended an elite institution is.” Chip
followed his BA and MA work at PMU with a Ph.D. from Elite Public University. His degree
from Elite Public University provides him with common ground to connect with faculty and
peers that PMU does not. Michelle had a similar experience while pursuing her master’s degree.
During undergraduate studies Michelle had been selected as the recipient of a prestigious
fellowship on the east coast in her field. She is one of the only people from the Midwest to have
ever been admitted to the program and one of the only individuals to not come from an Ivy
League school. Her experience in the fellowship was a preview of her grad school experience.
“Nobody knows anything about PMU. My advisor was a former fellow so his name helped
some, but I was still clearly in over my head. I felt underprepared academically and socially. I
learned a lot, but it was really my own hard work that got me through it.” Michelle stated that

83

her status as an alumna of the fellowship has given her more regard than her status as an alumna
of PMU ever has, in spite of being a presidential scholar and Phi Beta Kappa at PMU. “In grad
school, the fact that I was a Fellow culturally made up for having gone to PMU. It at least
allowed me to make connections that would have otherwise been unavailable to me had I relied
solely on merit and having gone to PMU.” Participants who went to grad school somewhere
other than PMU indicated that they felt a lack of academic preparation. Participants also felt that
PMU’s perceived lack of prestige was a factor in how faculty and peers initially perceived the
participants’ qualifications for study. This theme is discussed at length later in the paper in its
own section.
When all of the interviews are taken into consideration, none of the participants felt that
others considered PMU prestigious. Based on the experiences they provided and the reasons
they gave it is clear most of them do not disagree with this perception. That being said, the
participants were all able to share examples of a program that had a “good reputation” at PMU or
were able to relate in some way that it was ok that PMU was not prestigious, especially when
compared to Elite Public University. Based on participant responses it is clear that participants
share some commonalities in how they make meaning of these perceptions and that the question
of perceived prestige evoked responses that warrant further investigation. Alumni in this study
all appear to have a similar picture of their alma mater’s lack of prestige as an institution, while
at the same time recognizing those programs that have the highest reputation among outside
agencies. How others perceive their alma mater holds meaning for them and influences how
they relate to their alma mater. The difference between prestige and reputation as it emerged in
the interviews is interesting. It poses the question as to whether prestige or reputation is more

84

important in the development of a salient alumni identity. This could be an area worth
investigating in future studies.
Managing the Party School Reputation
Michelle told a story about a recent experience of hers that perhaps best frames the
perception of PMU as a “party school”. Michelle has recently become part of a social group of
mothers from her son’s class at school. Without exception all of these women have at least a
bachelor’s degree and most have a graduate degree, Michelle included. During a ‘moms’ night
out’, a humorous comment was made by one mom about her ability to out-drink another mom
who had gone to a rival university. This school rivalry is between two elite state schools and is
well known in the state. The jokes continued off and on until Michelle commented that “I have
you both beat, I went to PMU for undergrad.” Everyone in the group agreed they couldn’t beat
that, and Michelle was declared the unofficial victor. “The irony,” Michelle pointed out to the
interviewer, “is that in undergrad, I rarely drank and never partied. These women did not know
that. They awarded victory to me – solely on their perception of PMU’s reputation as a party
school.” As Michele described this there was almost a sense of pride in her voice. When asked
about this, Michelle indicated that she could do little to change that perception so she may as
well use it to her advantage in the rare cases she can. She indicated that her affiliation with PMU
is, “mostly benign . . . the party school rep in the region is not professionally helpful, but makes a
social statement, if you will.”
The interesting thing about Michelle’s story is that, while it is the most specific example
of the “party school” theme in the study group, it reflects a common theme expressed by nearly
all of the participants to some degree. Simon and Emily both indicated that as members of the
marching band they had an immediate introduction to the “party scene” if they choose to

85

participate. Both alluded to the parties more than discussed them in detail. Both also reflected
that the marching band in particular has a reputation for partying, but were quick to point out that
is a perception that exists at, and about, most state universities. Alex said a similar statement
even though he was not a member of the marching band. “PMU has a perception as a party
school, but every school can be if you want it too.” This statement is representative of the base
sense that alumni are aware of this reputation, but downplay it for the most part. This was most
apparent in the interview with Alan.
Alan works in campus ministry at PMU’s football rival. He stated that he often finds
himself confronting and contradicting the party school image in his conversations with students.
As a member of residence hall staff, campus ministry, and student government he indicated that
the party scene was “not my speed.” His activities indicate that he was one of those students
who actively worked against the party stereotype, something he continues in his work today.
Interestingly enough, Marc’s experience resembles Alan’s. Marc was deeply involved in his
fraternity and even was selected as the president of fraternity council. He indicated that PMU’s
party school reputation combined with being in a fraternity has at points in his life had a negative
impact. Like Alan, Marc works with students on a college campus. Marc works in student
affairs administration, and indicated that early in his career, when his proximity to PMU was
closer, he had to address the negative image frequently. He still finds himself redirecting
students away from the party school reputation and instead focuses on sustained personal social
connections with peers formed through fraternal organizations. Marc indicated that the
stereotypes associated with Greek life follow outside the region, but that “outside the Midwest
nobody is really aware of PMU.” He said that for this reason it all balances out to a rather

86

neutral reputation. The good and the bad are known in the Midwest, but once one leaves the
region PMU becomes a non-entity, “unfortunately it becomes just another state university.”
In the most unique experience, Chip indicated that it was in fact a party that got out of
hand that led him into his current academic path. When asked how his time at PMU has
impacted his life today, he said that it was “ironic that a distinctly non-academic event inspired
my research trajectory.” Chip briefly said that he was working at the 7-11 in the neighborhood
near campus where riots broke out in the spring of 2002. Having to work in the midst of the
chaos started him thinking about the relationship between the university and the surrounding
community where many students live. Chip refined this interest during his MA work at PMU,
where he attended based on faculty encouragement and support. He narrowed this interest
further during his doctoral studies in urban planning and his current research as tenure track
faculty examines the role of American universities in urban development. In the end, the reality
of a riot influenced Chip’s academic path, while the perceptions of partying provided “streetcred” in social situations for the equally high achieving Michelle, and causes some ongoing grief
for Marc and Alan who work with college students in a professional capacity.
Preparation
Preparation is a category that was not addressed in the research questions or expressly
asked about during the interview, but emerged as a very prominent theme. While conducting the
initial data analysis and coding the participant responses by specific research question there were
a number of responses that fit into multiple categories. A majority of these responses, when
examined together, shared a theme in common. That theme is related to how individuals
perceive their college experience prepared them for their next phase of career, life, and academic
experiences. Those who felt prepared for given situations based on their academic and social

87

experiences in college expressed this as a matter of expectations being met and cited a specific
instance or activity that provided the required skill or knowledge. Those whom did not feel
prepared for given situations based on their academic and social experiences in college expressed
the lack of preparation as a matter of unknown expectations, requirements that they did not
predict, and were not ever told to expect. These findings are supported by Pikes (1993, 1994)
work relating perceived preparation to satisfaction.
The importance participants placed on preparation varied by experience. Interestingly,
regardless of the level of emphasis participants assigned a fairly neutral value on the institution
related to their overall satisfaction. Every single participant used some close variant of the
phrases “good value” and “good enough” regarding the quality of education and the preparation
provided by their alma mater. Every single participant gave at least one example of how their
experience during undergrad either prepared them for, or failed to prepare them for, a life
experience, career opportunity, or graduate education, since graduating.
Felt Prepared
As a general rule, those participants that worked in the same field as their degree area
post-graduation, but did not attend graduate school indicated that they felt prepared for working
in their field. Jim is a perfect example of this. Jim attended PMU for its top ranked aviation and
flight science program with the goal of being a pilot. Jim stuck to his academic major,
graduated, and found employment as a pilot. He still works in the field as a pilot. Jim stated
that, “PMU aims to train pilots to professional corporate standards and is much more disciplined
than a mom and pop flight school.” He expanded on the various paths one could take to get a
pilot’s license noting that, “PMU not only gave me superior flight instruction, but allowed me to
have the whole college-experience as well. This helped me find my niche in aviation as well,

88

which is very important in this field.” Jim was very complimentary throughout the interview.
The tone in his voice matched his excitement when he talked about this experience and pride in
attending PMU. While Jim represents only one graduate of this program, in speaking with him,
it is easy to picture a graduating class with similar stories of success. Jim is not only confident in
his professional ability, but sure that the education he received has helped his success.
Simon also felt that his academic program prepared him for his current career path.
Simon actually goes so far as to say that he feels he got a “better, more well rounded, education
in PMU’s engineering program than what my wife got at an engineering school.” He explained
that outside of his own academic performance, PMU’s accredited program and good reputation
in the field helped him land a job as a civilian engineer for the Navy right after graduation.
Simon said that he had no problems performing his job and found that some other co-workers
w\are also PMU alumni. At one point, Simon had to switch jobs to accommodate a move for his
wife’s schooling. This job had a more significant electrical engineering component. Simon
indicated that even though the work was difficult, because it was outside of his specialty area, he
felt that the few classes in basic electrical engineering he had at PMU gave him an edge that
allowed him to learn the job much more quickly than he expected. He eventually ended up back
with the Navy where he currently works in the defense industry as a mechanical engineer.
Simon chose mechanical engineering with the thought of “getting a good job”. He chose PMU
because they offered more scholarship money than Land Grant State University and Elite Public
University and had the same accreditation as the other two. “I could have gone elsewhere and
gotten the academic pieces, but PMU was by far the best value out of my choices at the time.”
Ella is the exception to the category in that she went directly to graduate school at PMU
after graduating with her BFA in music theatre performance. She stated that her MFA was “a

89

logical extension of her BFA.” Ella Considered elite private fine arts schools as well as a
number of well respected private and public institutions in the Midwest. She ended up falling in
love with the PMU campus, facilities, and opportunities when she came to audition for the music
theatre program. “PMU has professional grade facilities, a well respected cohort of faculty and
alumni and offered many more opportunities to perform than other schools. To top it all off, it
was also very affordable in comparison to the others schools.” Like Jim and his decision to not
go to a flight school, Ella wanted the complete college experience that an arts school wouldn’t
provide her. Ella was cast in a production every semester of her undergraduate education. This
experience was invaluable in helping her decide to move directly into her MFA in performing
arts administration.
Having spent the better part of four years on the stage, she realized that it was not a
lifestyle conducive to a family. As a new program at PMU, Ella had to find her own way in the
MFA program at times, but felt the education and connection to practical skills development
were well worth the challenges. After completing her MFA, she worked in arts administration
doing marketing for a credit union and in 2007 she began working in worship administration for
a church. “You have to be creative with your degree given the current state economy, but
especially with the arts economy.” Ella moved away from the PMU area to another region in
2010 to support her husband’s education. She currently stays at home with their new baby, but
still finds ways to remain engaged and use her education. “Having gone to college is very
important. Even if I stay at home for the rest of my life it will have been worth it. I am still
using my education in volunteering with my new church and engaging in local non-profit work.
It makes a difference and opens doors for involvement that wouldn’t otherwise be available to
me.”

90

All three of these individuals share a common thread in their stories of success due to
perceived preparation. They all pursued work directly in the area for which they had been
trained. Each individual enrolled in their academic program with specific end goals in the form
of profession or employment in mind and feel they were able to meet these goals in part due to
the opportunities their education at PMU provided. Despite their individual success, and feelings
of preparedness, they all still indicated that PMU was the “good value” option. This is more
remarkable in that the researcher never asked about value, yet it came up more than once in most
of the interviews. Satisfaction is also higher among those who said they felt prepared by their
undergraduate education. Sun, Hoffman, and Grady, (2007) indicate that “alumni who were
treated more favorably as students, who were satisfied with their academic experiences, and who
believe their college education contributed to their career success are more inclined to give as
alumni than those with less favorable feelings and beliefs.” These empirical data are supported
by the findings of this dissertation, which indicate that those who had experienced institutional
support in their academic program and had close faculty relationships and faculty contact, had
more positive social and academic experiences and expressed greater overall satisfaction than
their peers who felt they had little institutional and faculty support and felt underprepared.
Not Prepared
Those participants that indicated they did not feel prepared by their undergraduate
education tended to be those who pursued graduate education at a different institution or who
worked in an allied field close to their degree, but not specifically within their field of study.
Michelle went straight to graduate school at Flagship Public University in another region
immediately after graduating from PMU. Michelle had always considered graduate school her
next step after her BA in public history. Having come to PMU for their archeology program, she

91

found the public history program and connected with faculty there leading to a change in her
focus. After being selected as a summer fellow in a prestigious residential materials culture
program, and based on her honors thesis research she chose to pursue her master’s degree in
historic architecture and preservation policy. Her experience at the summer fellowship was
challenging for her, both academically and socially.
Everybody else, every single person except me, came from an ivy league school
or a super elite private liberal arts school. At first I was proud of having been
selected along with these others. I felt my hard work and the social sacrifices I
had made for academic success would finally bear fruit. I was wrong. I held my
own, but through hard work and tenacity.

I just did not have the social or

academic pedigree and preparation that the others had. No one had told me that
schmoozing and politics were such a big part of this world. I gave it everything I
could, but I still felt like I was running a race where everyone else started a lap
ahead of me and I had to catch up.
This was not the end for Michelle though. PMU continued to not measure up even after
changing her academic approach to better reflect what she would need to be successful in
graduate school.
When I returned to PMU, I worked even harder to get the most out of my
education. I was selected as outstanding history graduate, inducted into Phi Beta
Kappa, selected as a Presidential Scholar for my senior project and even
mentioned in the presidential address at graduation, and I still felt underprepared
for graduate school. It was apparent during my first week that I did not have
adequate academic preparation. The only thing that saved me was the experience

92

of writing my honors thesis and completing my senior project, and the education I
had received during my fellowship. My PMU degree was good enough to get me
to the next step, but in the end, it was something I had to overcome.
Despite her best efforts and the best that the history program had to offer in the way of
preparation and faculty support, Michelle still felt underprepared. She admits that part of this
feeling is on her and recognizes that PMU can only be so much. “PMU is what it is. It gave all it
could, but it just wasn’t enough for me.”
Chip also felt that his academic preparation was lacking. Like Michelle, he was a history
major at PMU. Chip and Michelle both had the benefit of faculty mentorship and
encouragement, but still were left feeling ill prepared once they left the institution. Chip decided
to stay at PMU for his MA work in public history. He had also been an engaged undergraduate
and continued his involvement into graduate school.
My experience at PMU was a real mixed bag. The research trajectory I am on to
this day started at PMU. I had the good fortune to have faculty mentors who
helped prepare me for graduate school and continued to guide me in my continued
graduate studies at PMU.

The attention certainly helped, especially when I

needed recommendations for doctoral programs. I was admitted to [Elite Public
University] where I eventually earned a master’s degree in urban planning and a
Ph.D. in architectural history and theory. Though I greatly appreciated the PMU
faculty support, when it came down to it Elite Public University provided a much
better education. In comparing the two campuses PMU just felt that it had a lack
of robustness, in the institution and in many of its students. So many people just

93

appear to be going through the motions. Being a graduate student at EPU was a
very different experience.
Like Michelle, Chip found graduate school beyond PMU much more challenging. He thought he
was well prepared, but did not realize his misconception until he began doctoral course work.
I was pretty well satisfied with my PMU education until I started doctoral classes.
Early in the semester gaps in my knowledge and my mediocre training became
more evident. My satisfaction declined and I was frustrated by the need to play
catch up in areas where my peers had an advantage due to better institutional
preparation. After my experience starting out in my doctoral program, I was
surprised when my PMU education actually helped me land a tenure track
position. The hiring committee felt that my practical degrees were a complement
to my stronger academic credentials. Other than that, my PMU association and
degree haven’t really helped or hurt me. PMU was good enough for what I
needed to get by.
Again, the term good enough appears to describe one’s PMU experience. Chip and Michelle
both felt academically underprepared for their next steps after PMU. Both are high achievers
who had a wealth of faculty support, but even that was not enough to overcome the lack of social
and cultural capital at PMU. When these two participants talk about their lack of preparation, it
is in part a gap in the academic programs at PMU, but it is also a lack of social and cultural
connections that exist at elite, more prestigious institutions. By all reported indicators, both Chip
and Michelle were academically successful students. Is their feeling of lack of preparedness a
purely personal perception or is it more than that? The fact that both experiences are so similar
speaks to something more than individual meaning making at work. These observations are

94

consistent with the perceptions of prestige reported earlier in this chapter. Alumni do not view
PMU as prestigious and neither do others. This lack of prestige is even more tangible when
academic preparation is considered.
Alex and Jason both went to work immediately after graduation however, neither
specifically in their field. Alex majored in business administration and human relations
management. He explains that he did not waste his time in school. He hit his classes fast and
furious and checked them off the list. In doing this though, he neglected to get an internship
while at PMU. “After graduating the job market was horrible. I never had an internship because
no one ever told me it was that important, so I had very little experience and couldn’t get hired. I
discovered that a BA is merely the ticket to get in the game. After a year of working manual
labor jobs, I went to grad school at Regional Public University on the other side of the state.”
Alex feels that he had a “decent education at PMU.” He discussed how he felt that a bachelor’s
degree is important as documentation of a proven capacity to learn. He indicates that PMU
didn’t prepare him for what he needed, but that he didn’t really prepare himself either. “I just
feel that they should place greater emphasis on being clear about the career possibilities after
school and what you really need to do to make that happen.” Emily’s experience in the college
of business was very similar to Alex’s. Emily shares, “I learned very little of any use in my
academic program at PMU. Everything I needed to know to be successful I learned in the Peace
Corps after graduation and on the job I held after that.”
Jason majored in paper science, one of PMU’s premier academic programs. He was
excited about the program and saw it as a good career option that would allow him to make
decent money. He quickly found that he didn’t enjoy his program as much as he thought. He
joined the student organization for the paper program, but “didn’t fit in real well.” As he

95

progressed the environmental engineering parts became of greater interest. He took as many of
those courses as he could and even joined a student organization, but “that group was not very
practical and felt way too granola.” Jason felt that the program had sufficient rigor, but that the
scope was so narrow it didn’t allow for much flexibility. “The course work was difficult. It was
nearly impossible to do everything that was requested of you in the time allotted. It forced me to
learn how to manage my time and to take a loss when it made sense. Some things would just not
get done and I had to learn to choose wisely and be ok with that. This lesson more than anything
in all of the content is what I took with me into the workforce. Real work is all about
prioritizing.” Up until this point Jason sounded like he felt that he had been adequately prepared
for his career options, however that was not the case.
After being in the program for three years I discovered that if you were not going
into paper making that the degree would have little value in allied areas. Even
worse, I found out in my senior year that while the program was accredited the
degree was not.

This had a major impact on my ability to find work after

graduation. It took me 8 years of getting experience in another area for it to
finally pay off. I felt I had been prepared to work hard by the rigor of the
program, but that I was not ready for the real world after graduation in spite of
two internships. I own part of this, as my priorities changed after meeting my
future wife from making money and moving for the good paper jobs, to having a
family and remaining close to my relatives. I am proud of my degree and in the
end it was a good deal-good value for what I got. I just wish that they had been
clearer on the limitations of the program starting out, because I could have made
some choices that would have made my experience more useful.

96

Again the joint responsibility for preparation is noted, but there are clearly some areas where the
institution did not perform due diligence. Degree accreditation is important, as is being clear
about the career options of a given degree. Post graduation, none of these individuals mentioned
that they sought assistance from PMU career services or that assistance was offered. What is
important to remember in this section is that it is not the “reality” of the level of preparation that
matters as much as the perception that there was a lack. Individuals’ perceptions influence the
behaviors they exhibit and the decisions on which actions they may take in a given situation.
Burke and Stets (2009) go into a lot of detail explaining this process. In short, individuals
determine whether actions and experiences verify or contradict existing perceptions and beliefs
and then act in a way that reinforces the identity they are most comfortable with in that setting.
Individuals are more likely to take actions that verify an existing identity thereby influencing the
salience of that identity and subsequent behavior. Subjects who indicated that they are high
achievers and felt underprepared may have felt that way because their need to feel highly
prepared is a significant part of their salient identity. George Kuh has more to say in this area.
Kuh (2001) indicates that those with aspirations of being college faculty or who have a
high level of interest in scholarly and academic work are often hardest to prepare in college. The
academic expectations in faculty work and associated research fields are so high that few
institutions are able to meet these individuals’ needs at the undergraduate level. Kuh explains
that empirically “those aiming at an academic career differed in their peers in every college
going cohort” (p 286). He further explains that no amount of preparation will likely ever be
good enough for this small group, while explaining that this feeling is reinforced by likeminded
faculty who verify this belief by providing unreasonable expectations. This can be seen in the
responses of those participants above who felt underprepared by their education. All of these

97

participants had aspirations toward academic work or were in one of the high reputation, high
expectation programs offered by PMU. As mentioned earlier, both the college of business and
the paper science program are highly ranked at PMU. Thus, to some extent feelings of lack of
preparation may have been verified in their student experience and reinforced by their post
bachelorette interactions in a competitive job market or in a highly ranked graduate program.
In 2001, George Kuh made the following observation about the role of undergraduate
education in the face of a pedagogical shift away from knowledge acquisition. “The task of
higher education has never been more complex and challenging. Most colleges and universities
are not organized to help their students develop these kinds of competencies. Indeed, no higher
education system anywhere in the world is set up to do so” (p 289). What is important to
remember about this observation, is that it was made about higher education as it existed when
the participants of this study were undergraduate students. This comment is about them and their
experience.
st

The early part of the 21 century was a technological and sociological turning point in
American culture and particularly higher education. Technology was moving so fast that there is
no way the schools could keep up. Students who graduated during this time were not necessarily
prepared for the world of employment they were entering. Emily actually identified this concern
during her interview. “PMU felt out of touch with what you need to do in a modern era. People
of our generation were not prepared by our education at PMU to work in a knowledge
economy.” This is a trend that has been identified in this study, as well as a 2010 study on young
alumni ten years out. McDearmon (2010) indicates that the concern over career preparedness is
very present in feedback from young alumni. His qualitative study found that themes around
career services were prevalent among open ended responses to an alumni questionnaire.
98

McDearmon indicates that “career preparation is something young alumni feel strongly about
and may affect their willingness to make financial contributions” (p 38). The Arnett, German
and Hunt (2003) model indicates that financial contributions are significantly correlated with a
salient alumni identity. Based on these two studies and the current study results, it appears likely
that preparedness is the outcome of an identity verification process that may influence the
salience of the alumni identity.
Neutral
While there are always those outliers who exist on either extreme of any spectrum, most
individuals fall into a more balanced middle category (Alverman, Obrien, & Dillon, 1996). In
fact that proved to be the case in this study as well. One third of the participants spoke of their
preparation in far different terms than those who more clearly felt prepared or underprepared.
Alan, Marc, and Ryan, told similar stories about their preparation. What makes this group most
distinct from the other groups is that they seemed to take their education at greater face value.
While the not prepared group felt they had not received what they needed and the prepared group
felt fully prepared for what came next, the neutral group expressed satisfaction with preparation
in terms of broad skills versus knowledge acquisition. These individuals most clearly expressed
separation between degree attainment and personal success or difficulty after graduation. They
also held lower expectations of what a degree should provide, expressed greater appreciation for
transferable skills, made a significant major change while at PMU, and made decisions to work
in a different field than their degree after graduation.
Ryan, as mentioned earlier, finished his education at PMU at the same time as he was
going through a divorce. He shares that this life event led to his decision to move away and
pursue other education and employment. Ryan said, “I was not doing well in the pre-med track.

99

So when I met with my advisor, she took a look at my aptitude scores and suggested switching to
chemistry. This was a great idea and I was successful in the chemistry track. I worked in the
field while I was finishing school and supporting a family. After my divorce I needed a change
of scenery so I moved and looked for something completely new.” Ultimately, Ryan returned to
school for a second bachelor’s degree in 3-D art. While he does not work as a chemist he is still
using his chemistry degree as a glaze formulator in a ceramics studio.
When I looked at the chemistry field initially after moving, I saw that everything
has a significant onsite training piece. It was then I began to realize, that while
knowledge attainment was important it was applied in broad strokes and didn’t
really match the job market. My next revelation was in recognizing that a college
education is more about learning about a field of study and how to learn in that
field than it is about getting a job. You need to keep learning.
Ryan’s observations are at the heart of what faculty mean when they refer to lifelong learning.
Ryan had expectations of gaining new knowledge, but a realistic outlook on the job market and
what a degree really meant in that environment. He takes responsibility for his own learning and
feels that, “PMU provided a good, but average education. Better in some cases - worse in others.
I got what I expected and exactly what I paid for.” While many alumni relations professionals
would see this as a possibly negative, it may be a positive attitude. How often do people
complain when they get exactly what they expected?
Similar themes around lifelong learning, taking responsibility for one’s own education
and transferable skills emerged in Marc’s story as well. Marc tracked into the engineering
program based on his interests in high school. As part of the solar bicycle team at his high
school he chose PMU in part because of a desire to be involved with PMU’s solar vehicle team.

100

Once he got to PMU though he struggled, not academically, but socially in his academic
program.
I did not like the people in engineering. They were just not my type of people. I
liked the work, hated the people. There was very little social interaction, and
even when there was it was forced. Shut up and do the job was the rule for
interaction. My senior year I realized I could not work in this field so I spoke to
my advisors and was able to switch to a student planned curriculum that was close
to a communication degree. I was very involved in my fraternity and president of
the Latino student organization and wanted to keep working in those areas. My
student leadership experiences lead me to pursue a master’s degree in higher
education student affairs at another Midwestern University in the state.
Marc said that he did not exactly get what he expected out of his undergraduate education.
However, he accepts responsibility for that due to his late stage major switch. “I wish I would
have studied something else at PMU, but that isn’t their fault. Maybe I needed that experience to
figure out what I really wanted to do.” Marc currently works as a college administrator and is
still actively engaged in his fraternity as an alumnus.
Like Marc, Alan came to PMU for an engineering program. After failing calculus two
times and not being able to get admitted into the aerospace engineering program, he switched
gears completely and double majored in communication public relations and journalism. Alan
found this major was much more meaningful, especially when considered in conjunction with his
involvement in student government and residence life staff. Much like Ryan, it was a life event
that moved Alan in an unexpected direction.

101

Immediately following graduation I went on a mission trip with His House to
Panama City Beach, Florida. While on this trip I met my wife and made the
decision to follow a calling to mission work. I currently use my degree in my
work as a campus minister, just not in the sense training was geared toward. I do
a lot of writing and advertising and promotion of services, but I really use what I
learned on residence life staff in my ministerial work.
Alan was one of few people who expressed that he did not find much value in the general
education curriculum. He also expressed some frustrations with the system as a whole.
My life took such a turn right after graduation it is hard to express how I really
feel about PMU. I don’t actively think about my time at PMU. I was and still am
very frustrated with navigating the university system and random education
requirements in general. I never saw much value in them so expected to get little
out of the experience. What I remember about my college experienced is the
social stuff. I don’t remember most of my professors. I guess when I think about
it, if you fit easily into the PMU mold you would graduate. Those who don’t, like
my freshman roommate, fail out.
Again the theme of integration comes up. Alan felt he integrated well into the system socially,
but his own comments and choices following graduation indicate a low level of academic
integration. Alan is a case where academic success after switching majors coupled with high
levels of social integration lead to persistence. He takes credit for his own learning and
decisions, while still stating his concerns with the education he received. Ultimately, he
recognizes that PMU was only able to give him so much.

102

Good Enough
One final trend within this theme transcends all of the varying levels of participation and
is perhaps the most surprising theme to emerge from this study. The exact phrases “good
enough” and “good value” were used to describe a PMU education in every single interview. To
be certain that the interviewer did not influence this specific wording, he reviewed audio
recordings when available, interview notes, and interview questions. There were no indications
that the interviewer influenced this response pattern. These phrases are consistent with an
overall tone of neutrality in many of the interviews. The pros and cons appear to balance so well
in the ways in which participants make meaning of their experience that they negate many of the
strongest reactions. McAdams (2001) makes note of this phenomenon in his life stories
approach to personality psychology. McAdams also indicates that in the construction of a
personal life story “We choose the events that we consider most important for defining who we
are and providing our lives with some semblance of unity and purpose” (p 110). Ariel makes a
similar observation about her own memories of her college experience. “It is kind of like
childbirth, after you are removed from having gone through it for a while, you only remember
the positive outcomes. You remember the joy of your child way more than the pain of labor.”
Participants in this study have each constructed their own story as a way of making meaning of
their educational experience, specifically its role in preparing them for what comes next. While
the stories are different the theme across them all is that they chose PMU because it was an
affordable means of getting them where they wanted to be and in the end it met that expectation.
Summary
The primary focus of this chapter was on the characteristics of the participants and the
presentation of the analysis of the data they provided through individual interviews. After

103

conducting an initial analysis of the responses with consideration given to the theoretical frame,
another analysis was conducted to look for emergent themes that fell outside of those categories.
Themes were examined to determine if they addressed one of the study questions. If they did
they were categorized as such. If a theme did not fit a research question, or was prevalent
enough to stand on its own, it was coded as equivalent to the research question. One major
theme emerged from the data that was prominent enough to warrant its own section. This was
the theme of perceived preparation.
At first perceived preparation appeared to be a theme within the question of
understanding participation. However, the response data for this theme involved experiences
beyond the scope of the time they were at the institution, making this larger than participation
and overlapping how people described their experience as alumni. In the end the dual coding did
not suffice as closer examination allowed that the theme was in fact about perceived preparation
based on social interactions and perceptions of others beliefs. As the theme overlapped all three
research questions, it was given its own section with a supporting theme of good enough. “Good
enough” emerged from the microanalysis of the responses related to perceived preparation.
Chapter 4 allows the data, and the participants to speak for themselves for the most part.
The data have been analyzed, coded, and organized in a way to better understand the information
that they contain and their significance. While the analysis has revealed the shape of the findings
they have not yet been presented. Chapter 5 will provide a summary of the study as a whole, a
summary of findings, conclusions and discussion, limitations that emerged, and
recommendations for practice and future research.

104

CHAPTER 5: CONCLUSIONS, DISCUSSION, AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Introduction
Chapter 5 provides a brief synopsis of the study as a means of concisely framing the
findings. While the data analysis provided the raw ingredients and what they mean, the findings
frame the analysis in terms of the larger problem of understanding the salience of alumni
identity. After adequate framing of the findings, the researcher will make some suggestions and
implications for practice and future research regarding these findings.

Summary of Study
Purpose and Overview
The purpose of this study has been to provide better understanding of early alumni role
identity. Given that identity emerges through a process of interpreting and understanding ones
actions in a given situation (Burke and Stets, 2009), this study used a qualitative methodology to
gain insight into the ways in which early alumni understand their undergraduate experience. The
previous chapters have all served to establish the topic within the existing literature and the
world at large. They also provided the guiding conceptual framework, methodology and results.
Public universities have become more dependent upon outside resources due to reduced
state and federal funds and market losses resulting in up to 40 percent decreases in endowment
value (Johnstone, 2011). In hopes of an answer, many have made attempts to reinforce their
endowments by increasing contributions from alumni. The challenge for the institution then
becomes one of making that happen. Keeping students involved and engaged after they graduate
and become alumni is no simple task. In fact, as Mael and Ashforth (1992, p.106) state,

105

“surprisingly little is known about the factors which affect alumni attachment and involvement.”
Alumni identity is one of those factors about which “little is known.”
While many existing alumni studies seek to understand why alumni donate to their alma
mater (Tsao and Coll, 2005; Weerts and Ronca, 2007, Taylor and Martin 1995), few seek to
understand the role of alumni identity in general or in giving. As noted in the literature review in
Chapter 2, most studies take a variety of quantitative approaches to identify variables that are
likely to predict donations. One thing many of these studies have in common is the suggestion
that while certain factors may exhibit higher levels of correlation than others, the issue is still far
too complex to guarantee success. A number of studies in the past five years have begun to
attempt to understand these complexities better (Simone, 2009; Sun, Hoffman, and Grady, 2007;
Tsao and Coll, 2005; Von Kotzebue and Wigger, 2010; Weerts and Ronca, 2007). While these
works examine more than one variable in their search to identify alumni donor patterns, potential
donors and to predict who will make donations, they still utilize empirical data analysis to do so,
and do not consider identity a factor. This dissertation fills a gap in the literature by conducting
qualitative research that focuses explicitly on alumni identity. The relationships and systems of
interaction that coalesce to form alumni identity must be better understood before further studies
in this area can occur with confidence. The findings of this study support the limited literature in
alumni identity and add data for further consideration.
Conceptual Frame
Arnett, German and Hunt’s (2003) work places alumni identity at the center of the
discourse as its central theoretical frame. As discussed in Chapter 3, there are four factors that
contribute to a salient alumni identity; perceived prestige, participation, reciprocity, and
satisfaction. The more salient the alumnus identity the more likely it is that the individual will

106

donate to their alma mater. Very few alumni donor models consider identity as the key
mediating construct. The complexity of identity theory, combined with the desire to express a
causal relationship between given factors, is likely to blame for this omission from the literature.
Assuming that the alumni identity is a social role construct that is dependent on making meaning
of social perceptions and interactions, Arnett et al. devised a model using relationship marketing
theory to demonstrate a correlation between identity and donation and promotion. The 2003
study laid the empirical foundations on which this dissertation is based and allowed for deeper
exploration of early alumni identity to occur.
Methods and Analysis
The purpose of this study was to add depth of understanding to the small body of research
that exists around the identity of college alumni by using personal interviews to explore how
early alumni understand their college experience in ways that may influence their identity as an
alum. A group of twelve alumni of Public Midwestern University who graduated with their
bachelor’s degree in either 2001 or 2002 served as the target population. As this study utilized a
small sample from a narrowly identified cohort, a case study approach was utilized to achieve
greater depth in the data. A case study also allowed the researcher to identify trends across
individual responses from within a single institution. The findings of this study provide a deeper
understanding of the ways individuals continue to make meaning of their undergraduate
education ten years after graduation. Given the central role that meaning making plays in the
development of a salient identity (Burke and Stets, 2009) any patterns and themes that emerged
during the study will provide clearer direction for future empirical studies on alumni identity.

107

Revisiting the Research Questions
Before discussing the findings it is important to revisit the research questions guiding this
study.
1. How do alumni who graduated between ten and eleven years ago from the same
alma mater make meaning of their undergraduate experience?
2. How do alumni who graduated between ten and eleven years ago from the same
alma mater describe their experience as alumni?
3. How do alumni who graduated between ten and eleven years ago from the same
alma mater describe others’ perceptions of their alma mater?

Research Findings
Introduction
The findings in this study not only support those of Arnett, German, and Hunt (2003), but
also provide new areas for consideration as variables that may influence alumni identity. The
findings met the study goals of better understanding those factors that contribute to early alumni
identity and exceeded expectations in providing greater insight into the process by which alumni
understand their undergraduate education. In Chapter 4, the study data and corresponding
analysis were presented organized by research question. The summary of findings that follows is
organized according to prominence of supporting data for the theme. Those findings which have
greatest support in the interview data are highlighted in this section.
Even though the situations varied across the participants, it appears that the way they
describe their life as an alumnus in terms of their college experience and the ways others respond
to their alma mater is fairly consistent. The key findings of this study are as follows: 1) PMU

108

alumni describe their experience as alumni primarily in terms of informal peer-social groups
formed during their undergraduate studies (i.e. close friends); 2) Alumni perceptions of
academic and work preparation appear to play an important role in their satisfaction and
institutional commitment; 3) Others’ perceptions of PMU appear to influence alumni perceptions
of institutional quality and value.
Summary of Findings
Informal Social Connections
One of the key findings of the study is that PMU alumni tended to describe their
experience as alumni in terms of their informal social peer groups. When asked about formal
and informal engagement with alumni and alumni activities, most participants stated that they
only remained connected to other alumni who were close friends. When Ariel states, “My
closest friends are those I met in college” she is making an observation that many participants
shared. 75% of the participants stated that their closest friends are those that attended PMU with
them. Conversely, only one-third indicated any formal engagement with their alma mater. Half
of these were related to fraternity involvement and the other two individuals briefly held formal
roles as alumni. The informal social contact dominated the stories that participants provided
about their ongoing engagement with their alma mater. In this sense they are not so much
relating to other alumni as they are sharing how they interact with their close friends, whom they
happened to meet at PMU. This level of social integration even outweighed reports of academic
integration. Overall, participants did not report engaging in major or academic area alumni
groups or social alumni functions related to their area of study. In fact many, such as Marc and
Jason, reported that they did not fit into their respective academic peer groups and found
connections through other social groups that kept them engaged.

109

This dissertation suggests that social integration with a peer group may play a larger role
in alumni identity than previously thought. Other recent alumni studies have come to similar
conclusions. Burt’s (2001) study on attachment and decay in alumni finds that the more a
student exhibits embedded relationships, be they academic or social, the slower the decay rate of
the relationship. This trend is apparent in this study based on participant comments reported in
Chapter 4.
Perceived Preparation
Alumni perceptions of academic and work preparation appear to play an important role in
the meaning making process. Participant interviews revealed that many alumni understand their
college experience in terms of how well it prepared them for life after college. Pike (1993,1994)
touches on this area a bit in two studies that examine the relationship between satisfaction and
work experience and satisfaction with perceived learning, but they do not directly apply where
this study is concerned. There appears to be some areas where there may be correlations in the
type of post-baccalaureate experience and feelings of preparedness. Although the nature of this
dissertation does not allow for empirical confirmation of that finding, the qualitative data are
convincing and future studies will want to consider further examination of these relationships.
Chapter 4 provided some details of Chip and Michelle’s experiences at prestigious
graduate programs after their education at PMU. In their respective narratives the perceptions of
other about their level of preparation influenced, and often reinforced, their self-perceptions in
this area. Even though preparation emerged as a unique theme in this study, it is in fact also
closely related to perceived prestige. This assertion is supported on the other end of the
spectrum as well where Jim shares that being a PMU graduate is viewed in high regard in his
career as a pilot. Simon told a similar story as well, where institutional reputation reinforced a

110

positive feeling of preparedness. The observed patterns are as follows: a) Those who were in
highly respected programs and followed the traditional path from education to work indicated
that they felt well prepared by their education at PMU; b) Alumni at PMU who went on to
pursue graduate school beyond PMU felt that PMU did not provide adequate preparation; and c)
Alumni at PMU who worked outside their degree area after graduating from PMU felt that PMU
did not provide adequate career preparation.
Those trends were identified in participant responses to questions regarding a) how they
felt about being an alumnus of PMU; b) how their satisfaction changed over time; and c)
questions related to prestige and impact on life today. Participants were never asked if they felt
that PMU prepared them for life after college or any variation on that theme. The closest
question to that focuses on how their time at PMU has impacted their life today. However, that
particular question yielded more data to support the informal peer group findings than any other
area. The interview question that most directly evoked discussion of this topic was regarding
satisfaction. Responses related specifically to perceptions of preparation emerged across other
questions, but appear to be directly related to satisfaction. This observation will be discussed in
more detail in the section on further research.
Good Value
Alumni of PMU in this sample consistently use the same two phrases to describe their
undergraduate education, “good enough” and “good value”. These two phrases were repeated in
every interview by every participant at some point. Often they were used repeatedly and in the
context of their level of satisfaction with their education over the past ten years. Alumni at PMU
have appeared to internalize their personal experience with, and others’ perceptions of, their
alma mater. The implied consensus among participants is that PMU is a party school with no

111

prestige, which has four distinct programs with high reputational value and many others that will
do the job at a fair price. The limited sample size and the make-up of the sample may play a role
in this conclusion, which will benefit from a more empirical analysis. When Jason responds to a
question about how he feels about being an alumnus of PMU with “It was a good deal – a good
value at the time,” he is not being negative, but sharing that the return on investment is a big
influence on his feelings towards his alma mater. In fact, when most participants came to a point
in the interview where they made their own “good enough” or “good value” statement, they
immediately followed it up with a qualifying statement.
After sharing that his overall satisfaction with PMU was “pretty good. I received a good,
but average, education,” Ryan qualifies the statement in the next breath. “After going to another,
less expensive, school for my art degree I realized that PMU was actually better than I had
perceived it to be. I felt I got what I paid for.” Every time the researcher had this conversation
the reactions were similar. Ella had stated that PMU was a much better value than the private
performing arts schools, but she also said that once she left the only time she gets a phone call is
when PMU wants money. “I still love PMU, but one area I am disappointed in is that all I get
for eleven years of dedication are requests for money.” In this case Ella has expressed a positive
emotional commitment to her alma mater, but is still bothered by a perceived lack of reciprocity
where care is concerned. The feeling of frustration is present across all interviews, yet
consistently participants share responsibility with PMU for this. When Alex states, “I never
really fully connected to PMU, but that is more about my focus and interests,” he is saying
institutional commitment will only go so far if the individual isn’t willing to engage and fully
commit.

112

Conclusions and Discussion
In the end, participants in the study stated that they enjoyed their college experience at
PMU, but have not really maintained close ties, if any, with the institution since they graduated.
In their own terms, they all feel that they have achieved a relative amount of social and
professional success. They all indicated that they have realized some of the goals that they had
in mind when they set off for college. PMU did not give them everything they felt they needed,
but in the end it has turned out “good enough”. Ariel comments, “I enjoyed my time there and
think of it fondly, but you can’t go back. It is a once in a life time experience.” That one
comment describes college in a nutshell. Each of these twelve individuals went to the same
university, during the same timeframe, and had completely unique personal experiences. Within
those experiences though, there are common threads that connect them together. Those threads
are anchored in friends, preparedness, value of education and identity groups such as band and
fraternities. The question remains though, as to how these threads relate to their alumni identity.
While there in not an expectation that individual alumnus will share a common alumni identity,
there is a belief that alumni from the same alma mater will have enough of a shared sense of
place (Putnam, 2001) to constitute a formal group (Ashforth and Mael, 1989). Although, this
case study is by itself too small to make any generalizations to all alumni, or even all alumni at
PMU, it does provide new ideas for consideration in future studies and practice.
The findings as they are presented here are distinct from those of the conceptual frame
that inspired the study, yet support that frame all the same. Arnett, German, and Hunt (2003)
found that participation and prestige both demonstrate a statistically significant relationship to a
salient alumni identity. Thus if an alumnus were to indicate that they were highly involved at a
prestigious institution, they should also appear to demonstrate a high level of identity salience

113

where their role identity as an alumnus is concerned. What happens when a “prestigious”
institution is not perceived as such? Or, what if that institution has a good reputation, but is not
prestigious? PMU has many prestigious distinctions as indicated in the institutional background,
yet alumni do not perceive it as such. The challenge of prestige is that it is not only about quality
of education, but perceptions of that education in a comparative sense that is greater than quality
and preparation. In the same way, participation is much more complex than the type, number,
frequency, or depth of activities in which one engaged during undergraduate studies. Arnett et
al. provide empirical evidence for a relationship, however once the factors are unpacked there is
much more to consider.
This dissertation took apart three key factors as indicated by Arnett, German and Hunt
(2003) participation, prestige, and satisfaction. After analyzing qualitative data from the
participants, the themes were less present in the ways expected. Arnett et al. indicate that
satisfaction has a positive relationship, but is not significant. The current study found that
conversations rooted in satisfaction during the interview were a path to rich data on other areas
through clear examples provided by participants. Overall level of satisfaction alone is not
interesting. The ways that individuals explain how they understand ten years of experience as
they seek to explain their overall satisfaction is very interesting. The hemming and hawing that
result in a declaration of “good value” and “good enough” say much more about an institution
and its alumni than a likert scale rating can. Satisfaction is more a reflection of the meaning
making process that occurs in other areas. Students quit activities they are not happy with or
change majors, so satisfaction is more a process of cognitive reflection back at what they wished
they had done, or done differently. Taking this into consideration, everyone should have a high

114

degree of satisfaction due to the level of personal control one has on their path. However this is
seldom the case.
The struggle to reconcile disparate feelings about their alma mater was tangible in the
tone and carefully chosen words. These vocal cues (and visual when appropriate) are likely to
indicate residual cognitive dissonance as a result of having post college experiences that do not
quite match original expectations. Dissonance is a natural part of the identity verification
process (Burke and Stets, 2009). The interview questions were designed to build on participants’
recollections and bring them from their memories of the past into their feelings in the present.
This design led each participant to really rethink their feelings toward, thoughts about, and
overall desire to be affiliated with, their alma mater. In some cases it put people on the defensive
a bit. They felt they had to justify or apologize for the school. By framing the questions in the
manner and order as they were, participants went through the identity verification process that
determines the salience of an identity (Burke and Stets, 2009) again as they processed with the
researcher. Some participants were more aware of this than others. Those that exhibited higher
tendencies toward a salient identity through their responses were more likely to claim an identity
as an alumnus as when asked how they felt about being affiliated with their alma mater. These
same participants also stated that they were “proud” or “happy to be associated with” their alma
mater. Those who appeared to have a less salient identity used phrases such as “not
embarrassed” or “ok I guess” when asked the same question. Others, like Alan, indicated it is a
non-variable for the most part. “My life took such a turn so soon after graduation that I don’t
actively think about my time at PMU that often.”
The challenge for most participants is that the only expectation of alumni they are aware
of is, as Michelle puts it, “to continue to give them money after having given them thousands of

115

dollars already. I am still paying ten years later and they want more.” The reluctance of those
who are in loan repayment to donate to their alma mater is well documented (Smith, 2012).
Emily states it most clearly when she says, “The more I think about it the more I feel that I really
don’t know what it means to be an alumni. No one ever taught me what I am supposed to do. I
just graduate and they take credit if I’m successful and write me off if I’m not.” Ella expressed
similar feelings regarding institutional credit. “They love to claim our success.” As noted
earlier, there is a sense that personal success is viewed as a result of having attended PMU, more
than portrayed as successful people choose PMU. A subtle difference, but important when
talking about credit for excellence.
Undergraduate activities and defining moment were parallel, in all cases. Those who
were on residence life staff cited that as their defining moment. Those in fraternities cited their
involvement similarly, as did those who exhibited strong academic focus and high residence hall
social involvement. Participants spoke far less about their undergraduate activities than
expected. This is contrary to the Arnett et al. findings where participation appeared as the most
significant factor. Friend groups formed through these activities were discussed at length
though.
The distinct lack of overall participation in formal alumni events and socials is interesting
to note. It may be a result of the small sample size, but it could also indicate a larger institutional
trend. Given other external factors, such as the recent elimination of dues paying alumni
association and a new focus on developing a medical school, it is likely that lack of formal
engagement may be a broader concern at PMU. Only one of the participants was aware of the
change in the alumni association, whereas all of them were aware of the new medical school.
Despite these factors, all participants focused on their alumni friend groups as the extent of their

116

engagement with other alumni. How alumni describe their experience as alumni and make
meaning of their experience is important in understanding the extent to which these experiences
weigh in on their identity. Based on interview responses a bulk of the relationship was
determined by their social networks in college. This is consistent with findings by Burt (2001)
that stress the importance of integrated friend groups in creating sustained relationships and
institutional affiliation past graduation. The ways in which individuals make meaning of their
alumni experience are complicated but an important part of the overall process of verifying a
salient identity.
The importance of others’ perceptions appears to weigh heavily on the mind of
participants, especially as it relates to feeling prepared. An emergent category that came in part
from the satisfaction questions suggests that the two may be closely linked. Prepared and not
prepared seem to fall along lines of those who were in programs that tracked into a specific work
area, those that followed the traditional track, and those who are academic outliers. Kuh (2001)
suggests that he higher the demands of the student the less likely they will be satisfied with their
academic experience. This fits the study findings. Those who expressed they felt least prepared
by their PMU education, had the highest level of degree attainment at a prestigious institution
post-baccalaureate.
The value of this study lies ultimately in its identification of perceived preparation,
informal peer groups, and lack of prestige as factors that should be considered in measures of
alumni identity and should be examined in future alumni studies. Knowing that these are the
trends that come up in conversations with alumni is important as it reinforces the idea that they
matter. If they matter enough for alumni to talk about in an interview, they should matter
enough to consider in future research.

117

Discussion of Limitations
Before moving into recommendations for practice and future research it is important to
revisit the limitations presented in Chapter 1. The findings presented in this study are based
upon open-ended interviews with twelve college graduates who were identified as Public
Midwestern University alumni through social networking with primary contacts of the
researcher. Facebook and LinkedIn were the sites used to identify and provide contact with
potential participants. The use of social media to identify participants provides some limitations
to the study and its findings. First, it limits participation to only those with regular internet
access. Second, the primary contact sites are membership based. While there are no dues
required for baseline membership, one must still be a member to communicate using that system.
Third, participant selection is limited by the size and scope of the researcher’s primary and
extended networks.
Response rate was surprisingly a significant limitation to the study. As an alumnus of
PMU the researcher has access to PMU alumni groups in both LinkedIn and Facebook. His total
direct network between the two sites is over 11,000 people. When extended networks beyond
first person connections and shared groups are considered, the number increases exponentially to
nearly 1.5 million. The researcher posted a request for participation in each of three areas, once
a month over a three month period. The three areas were his Facebook wall (with alumni
tagged), his LinkedIn page and the PMU Alumni LinkedIn group. These posts led to five direct
responses from individuals who were eligible for participation. The researcher sent twenty direct
messages to individuals in his alumni network asking them to pass along a request for
participation message to others. Two participants came from a non-PMU alumni connection
who referred the individuals to the study. The remaining five participants were all referrals from

118

individuals who had already participated in the study. Despite significant social and alumni
connections, the researcher still struggled with participation rates. Participation bias was an
initial concern for the researcher, however the results indicate that is not a significant concern.
No efforts were made to control for race or ethnicity, socioeconomic status, marital status,
or any other factors other than alumni status and time of graduation. The sampling method did
not allow for control of these factors. The focus of the study is on the alumnus and the ways
they make meaning of their experience. Not isolating or placing emphasis on the above factors
allows room for themes or trends to emerge in the context of the interview without influencing
the study in that direction. As always, research bias can play a role in the study. As an alumnus
of the school being studied, the primary researcher is not without personal bias. While the
familiarity with the institution can provide bias, it also allows for a deeper rapport with subjects
during the interview and an increased ability to understand answers and probe for more
information in meaningful ways. In nearly every interview the researcher’s institutional
knowledge allowed for more open dialog and more comprehensive follow-up questions.
Several limitations emerged during the study. The first one was in the conceptual frame
used for analysis. The nature of the data and the overall findings support the findings in Arnett,
German, and Hunt’s (2003) study. However, using the conceptual frame to generate the
interview questions and in coding the responses may have limited the response data. Given the
nature of the interview results a life stories approach (McAdams, 2001) may provide greater
overall depth and allow for more insight into the meaning making process as it occurs in identity
development. While the current study methodology is sound, the limitations within the frame
should be taken into consideration in future studies. Secondly, the lack of any significant
outliers in participant responses leads one to consider that the sample may not have been large

119

enough or robust enough to capture the full spectrum of alumni responses. As stated earlier the
limitations of sample size have been noted and taken into consideration, however perhaps the
impact of a small sample size was greater than anticipated.
Another consideration is that the sample and the means used to identify candidates may
have led to an overly homogenous attitudinal group (Merriam, 1998). While the responses were
not overwhelmingly negative they certainly did not show PMU’s best side either. The extreme
neutrality of overall comments seems to indicate an element of dissident enlistment tempered by
the researchers own alumni status. What this means is that those with some concerns in a
specific area regarding their PMU experience may have been more likely to respond to the
request to participate in the study. Given that the initial respondents gave referrals for other
participants, it is also likely that they referred the researcher to others who were like minded.
Thus the purposeful snowball sample produced a more homogenous group than desired.
The implications of this particular limitation are such that, in recognizing it, there is value.
Knowing that the sampling method may have had this effect, PMU can look to these findings as
possibly being the worst case scenario, or as a representation of an exploration of the true
middle. It both cases PMU may not see these results as necessarily negative. Overall the
participants got what they were looking for from PMU and in that regard, PMU can claim
success. After all, PMU’s primary goal is to educate, not create alumni. Which brings to light
one last limitation to consider; there are challenges inherent to studying alumni in general. When
studying alumni, there is a heavy reliance on memory which impacts results (McAdams, 2001).
It is also limiting to study engagement in a group that is reluctant to engage. If alumni are not
engaging their alma mater why would they engage a researcher? Another challenge in alumni
research is access. Once students graduate and become alumni, there is more limited access and

120

a broader range of factors to consider in assessment. As noted earlier in the dissertation, the
complexity of many of the factors contributing to alumni identity, alumni donation, and just
alumni in general make this subject inherently challenging to study.
Implications for Practice
The findings of this study indicate that the informal social relationships students form
during their undergraduate education remain their primary interaction with other alumni once
they graduate. This suggests that alumni relations staff need to work more closely with student
affairs professionals to establish those connections as valid alumni engagement. How can
professionals encourage those informal groups to become slightly more formal so that they form
alumni clubs, or work together to provide a scholarship? Student affairs professionals need to be
aware that the work they do with students in the present as instrumental in fostering the
relationships that will remain influential once they graduate. A salient institutional identity will
more easily transition into a salient alumni identity if there are peer groups to maintain the
connection through transition (Burt, 2001; Mael and Ashforth, 1992).
Those participants in the study who felt that PMU did not provide adequate preparation
for career or graduate study were quicker to invoke the “good enough” phrase early in the
interview. These individuals also indicated less connection to the institution compared to others,
stated clearly they do not give to their alma mater, and have drifted away from their informal
peer networks with the exception of one or two people. Academic affairs professionals play a
vital role in building academic community that students can connect to. Jim’s feeling of
connectivity to his program was in part due to the community that existed between students and
instructors. Ella expressed similar feelings when she commented “The faculty in my program
was just amazing. They encouraged and challenged and pushed you to do your best.” She also

121

commented that the theatre department had a culture and community all its own that created ties
she maintains to this day.
This study found that it didn’t necessarily matter whether peer relationships began in
formal or informal contexts, but that they formed in the first place and that there is a common
thread to connect to beyond their PMU student status. Jim and Marc both cited their
involvement in fraternal organizations as their primary connection to campus, while Simon and
Emily both cited their band experience as having had a similar impact. Chip and Michelle each
found a home in the History department at PMU, even though they later felt a lack of academic
preparation. In all cases, the institution played a role in facilitating the relationships by
providing the physical and social space for them to occur.
As indicated in Chapters 3 and 4, most participants went to school because they felt they
had to. It was the next logical step in their life. How invested in the institution are students who
pick a college because it is “good enough” and “a good value”? This is one question that this
dissertation cannot answer fully. The findings suggest that neutral feelings about alma mater as
expressed by the participants indicate a les salient alumni identity. However, as indicated in the
limitations section, there are sampling challenges around dissident enlistment that may be
influencing the results. Only further research in this area will be able to show if there is a
correlation between salience of alumni identity and perception of alma mater. As noted in the
limitations section of this chapter, the data showed a lack of significant outliers in this study.
This in itself provides an opportunity to gain a better understanding of the attitudes, feelings, and
identity of those who exist in the neutral. The participants of this study will likely not weigh in
on alumni surveys. They will likely not feel extreme enough about any issue to send an email or
make a phone call to someone at PMU. They are likely to slip through the cracks. The value of

122

this dissertation is that it opens the door to understanding a segment of the early alumni group
that has been difficult to identify and reach up until now. Better understanding of alumni
identity and those factors that contribute to its development will allow for more targeted
approaches to engage the neutral segment of the alumni population. Further research that can
better understand the “good enough” group can greatly influence future practice in alumni work.
Enhancing Development
As with most alumni studies, the findings of this dissertation have some implications for
development. The frequency of restricted donations suggests that those who give feel a
connection to the institution, but especially that specific aspect of the institution. This belief is
present in some level across all of the donation literature (Croson, 2007; Holmes, 2009). As
mentioned earlier, most studies work backwards from their donors to develop a profile based on
shared factors. They then seek to provide empirical evidence to support a certain level of
correlation or causation. What all of these studies skip over are the relationship piece and the
alumni identity.
This dissertation goes deeper than most alumni studies with regard to seeking
understanding of how experience shapes alumni identity based on how alumni interpret that
experience. Alumni at PMU stated that they were involved in a variety of activities that
connected them to the institution during their time there. As mentioned in Chapter 4, those who
were members of a fraternity were the most engaged post-graduation. The depth of the personal
experience and its lasting impact appear to be an influence of the individuals’ alumnus identity.
What is the practical value of this finding? First, if institutions can track student involvement
more thoroughly while they are still attending they will have a better idea of those areas that are
meaningful to the individual. Thus an individual who worked in the cafeteria may be asked to

123

support renovations of the food service areas. The former student body president would be
invited back to speak at commencement or asked to donate to campus programs. Library
Science majors will receive information about the library and an institutions collection
development. The list goes on. Good record keeping and early relationship building will allow
institutions to better target alumni for fundraising efforts in the areas they are most likely to
support.

Recommendations for Future Research
This dissertation’s greatest value lies in its potential to influence researchers and
practitioners alike to rethink the way they study and think about alumni. As noted earlier, the
predominant approach to alumni studies have relied upon survey data designed to identify
donors. While data from this approach has value, it is rooted in a specific way of thinking about
alumni. Very few studies challenge the existing base assumptions on which most alumni
research is constructed. Arnett, German, and Hunt (2003) present an alternative way of thinking
about alumni framed in relationship marketing. However, even this approach makes
assumptions about alumni such as assuming the primary value or end measure should relate to
donation or promotion, and assuming that participation, prestige, reciprocity, and satisfaction are
relevant factors. It is not a matter of placing a value judgment on the standard assumptions; it is
a matter of asking whether anything has been overlooked. This dissertation sought to better
understand early alumni identity in the context of these existing factors. The use of qualitative
methodology allowed for deeper analysis of the assumed factors. The identified themes provide
a starting point for further research to reexamine the previously help assumptions. According to

124

the findings of this study it is likely that many will hold true, however consideration must be
given to the possibility that they may not hold up to further empirical scrutiny.
The most significant implication for future research as a result of the findings of this
study would be an empirical test of the qualitative findings. It is suggested that a future study
would serve to test the Arnett, German and Hunt (2003) model assumptions along with the
findings of this study. Closer analysis of the relationship between perceived preparedness and
alumni identity would be of interest as would further exploration of the concept of “good
enough”. Many studies examine alumni that contribute and several examine individuals who do
not give, however none focus on the idea of the impact of a neutral institutional reaction to alma
mater as an influence on alumni identity. Ella stated that she did everything she was supposed to
as a student and an alumna and she “has been asked for money, but not my opinion”. As this
dissertation demonstrates, institutions can be successful in keeping a student through graduation,
but still lose them as alumni.
In practice, the more one invokes an identity or organization they identify with, the more
likely it is that their identity related to that organization will exhibit greater salience (Ashforth
and Mael, 1989). The willingness to talk about an identity is an indicator that the given identity
is more likely to be more salient (Burke and Stets, 2009). If alumni balk at talking about their
experience with a fellow alumnus who has been referred to them by a friend, what are the
chances that they will invoke this identity to a complete stranger in a professional setting? The
more institutions can get their alumni to communicate with their alma mater immediately after
they graduate, the more likely it is that alumni will continue to engage and communicate about
their experience with others (Levine, 2008). In the context of relationship marketing it is well
documented that different relationship types are more strongly correlated with sustained product

125

commitment (Arnett, German, and Hunt, 2003; Michalski and Helmig, 2008). Thus any
sustained positive relationship will improve chances of encouraging repeat business or
promotion of the product.
Every single participant indicated that they used social media to remain connected with
their close friend group. This is certainly an area that should be considered in greater depth in
future studies. Given that the sample was collected via social networking and that all
participants noted their use of social media as a means of staying connected to other alumni,
future studies of use of social media among alumni may bear good fruit. Studies in this area
would do well to more closely examine how social media plays a role in alumni communications
and if it is indeed enhancing interactions or just providing a new way of interacting with the
same circles.
This study design could use improvement in the future. There are more targeted
questions that can be asked and a larger sample would certainly serve to enhance response data.
More qualitative studies with higher controls for sample population and a stronger case study
approach may be of benefit to teasing out more themes related to alumni identity. Comparative
studies at other benchmark institutions for PMU may be beneficial in providing a comparison
case study. Themes that appear across institutions would be candidates for more in depth study.
The area of identity studies is very rich and complex. There is a lot of room to play. One area
that would enhance studies on alumni identity is the concept of intersectionality (Bowleg, 2008;
McCall, 2005). The current study isolated the alumni identity as a means of pursuing depth in
that area, however the alumni identity is much more complex than that as it encompasses the
student identity and the employee identity among others. The alumni identity has many
components that are interdependent. Intersectionality would allow for consideration that those

126

multiple identities work in concert to allow an alumnus identity to be salient when necessary, yet
ever present in the self.
Conclusion
Through the long and storied history of higher education, alumni remain one of the most
important, and possibly misunderstood, resources of a university (Levine, 2008). The traditional
role of alumni is to support their alma mater through promotion and donation (Arnett, German,
and Hunt, 2003; McDearmon, 2010), but that alone will not be enough in the future. Alumni are
often viewed as members of a single group that share traits through virtue of having attended the
same university (Baade, 1996; Clotfelter 2003). However, many practicing alumni relations
professionals and recent alumni literature demonstrate that this is not the case (Simone, 2009;
Sun, Hoffman, and Grady, 2007; Tsao and Coll, 2005; Von Kotzebue and Wigger, 2010; Weerts
and Ronca, 2007). Alumni are a varied and unique group of individuals connected through a
common or shared sense of place or nostalgia (Putnam, 2000). The challenge then is how to
reach individual alumni on a personal level that respects the larger group membership yet ties in
closely to the personal and role identities associated with their experience within that shared
place.
Once a student makes their choice, and becomes a part of the institution, they further self
select into other groups such as their academic major, formal social and professional activities
and informal social and academic groups. As they progress through their college experience and
integrate into academic and social groups they develop a new sense of self that determines their
trajectory toward graduation. Much of the literature in the area of student development places a
strong focus on the individual development during college (Torres, Jones, and Renn, 2009), but
fails to address how development of identity, specifically as it relates to the institution and their

127

role identity as an alumnus, continues to develop after graduation. Much like current student
development literature seeks to understand student identity development with an ends toward
improving the student experience and enhancing student learning, this study used identity theory
and relationship marketing in an effort to better understand how alumni make meaning of their
experience in ways that may contribute to an alumnus’ identity. If scholars, student affairs
professionals and development professionals really want to understand and influence alumni in
meaningful ways that result in greater institutional engagement through promotion and donation,
they need to rethink their approach to studying alumni.
The most important thing to note regarding the findings of this study and their implications
for practice is that everything important to the alumni identity and understanding the college
experience began while the participants were students. Alumni affairs, student affairs, and
academic affairs professionals must place greater emphasis on developing the whole student and
engaging them completely throughout their undergraduate experience. This will be much more
difficult if efforts to connect continue to happen in isolation. While there are some high quality
partnerships and initiatives that bring these often disparate units together, they are the exception
not the norm. Institutions focus so hard on getting students to persist through to graduation, yet
they do not really know what to do when they get there. It is like planning a road trip and
carefully structuring and planning out the route, but leaving it all to chance once one arrives at
the destination. Sure, it may work out sometimes, and the journey was great, but it doesn’t
always go smooth and sometimes one does not end up in a good place. If institutions focus on
developing engaged alumni with a salient alumni identity, they will not only increase the joy in
the journey and improve satisfaction with the destination, but it will change their students’ lives
as well.

128

APPENDIX

129

APPENDIX
Interview Questions for Alumni Identity Study
1. What were your reasons for going to college, and specifically why did you choose
WMU?
2. What was your academic major at WMU? Are you working in that field today?
3. What specific extra-curricular activities or organizations did you participate in while
at WMU and how actively did you participate? (clubs, groups, activities, professional
orgs, internships)
4. What would you consider the most defining moment in your undergraduate
experience?
5. In what ways has your time at WMU impacted your life today (positive and/or
negatively)?
6. Has there ever been an instance when your association with WMU helped you, or
hurt you, socially or professionally?
7. Do you believe that those you interact with view WMU as prestigious? Give an
example of an experience that makes you believe this?
8. How would you say that your satisfaction with the education you received while at
WMU has changed over time?
9. What formal and informal ways are you engaged with WMU alumni and activities?
(what and frequency).
10. How important is it to you that you are a college graduate? How important is it that
you graduated from WMU?
11. How do you feel about being an alumnus (ae) of WMU?
12. What is the most important thing for me to know about your being an alumnus of
WMU?

130

WORKS CITED

131

WORKS CITED

Alvermann, D.E., O’Brien D.G., and Dillon, D.R. (1996). On Writing Qualitative Research.
Reading Research Quarterly. 31.1 (pp. 114-120)
Andreoni, J. (Jun., 1990). Impure Altruism and Donations to Public Goods: A Theory of WarmGlow Giving. The Economic Journal , 100 (4) pp. 464-477 Stable URL:
http://www.jstor.org/stable/2234133
Arnett, D.B., German, S.D., Hunt, S.D., (2003). The Identity Salience Model of Relationship
Marketing Success: The Case of Nonprofit Marketing. Journal of Marketing, 67, 89–105
Ashforth, B. E. and Mael, F, (Jan., 1989). Social Identity Theory and the Organization
The Academy of Management Review, 14(1) pp. 20-39.
Baade, R. A., & Sundberg, J. O. (1996). What determines alumni generosity? Economics of
Education Review, 15, 75-81. doi: 10.1016/0272-7757(95)00026-7
Baron, R.A., Byrne, D., & Suls, J. (1989). Exploring social psychology, 3rd ed. Boston, MA:
Allyn & Bacon.
Batson, C. D., Ahmad, N.D., & Tsang, J. (2002). Four motives for community involvement.
Journal of Social Issues, 58 (3), 429-445.
Bekkers, R., & Wiepking, P. (2007). Generosity and Philanthropy: A Literature Review. SSRN
Working paper series No. 1015507.
Bowleg, L. (2008). When Black + lesbian + woman =Black lesbian woman: The methodological
challenges of qualitative and quantitative intersectionality research [Electronic version].
Sex Roles,59(5/6), 312–325. DOI 10.1007/s11199-008-9400-z
Brint, S. (1994). In an age of experts: The changing role of professionals in politics and public
life. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Burke, P. J. (1980), “The Self: Measurement Requirements from an Interactionist Perspective,”
Social Psychology Quarterly, 43 (March), 18–29.
——— (1997), “An Identity Model of Network Exchange,” American Sociological Review, 62
(1), 134–50.
Burke, P.J., and Stets, J.E., (2009). Identity Theory. Oxford University Press. New York, NY.

132

Burt, R.S. (2001). Attachment, Decay, and Social Network. Journal of Organizational Behavior.
22 (6). pp. 619-643.
Cabrera, A.F., Weerts, D.J., and Zulick, B.J..(2005) Making an impact with alumni surveys.
New Directions for Institutional Research. (2005) 126. 5-17. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass
Publishers.
Callero, P. L. (1985), “Role-Identity Salience,” Social Psychology Quarterly, 48 (3), 203–15.
Cermak, D.S.P., File, K.M., and Prince, R.A. (February 1994) A benefit segmentation of the
major donor market. Journal of Business Research, 29 (2), 121-130
Charmaz, K. (1995). Grounded Theory. In J.Z. Smith (Ed.) (2003).Qualitative Psychology: A
Practical Guide To Research Methods. Thousand Oaks, CA. SAGE
Clotfelter, C. T. (2001). Who are the alumni donors? Giving by two generations from selective
colleges. Nonprofit Management & Leadership, 12, 119-138.
Creswell, J.W. (2003). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods
approaches (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Croson, R. T. A. (2007). Theories of commitment, altruism and reciprocity: Evidence from linear
public goods games. Economic Inquiry, 45, 199-216.
Dennis, A.R. and Kinney, S.T. (1998) Testing Media Richness Theory in the New Media: The
Effects of Cues, Feedback, and Task Equivocality. Information Systems Research Vol 9,
No. 3,
Duderstadt, J.J. (2000). A university for the 21st century. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan
Press.
Emerson, R. M. (1976). Social exchange theory. Annual Review of Sociology, 2, 335-362.
Erikson, E.H. (1968). Identity: Youth and Crisis. NewYork: Norton.
Fisher, M. B. (1988). Surveying your Alumni. In G. S. Melchiori. Alumni Research: Methods
and Applications. New Directions for Institutional Research. Volume 60. (pp. 25-39).San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Hogg, M. Terry, D., and White. K. (1995). A tale of two theories: A critical comparison of
identity theory. Social Psychology Quarterly. 58, pp. 255-269
Holmes, J. (2009). Prestige, charitable deductions and other determinants of alumni giving:
Evidence from a highly selective liberal arts college. Economics of Education Review,
28, 18-28.

133

James, W. (1890). Principles of psychology. Holt, Rinehart and Winston; New York.
Johnson, B.L. (1995). Resource Dependence Theory: A Political Economy Model of
Organizations. Viewpoints.
Johnson, D. I. (2004). Relationships between college experiences and alumni
participation in the community. The Review of Higher Education, 27, 169-185
Johnstone, B. (2011). Financing Higher Education: Who Should Pay? In Philip G. Altbach Eds.,
American Higher Education in the Twenty-First Century: Social Political and Economic
Challenges. 3rd Ed. Johns Hopkins.
Kerlinger, F.N. (1973). Foundations of behavioral research (2nd ed). New York: Holt, Reinhart
and Winston.
Kerr, C. (2001). The Uses of the University. Harvard University Press.
Khalil, E. L. (2004). What Is Altruism? Journal of Economic Psychology, 25, 97-123.
Kiley, K. (Feb. 15, 2012) A Gift of Good News. Inside Higher Ed. Web.
http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2012/02/15/giving-colleges-grew-82-percent-2011
Koberg , C.S. (1987) Resource Scarcity, Environmental Uncertainty, and Adaptive
Organizational Behavior . The Academy of Management Journal. 30(4), 798-807.
http://www.jstor.org/stable/256161
Koral, M. (June, 1998). Political Performance: If you want campus support from legislators,
alumni volunteers are instrumental to your success. Here's how to fine-tune your
advocacy efforts (Alumni Administration-government relations, volunteers; Government
Relations-alumni volunteers). p. 46.
Kotzebue, A. and Wigger, B.U., (2010). “Private contributions to collective concerns: modeling
donor behavior.” Cambridge Journal of Economics. 34, 367-387.
Lacy, S. & Fico, F.(1991) The link between newspaper content quality and circulation.
Newspaper Research Journal, 12, 46 57.
Levine, W. (2008). Communications and alumni relations: What is the correlation between an
institution's communication vehicles and alumni annual giving? International Journal of
Educational Advancement, 8, 176-197.
Lindahl , W . E . and Winship , C . ( 1992 ) Predictive models for annual fundraising and major
gift fundraising . Nonprofit Management and Leadership 3 (1) : 43 – 64 .

134

Mael, F. and Ashforth, B. E. (1992). Alumni and Their Alma Mater: A Partial Test of the
Reformulated Model of Organizational Identification. Journal of Organizational
Behavior, 13 (2), 103-23.
McAdams, D.P., (2001). The Psychology of Life Stories. Review of General Psychology. 5 (2):
100-122.
McAdams, D.P. and de St. Aubin, E. (1992). A Theory of Generativity and Its Assessment
Through Self-Report, Behavioral Acts, and Narrative Themes in Autobiography. Journal
of Personality and Social Psychology. 62, 6. 1003-1015.
McAdams, D.P., de St. Aubin, E. and Logan, R.L. (1993). Generativity Among, Young, Midlife,
and Older Adults. Psychology and Aging. 8. 2. 221-230.
McCall, G., and Simmons, J. (1978), Identities and Interactions, revised ed. New York: The Free
Press.
McCall, L. (2005). The complexities of intersectionality. Signs,30(3), 1771–1800.
McDearmon, J. T., & Shirley, K. (2009). Characteristics and institutional factors related to young
alumni donors and non-donors. International Journal of Educational Advancement, 9,
83-95.
McLeod, S. A. (2007). Social Psychology. Retrieved from
http://www.simplypsychology.org/social-psychology.html
Mead, G. H., (1934). Mind, Self, and Society.
Melchori, G. S. (1988a). Alumni research: Methods and applications. New Directions for
Institutional Research. Number 60. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
Melchori, G. S. (1988b). Applying alumni research to fundraising. In G.S. Melchori (Ed.).
Alumni research: Methods and applications. New Directions for Institutional Research.
Pp. 51-66. Number 60. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
Merriam, S.B., (1998). Qualitative Research and Case Study Applications in Education.
(Revised and Expanded). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass
Michalski, S. and Helmig, B., (2008). What Do We Know About the Identity Salience Model of
Relationship Marketing Success? A Review of the Literature. Journal of Relationship
Marketing. 7 (1) 45-63.
Monge, P.R. (1977). “The systems perspective as a theoretical basis for the study of human
communication”. Communication Quarterly. 25 (1), 19-29.
Monks, J. (2003). Patterns of giving to one's alma mater among young graduates from selective
institutions. Economics of Education Review, 22, 121-130.
135

Okunade, A.A., (Apr., 1996). Graduate School Alumni Donations to Academic Funds: MicroData Evidence. American Journal of Economics and Sociology, 55 (2), 213-229
Olsen, K., Smith, A. L. and Wunnava, P. V. (1989). An empirical study of the life-cycle
hypothesis with respect to alumni donations. American Economist. 33 (2), 60-63.
Owston, J. (2007) Survival of the Fittest? The Rebranding of West Virginia Higher Education.
Marshall University. Retrieved from http://www.newriver.net/dissertation-complete.pdf
Palmer, A., and Koenig-Lewis, N. (2008). Experiential Bases for Relationship Development: A
study of Alumni Relationships. Journal of Relationship Marketing. 7(1)
doi:10.1080/15332660802068013
Pike, G. R. (1993). The relationship between perceived learning and satisfaction with college:
An alternative view. Research in Higher Education, 34(1), 23-40.
_________ (1994). The relationship between alumni satisfaction and work experiences.
Research in Higher Education, 35(1), 105-124.
Putnam, R.D. (2000). Bowling Alone. The Collapse and Revival of American Community. Simon
and Schuster, NY, NY.
Rhodes, F.H.T., (2001). The Creation of the Future: The Role of the American University.
Cornell University Press. Ithaca & London
Riffe, D., Lacy, S., & Fico, F. (1998). Analyzing Media Messages: Using Quantitative Content
Analysis in Research. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Rooney, P. M., & Frederick, H. K. (2007). Portraits of Donors: Bank of America Study of High
Net-Worth Philanthropy. The Center on Philanthropy at Indiana University,
Bloomington, IN.
Scott, W.R. (2003). Organizations: Rational, Natural, and Open Systems 5th Ed. Prentice Hall.
Upper saddle River, NJ.
Serpe, Richard T. (1987), “Stability and Change in Self: A Structural Symbolic Interactionist
Explanation,” Social Psychology Quarterly, 50 (1), 44–54.
——— and Sheldon Stryker (1987), “The Construction of Self and Reconstruction of Social
Relationships,” in Advances in Group Processes, Vol. 4, E.J. Lawler and B. Markovsky,
eds. Greenwich, CT: JAI Press, 41–66.
Simone, S. A. (2009). Examining the influence of selectivity on alumni giving at public
universities: A dynamic panel modeling approach. University of Maryland, College
Park. ProQuest Dissertations and Theses, Retrieved from

136

http://ezproxy.msu.edu/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/304924960?accoun
tid=12598
Smith, M. (Feb. 28, 2012). Paying it Back, Not Forward. Inside Higher Ed. Web. Oct. 2012.
http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2012/02/28/study-loan-and-scholarship-recipientsgive-less-alma-mater
Smith-Lovin, L. (2003). “Self Identity and Interaction in an Ecology of Identities”. In Peter
Burke Ed. Advances in Identity Theory and Research. Springer, NY
Snow, D.A. ( 2001) Extending and Broadening Blumer's Conceptualization of Symbolic
Interactionism. Symbolic Interaction, 24 (3) pp. 367-377
Stryker, Sheldon (1968), “Identity Salience and Role Performance: The Relevance of Symbolic
Interaction Theory for Family Research,” Journal of Marriage and Family, 30 (4), 558–
64.
____________(1980 [2002]). Symbolic interactionism: A social structural version. Blackburn
Press. Caldwell, NJ.
Stryker, S. & Burke, P.J. (2000). The past, present, and future, of identity theory. Social
Psychology Quarterly, 63, 4 284-297.
Sun, X., Hoffman, S.C., and Grady, M.L. (2007) A Multivariate Causal Model of Alumni
Giving: Implications for Alumni Fundraisers. International Journal of Educational
Advancement. 7(4) 307–332
Tajfel, H. and Turner, J.C., (1979). “An integrative theory of intergroup conflict.” In W.G.
Austin and S. Worchel (Eds.) The Social psychology of intergroup relations. Pp. 33-47.
Brooks/Cole: Pacific Grove, CA.
Taylor, A. L., & Martin, J. C. (1995). Characteristics of Alumni Donors and Non-Donors at a
Research I, Public University. Research in Higher Education, 36(3), 283-302.
Tinto, V. (1993). Leaving College.: Rethinking the Causes and Cures of Student Attrition. 2nd ed.
The University of Chicago Press. Chicago.
Todd, S. J., & Lawson, R. W. (1999). Towards a better understanding of the financial donor: An
examination of donor behavior in terms of value structure and demographics.
International Journal of Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Marketing, 4, 235-244.
Torres, V., Jones, S.R., and Renn, K.A., (2009). Identity Development Theories in Student
Affairs Origins, Current Status, and New Approaches. Journal of College Student
Development. 50 (6) pp. 577-596
Tsao, J.C. and Coll, G. (2005). To Give or Not to Give: Factors Determining Alumni Intent to
Make Donations as a PR Outcome.
137

Vesterlund, L. (2006). Why do People Give? In: W. E. Powell and R. Steinberg, (Eds.), The
Nonprofit Sector: A Research Handbook. (pp. 568-590). New Haven, CT: Yale
University Press.
Volkwein, F. V. (2002). Value of Alumni Studies. In Resource Notebook: The NCTLA
Assessment Institute. College Park: Penn State University
Volkwein, J. F., & Parmley, K. (1999). Testing why alumni give: A model of alumni gift-giving
behavior. In D. Shoemaker (Ed.) Research in alumni relations: Surveying
alumni to improve your programs (pp. 59-62). Washington DC: CASE.
Volkwein, J. F., & Sweitzer, K. V. (2006). Institutional prestige and reputation among
research universities and liberal arts colleges. Research in Higher Education,
47(2), 129-148.
Von Kotzebue, A. and Wigger, B.U. (2010) Private Contributions to Collective Concerns:
Modeling Donor Behaviour. Cambridge Journal of Economics, 34, 367-387
Wastyn, M. L. (2009). Why alumni don't give: A qualitative study of what motivates non-donors
to higher education. International Journal of Educational Advancement, 9, 96-108.
Weerts, D. J., & Ronca, J. M. (2006). Taking it to the next level: Characteristics of
alumni donors who increase levels of giving to their alma mater. Paper Presented
at the Association for the Study of Higher Education Meeting.
Weerts, D.J. and Ronca, J. M. (March, 2007). Profiles of Supportive Alumni: Donors,
Volunteers, and Those Who “Do It All”. International Journal of Educational
Advancement, 7(1).
Wiepking, P. (2007). The Philanthropic Poor: In Search of Explanations for the Relative
Generosity of Lower Income Households. Voluntas, 18, 339-358.
—. (2008). For the Love of Mankind. A Sociological Study on Charitable Giving. Department of
Philanthropic Studies, VU Amsterdam, Amsterdam.

138