HSO Search and Proposal Alignment

Full Text | Scholarly Journal

Learning by Grant Writing (LxGW): Exploring the Impacts on Student Philanthropy Attitudes and Intentions Trull, Laura H; Henry, Dayna S. Philanthropy & Education; Bloomington Vol. 4, Iss. 1, (Fall 2020): 82- 94.

Full Text

Abstract

Evidence exists for the importance of grant writing skills among professionals in non-profit settings, indicating an emerging need for courses teaching these skills. Less is known about the impact of learning grant writing skills on attitudes toward philanthropy. The purpose ofthis research note was to explore attitudes toward philanthropy and perception of grant writing skills using a pre- and post-test, comparison group design. Data were collected from 56 students enrolled in elective grant writing courses and a comparison course. Variables included demographics, attitudes toward philanthropy, and perceived impact on grant writing skills. At post-test, those who took the grant-writing course had more positive attitudes toward philanthropy and working in the nonprofit sector. Substantial improvement in writing and researching skills for a small sample indicate this type ofcourse should be required for health and human services programs to provide students opportunities to have a meaningful positive impact on the nonprofit sector.

MoreK

Listen Headnote Evidence exists for the importance of grant writing skills among professionals in non-profit settings, indicating an emerging need for courses teaching these skills. Less is known about the impact of learning grant writing skills on attitudes toward philanthropy. The purpose ofthis research note was to explore attitudes toward philanthropy and perception of grant writing skills using a pre- and post-test, comparison group design. Data were collected from 56 students enrolled in elective grant writing courses and a comparison course. Variables included demographics, attitudes toward philanthropy, and perceived impact on grant writing skills. At post-test, those who took the grant-writing course had more positive attitudes toward philanthropy and working in the nonprofit sector. Substantial improvement in writing and researching skills for a small sample indicate this type ofcourse should be required for health and human services programs to provide students opportunities to have a meaningful positive impact on the nonprofit sector.

Keywords: Grant writing skills, experiential philanthropy

The twenty-first century nonprofit world has begun to embrace a changing skill set for its new and emerging leaders due to innovations in technology and changes in trends in philanthropy (Mirabito, 2012). Some of the more desirable expertise include the importance of grant writing skills among philanthropy professionals in an assortment of nonprofit settings (Kleinfelder, Price, & Dake, 2003). Professionals time and again learn to write grants through trial-and-error, and often repeatedly failing, as there are few opportunities for learning grant writing skills (Lundquist & Hadidi, 2013; Wooley, 2004). While there is some professional preparation for these needs in social work or health administration programs, there is an emerging need for specific courses on organizational operations such as grant writing skills (Mirabito, 2012). Data supports that human services students feel the improved ability to understand grant making and grant writing after participating in a project-based grants course (Long, McCarter, Thomas, & Boyd, 2012). Therefore, it is important to understand how we develop grant writing skills in higher education and the relationship between skill development and a future in philanthropy.

PRiOR RESEARCH ON HOW GRANT WRiTERS LEARN TO WRiTE GRANTS

A variety of courses do exist where students are exposed to elements of philanthropy. Students often study the phenomena that benefit from charity such as economic distress, animal welfare, and global human rights violations. Philanthropic leadership may be addressed through management courses or public administration programs, and many colleges have classes on philanthropy for course credit (McDonald & Olbdering, 2012). Students may learn about grants as a sub-component of a research methods course (Costa, 2016). Students may learn about grants through a service- learning component of a course (Bentley & Swan, 2018). However, there is little discussion of philanthropy, or the



The ProQuest Resource Center has moved You'll still find all the tools that help you get the most fro your time in ProQuest:

In-app guided tours Quick access to our Support Center Product updates Learning resources

Close

connection to grant writing and philanthropy, in the health and human services undergraduate programs including social work, nursing, health sciences, and others (McClendon, Kagotho & Lane, 2016). Typically, the focus of philanthropy in health professionals, like nursing, is on donation of one's time or skills (van de Pasch, 2016).

Experiential Philanthropy

It is well documented in the literature that you can teach philanthropy directly to college students through the experience of giving as part of their course (Campbell, 2014; Benenson & Moldow, 2017; McDonald, Miller, & McDougle, 2017; McDougle, McDonald, Li, Miller, & Xu, 2017; Olberding, 2009). At the broader university level, particularly in public administration programs, there are quite a few examples of students learning philanthropy through a course where they give real funds to local nonprofit organizations (Irvin, 2005). One of these examples is through the Learning by Giving Foundation. Learning by Giving (LxG) attempts to bridge the gap between student and worker by providing students in college philanthropy courses the opportunity to donate funds to local nonprofit organizations (McDonald et al., 2017). Student philanthropy is an established pedagogy and may be considered a type of student service-learning (Olberding, 2009). Experiential philanthropy, where students directly handle real money as part of philanthropy education, has a positive effect on student attitudes (Benenson & Moldow, 2017), increases their awareness of social problems and nonprofit organizations (McDonald et al., 2017), and is perceived to enhance their learning (Li, Xu, & McDougal, 2019).

Experiential philanthropy is typically conceptualized as two models of either direct or indirect giving (Olberding, 2009). In these models, students give away real funds (direct) or evaluate grant proposals (indirect). Both models offer a connection between those who donate funds and those who endeavor to receive the funds and put them to use. When considering experiential philanthropy as pedagogy, there is a gap between our understanding of those who give and how they learn about philanthropy. Particularly, the degree to which aspects and experiences within college courses that influence students' attitudes, beliefs, and intentions around philanthropy.

Experiential Philanthropy as a Grant Writing Pedagogy

One study looked at potential aspects of courses in philanthropy, including contact with nonprofits, research, developing selection criteria, and making funding decisions (Benenson & Moldow, 2017). Benenson & Moldow (2017) incorporated grant writing skills as one of the many components of a philanthropy course. As these skills were included and measured with other activities, it was impossible to tell if the experience of writing a grant had any significant effect on student learning. So while experiential philanthropy as a pedagogy is useful (Campbell, 2014) and grant writing skills are desirable by nonprofits (Kapucu, Healy & Arslan, 2011) and the broader workforce (Adams & Thomas, 2020), what has not been discussed is whether grant writing training affects students attitudes, beliefs, and intentions around philanthropy.

The present study looked at an innovative model that incorporates direct and indirect (Olberding et al., 2010) methods of experiential philanthropy into a hybrid with service-learning in courses in an undergraduate college of health and behavioral studies at a mid-size university. The purpose of this study was to explore student attitudes toward philanthropy and perceptions of grant writing skills after taking a grant writing course. Given the exploratory nature of the study, the research questions were:

R1: How does participation in a grant writing course change student's attitudes toward philanthropy?

R2: In what ways are demographic information such as class standing, religiosity, and college major and minor predictors of student attitudes?

R3: How does participation in a grant writing course change students' perceptions of their own grant writing skills?

METHODS

Procedures

Students enrolled in grant writing courses offered online through the department of health sciences in summer and face- to-face by the social work department in fall were invited to participate in the study. The purpose of the courses is for students to learn the entire grants process from request for proposals through proposal development and review. As part of course requirements in both courses, students partnered with local nonprofit organizations to write a grant proposal on their behalf. The guidelines for the grant proposal were either developed by the instructor or the students as part of the course. The students reviewed classmates' proposals and evaluated their merit for funding.

IRB Human Subjects Approval was obtained prior to data collection. Data were collected via an online anonymous survey during the 2018 summer and fall semesters. Students enrolled in grant writing courses offered through the department of health sciences in summer and by the social work department in fall were invited to complete the surveys via course management pages during the first week of the course and again during the last week of the course. Participants were asked to create a unique identifying code to allow the researchers to link pre-and post-test responses. Additionally, a

comparison group of health sciences research methods students were invited to take the same measures as the pre-test survey during the fall 2018 semester to determine appropriateness of comparison group. No incentives were offered to students to participate.

Participants

Participants included 37 undergraduate students who enrolled in a grant writing course in one of two departments (social work or health sciences). The majority of the students were social work majors (n=17) with health sciences as the second most common major (n=9). Other declared majors included psychology, sociology, and communications studies. The most common reported minor was non-profit studies. The majority of the students were juniors (n=16, 43%) and seniors (n=18, 49%). At post-test, 16 students completed the survey, and it was not possible to match students to their pre-test ID's because students reported different ID's than those they created at pre-test This study also included a comparison group of 19 senior undergraduate health science students who did not opt to take the grant writing course. The comparison group seemed to report slightly more religiosity than the grant writing course participants. The majority of students in both groups were women.

Measures

Building on previous research, we utilized the pre-and post-course survey questions from "Assessing Changes in Students' Academic Learning and Personal Development after Experiential Philanthropy" (McDougle et. al, 2017). This instrument was modified from the questions incorporated into a 2011 study of alumni of a student philanthropy program (Olberding, 2011) and studies of the Mayerson Student Philanthropy Project (McDonald et al., 2017; McDougle et. al., 2017). The pre- test and comparison group survey included questions about the participants class standing, major, minor, religiosity, spirituality, and to rate, on a 5-point scale, their attitudes toward philanthropy using a 12-item tool (see Table 1). Items were added together to form the "Attitudes Toward Philanthropy Scale." The lowest possible score on the scale was 12 and the highest was 60. The scale was determined to be reliable across all data collection time points using Cronbach's Alpha (Pre-test = .82; Post-test = .91; Control = .88). The post-test survey included class standing, the 12-item attitudes toward philanthropy scale, perceptions of how the course impacted students writing skills, interest in grant writing and working in philanthropy, and significant outcomes from taking the course in an open-ended format.

RESULTS

As seen in Table 1, for the majority of items, there were no perceptible differences in the scores among the three groups. The comparison group seemed to self-report less awareness of non-profit organizations in their community and less interest in grant writing than the course participants at both pre-and post-test. However, there were some items where the comparison students were similar to the pre-test students and higher scores were seen only after the grant-writing course concluded or where the comparison students scored lower than even the pre-test.

Across both time-points for the grant writing course and the comparison group, mean scores on the attitudes towards philanthropy scales were high (see Table 2). An independent samples t-test indicated there was no significant difference in attitudes towards philanthropy between the control group course and the pre-test grant writing course (t (54) = .91, p> .05). While post-test attitudes towards philanthropy scores were higher than pre-test, this difference was not significant (t (33) = 1.22, p> .05). A linear stepwise regression was used to determine which variables predicted attitudes towards philanthropy. In the first block, class standing, major (1: Health Sciences, 2: Social Work, 3: Other), minor (1: Non-profit studies, 2: Health-related, 3: Other or None), and a computed religiosity and spirituality score (higher scores meant more religious and spiritual) were entered. The second block contained condition (1: Pre-test, 2: Post-test, 3: Comparison).

Bivariate analysis indicated no significant difference based on major, however, those minoring in Non-Profit studies had significantly higher attitudes towards philanthropy scores than those with no minor or "other" minor (i.e., non-health related), mean difference = 4.26 (SE = 1.63), p < .05. Additionally, those who were more spiritual and religious had significantly higher attitudes towards philanthropy scores (r (56) = .296, p < .05) according to the Spearman's rho. Juniors and sophomores had higher attitudes towards philanthropy scores than seniors, but the differences were not significant (F(2, 69) = 2.76,p > .05).

Block 1 of the regression containing the predictors of class standing, major, minor, and religiosity/spirituality was not significant (F(4, 51) = 2.28, p >.05). The R Square value for Block 1 was .151 and an adjusted R of .09 (SE = 5.47). Block 2, containing only condition, was also not significant (F(5, 50) = 1.81, p > .05). The R square value for Block 2 was .153 and adjusted R of .07 (SE = 5.52).

Students in the grant writing course reported the degree to which participation in the course changed their perceptions of their grant writing skills. See Table 3 for frequency data related to skill improvement. About half of the grant writing students who completed the post-test felt their writing skills, citation skills, and ability to paraphrase were very much or extremely improved after taking the course. This jumped to two-thirds of students when asked about identification of

primary sources and clarity of writing. About two-thirds of students also indicated the course increased a lot or a great deal, their interest in taking another course related to philanthropy and sense of purpose or direction in life. About half said it impacted a lot or a great deal their consideration of a career in the non-profit sector.

Grant writing course participants were asked to specify the most significant things learned in the course. Unsurprisingly, writing a grant proposal was mentioned most often. The second most frequent response involved understanding non- profit agencies and how to communicate more effectively with them regarding funding. Participants also mentioned general researching and writing skills as important. Finally, the participants were asked if they planned to make any changes as a result of the course. The most frequent responses were considering working as a grant writer, becoming more involved in the community and confirmation they were on the right career path.

DISCUSSION

The purpose of this study was to explore the impact of a taking a grant writing course on student attitudes toward philanthropy. Looking only at means, for post-test scores, scores on the attitudes toward philanthropy scale were higher than at pre-test and higher than the comparison group. These findings, though not statistically significant, are consistent with previous studies demonstrating the benefits of grant writing activities (Benenson & Moldow, 2017). In examining the individual scale items, unsurprisingly, the control group reported less awareness of non-profit organizations in their community and grant writing than the course participants at both pre-and post-test, indicating high interest and awareness among course participants before enrolling in the course. Those who elect to take a grant writing course may have prior interest or experience in nonprofit organizations resulting in increased motivation to further study this topic.

However, there were some items where the comparison were similar to the pre-test students and higher scores were seen only after the grant writing course concluded. This included awareness of the needs and problems in the community, believing that one has a personal responsibility to the community in which one lives, planning to help raise money for a charitable cause, intending to donate money to a charity, and an interest in working on behalf of social justice. From this preliminary evidence, it appears these attitudes may be shifted by the grant writing course. Though for some, the comparison students scored lower than even the pre-test (e.g., donating money to a charity and working on behalf of social justice), further supporting that those who elect to take a grant writing course are different from those who do not.

While there were no significant differences among the groups, the general trend on the individual measures was an increase in scores from pre- to posttest, with a few exceptions. It is possible that as understanding of grant writing increases, students recognize how financial management is an essential function for nonprofits and may direct their attention to raising funds for a nonprofit rather than volunteering or participating in a charity run. This is consistent with the literature that the better one understands the nonprofit industry, the more completely they understand financial needs (Ahmed & Olberding, 2007).

While students learn about philanthropy through their college education, exposure to philanthropy in higher education is only one way people learn about giving as the decisions of parents/guardians to donate to charity has a positive relationship to whether their children will decide to give (Osili, Clark, Bergdoll, Keeler, Kalugyer, & St. Clair., 2016). This may be a stronger predictor of student attitudes toward philanthropy. There are many identified motivations for giving, including altruism and tax deductions (Van Slyke & Brooks, 2005). Decisions about giving and how much people give vary by demographics and economic factors such as age, gender, education level, religiosity, income and volunteerism (Andreoni, Brown, & Rischall, 2001). If experiential philanthropy with grant writing skills as a component may have an influence on student attitudes toward giving, it is worthy of further study with larger sample sizes, or longitudinally. This is especially true if the course impacted students' understanding of the financial needs of nonprofits rather than the need for unskilled volunteers.

Students with a nonprofit studies minor had more positive attitudes toward philanthropy than students that either had no minor or a non-health-related minor. This is not a surprise because students who select this minor already have a high understanding of community concerns and the importance of the nonprofit sector. Students who were more spiritual and/or religious also had more positive attitudes toward philanthropy, which is consistent with many other studies of religiosity and philanthropy (Daniels, 2013). Therefore, the grant writing courses had the most impact on students who may not previously identify as interested in the nonprofit sector. Both of the grant writing courses that were studied were electives and may have attracted students who already have positive attitudes toward philanthropy as evidenced by the pre-test scores on attitudes toward philanthropy being higher than the comparison group. Therefore, to maximize the impact of grant writing skills on philanthropy, grant writing courses should be a mandatory component of the curricula.

Further coursework about philanthropy increases student interest in a career in the nonprofit sector and positively impacts their sense of purpose or direction in life. Students who participated in the elective grant writing course reported the course impacted their interest in taking further courses related to philanthropy, their sense of purpose or direction in life, and their consideration of a career in the nonprofit sector. There are additional benefits to studying philanthropy and grant writing, such as improved writing skills and information literacy skills as is supported by the literature (Mirabito, 2012). In

fact, students who took the grant writing courses in this study reported substantially improved writing and researching skills. However, with no immediate benefits reported by students for building these skills, it may be more beneficial to study this longitudinally.

While students' attitudes toward philanthropy seemed to improve through coursework, it was difficult to determine the degree to which this occurred in this study for a number of reasons. Students self-select to take the grant writing course, which was an elective in their programs. Presumably, students that select these courses have some desire to learn the skills or care about the content. There was a comparison group to compare to, but it was a small sample, and those students did not elect to take the course even though it was available to them. To account for pre-course positive attitudes toward philanthropy, a stronger control group might be students who also identified interest in taking a grant writing course, but who were unable to do so.

The post-test did not have a high rate of response, so it was a very small sample and it was not possible to match students across time due to incorrect reporting of ID #'s. As such, it would be beneficial to offer incentives to complete the post-test. Future studies should consider measuring additional covariates that might predict attitudes toward philanthropy such as parent attitudes and behaviors (Osili, et. al., 2016) and empathy towards others (Bekkers & Wiepking, 2011). Having a larger and more diverse sample would allow the examination of socioeconomic status and gender as predictors of attitudes toward philanthropy. Despite the fact that the controls were less interested in philanthropy and the small sample size, this study provided evidence towards the positive impacts of taking a grant writing course on both student attitudes toward philanthropy, interest in philanthropy, and working in the nonprofit sector and desirable grant writing skills.

iMPLiCATiONS FOR PRACTiCE

Much evidence recognizes the importance of grant writing skills among philanthropy professionals in an assortment of nonprofit settings (Kleinfelder et al., 2003), and a course specifically dedicated to grant writing skills prepares students for twenty-first century nonprofit work. Preliminary evidence based on this small sample size corroborates grant writing as an important component of the emerging pedagogy of experiential philanthropy which is part of the larger and welldocumented pedagogy of experiential learning. Based on the courses used in this study and Adams and Thomas' (2020) recently published chapter on community engaged experiential learning grant writing class, we recommend the following for any faculty members considering designing and offering a grant writing class:

* Develop broad course objectives inclusive of multiple disciplines to attract students of a variety of courses of study.

* Cultivate real partnerships between students and nonprofit organizations to immerse students in a professional setting.

* Facilitate student teams based on interest in particular topics or target populations.

* Create a base of knowledge using carefully curated and diverse resources to help students become familiar with professional grant making language.

* Scaffold the writing of a real (not simulated) proposal with opportunities to receive feedback and revise.

* Structure the course to allow ample time for targeted mentoring of students throughout the process.

* Include an opportunity for the community partners to receive products and close out the experience.

Since many students who elected to take a grant writing course were already interested in philanthropy, it's important for health and human service programs to require such a course. This study demonstrated the potential to positively impacting undergraduate student attitudes about philanthropy through the development of a grant proposal as part of a grant writing course. Not only are the skills relevant for their careers, having these skills would allow students to volunteer their time in a more meaningful way than unskilled volunteering. The impact of these skills on the nonprofit organizations or student willingness to donate funds directly would have a larger positive financial impact on this sector. Investigating methods of impacting student willingness to contribute philanthropically is important for the financial future of the nonprofit sector.

An immediate benefit of the course is that students and faculty have a positive impact on partner community organizations who may obtain funding directly from the course or as a result of submitting the proposal to another funder. Organizations often return to partner with future grant writing classes and other experiential learning classes and become internship sites and future employers. These types of meaningful and mutual beneficial relationships serve as a connection between the university and the local community who both seek to positively impact the lives of the students and their nonprofit mission.

ACKNOWLDGEMENT

The authors would like to acknowledge the Learning By Giving Foundation, which funds one of the grant writing courses and provides extensive leadership in experiential philanthropy around that nation.

Sidebar LAURA HUNT TRULL, Ph.D is an Assistant Professor of Social Work at James Madison University. She obtained her Ph.D. in Nonprofit and Community Leadership from James Madison University and her Masters of Social Work from the University of Minnesota. Dr. Trull's research and service focus on social work education, nonprofit studies, rural health and community practice. She teaches social policy, grant writing and other undergraduate courses in the social work major and nonprofit studies minor.

DAYNA HENRY, Ph.D is an Assistant Professor of Health Sciences at James Madison University. She obtained her Ph.D. in health behavior with a minor in human sexuality from the Kinsey Institute at Indiana University Bloomington. Dr. Henry's research and service focus on sexual assault prevention among college students. She teaches courses covering health behavior change, research methods, and grant writing.

References References

Adams, N. F., & Thomas, P. W. (2020). When students write for money: Reflections on teaching grant writing through experiential learning. In K. Lovett (Ed.), Diverse pedagogical approaches to experiential learning: Multidisciplinary case studies, reflections, and strategies (pp. 13-26). doi: 10.1007/978-3-030-42691-0

Ahmed, S., & Olberding, J. (2007). Can student philanthropy help to address the current nonprofit identity crisis? A Case study of a multiyear, multidisciplinary project at Northern Kentucky University. Journal of Public Affairs Education, 22(3-4), 593-615. doi: 10.1080/15236803.2007.12001500

Andreoni, J., Brown, E., & Rischall, I. (2001). Charitable giving by married couple: Who decided and why does it matter? Journal of Human Resources, 38, 111-133. Retrieved from: https://www.jstor .org/stable/1558758? seq=1#metadata_info_tab_contents

Bekkers, R., & Wiepking, P. (2010). A Literature review of empirical studies of philanthropy: Eight mechanisms that drive charitable giving. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 40(5), 924-973. doi: 10.1177/0899764010380927

Benenson, J., & Moldow, E. (2017). Paying it forward: The role of student philanthropy course activities on civic outcomes. Journal of Public Affairs Education, 23(3), 885-902. doi: 10.1080 /15236803.2017.12002294

Bentley, K. M., & Swan, S. A. (2018). Service learning: A Useful pedagogy to engage community health education students in a resource. Pedagogy in Health Promotion: The Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 4(2), 83 -87. doi: 10.1177/2373379917724171

Campbell, D. (2014). Practicing philanthropy in American higher education: Cultivating engaged citizens and nonprofit sector professionals. Journal of Public Affairs Education, 20(2), 217-231. doi: 10.1080/15236803.2014.12001783

Costa, J. T. (2016). Grant writing as a pedagogical tool. Business Education Innovation Journal, 5(1), 50-55. Retrieved from: http://www.beijournal.com/v82016/v8n1fulltext.html

Daniels, A. (2013). Religious Americans give more, new study finds. The Chronicle of Philanthropy. https://www.philanthropy.com/article/Religious-Americans-Give-More/153973.

Irvin, R. A. (2005). The Student philanthropists: Fostering civic engagement through grant making. Journal of Public Affairs Education, 11(4), 325-336. doi: 10.1080/15236803.2005.12001405

Kapucu, N., Healy, B.F & Arlsan, T. (2011). Survival of the fittest: Capacity building for small nonprofit organizations. Evaluation and Program Planning, 34(3), 236-245. https://doi.org/10.1016/]' .evalprogplan.2011.03.005

Kleinfelder, J., Price, J. H., & Dake, J. A. (2003). Grant writing: Practice and preparation of university health educators. American Journal of Health Education, 34, 47-53. doi: 10.1080/19325037.2003.10603525

Li, H., Xu, C., & McDougal, L.M. (2019). Philanthropy can be learned: A Qualitative study of student experiences in experiential philanthropy courses. Philanthropy & Education, 2(2) 29-52. doi: 10.2979/phileduc.2.2.02

Long, D. D., McCarter, S., Thomas, L.M., & Boyd, S.A. (2012). An exploratory examination of a grantmaking project in social work education. Journal of Teaching in Social Work, 32(1), 108-120. doi: 10.1080/08841233.2012.639275

Lundquist, R., & Hadidi, N. (2013). Developing grant writing skills to translate practice dreams into reality. Advanced Critical Care, 24(2), 177-185. doi: 10.1097/NCI.0b013e31828c8b58

McClendon, J., Kagotho, N., & Lane, S.R. (2016). Preparing social work students for leadership in human service organizations through student philanthropy. Human Service Organizations Management, Leadership & Governance, 40(5), 500-507. doi: 10.1080/23303131.2016.1173159

McDonald, D., & Olberding, J.C. (2012). Learning by giving: A Quasi-experimental study of student philanthropy in criminal justice education. Journal of Criminal Justice Education, 23(3), 307-335. doi: 10.1080/10511253.2011.604339

McDonald, D., Miller, W.M., & McDougle, L. (2017). Connecting through giving. Journal of Nonprofit Education and Leadership, 7(2), 110-122. doi: 10.18666/JNEL-2017-V7-I2-9177

McDougle, L., McDonald, D., Li, H., Miller, W.M. & Xu, C. (2017). Can philanthropy be taught? Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 46(2), 330-351. Retrieved from: https://doi.org /10.1177%2F0899764016662355

Mirabito, D. M. (2012). Educating a new generation of social workers: Challenges and skills needed for contemporary agency-based practice. Clinical Social Work Journal, 40(2), 245-254. https://doi. org/10.1007/s10615-011-0378-6

Olberding, J. C. (2009). Indirect giving to nonprofit organizations: An emerging model of student philanthropy. Journal of Public Affairs, 15(4), 463 - 492. doi: 10.1080/15236803.2009.12001572

Olberding, J. C. (2011). Does student philanthropy work? A study of long-term effects of the "Learning by Giving" approach. Innovations in Higher Education, 37, 71-87. doi: 10/1007/s10755-011-0189-5

Osili, U., Clark, C., Bergdoll, J., Keeler, A., Kalugyer, A., & St. Clair, M. (2016). A tradition of giving: New research on giving and volunteering within families. A report of the Lilly Family School of Philanthropy. Retrieved from: https://cdn.vcapps.org/sites/default/files/upload/A%20 tradition%20of%20giving_Final_0.pdf.

van de Pasch, T. (2016). Influence through philanthropy: What philanthropy looks like. Reflections in Nursing. Retrieved from:<https://www.reflectionsonnursingleadership.org/commentary/more -commentary/Vol42_3_influence-through- philanthropy-what-philanthropy-looks-like

Van Slyke, D. M., & Brooks, A. C. (2005). Why do people give? New evidence and strategies for nonprofit managers. American Review of Public Administration, 35(3), 199-222. doi: 10.1177/0275074005275308

Wooley, S. F (2004) A review committee as a way to teach grant writing skills. Journal of Health Education, 35(6), 366- 368, doi: 10.1080/19325037.2004.10604777 Copyright Indiana University Press Fall 2020

Suggested sources Looking for more sources on the same subject? Try these suggestions:

Hernandez, Paul R; Adams, Amanda S; Barnes, Rebecca T; Bloodhart Brittany; Burt, Melissa; et al. Communications Earth & Environment; London Vol. 1, Iss. 1, (Dec 2020).

Patterson, Barbara, PhD, RN, ANEF; McNelis, Angela M, PhD, RN, ANEF. Nursing Education Perspectives; New York Vol. 34, Iss. 5, (Sep/Oct 2013): 361.

Inouye, Sharon K; Fiellin, David A. Annals of Internal Medicine; Philadelphia Vol. 142, Iss. 4, (Feb 15, 2005): 274-82.

Beatty, Joy E. International Journal of Organizational Analysis; Bingley Vol. 18, Iss. 2, (2010): 181-197.

Inspiration, inoculation, and introductions are all critical to successful mentorship for undergraduat e women pursuing geoscience careers ...

The NLN Research in Nursing Education Grants Pr ogram: Progress Toward the Future ...

An Evidence-Based Guide to Writing Grant Proposals for Clinical Research ...

For which future? Exploring the implicit futures of service-learning ...

Show more suggestions...

Copyright © 2025 ProQuest LLC.