You are on page 1of 2


Since the completion of the initial proposal and the recommendation report, I
have learned a range and variety of information about the issue at hand. The
lack of required gender studies benchmarks for undergraduate students on
Boise State University campus as well as campuses across the country is
prevalent. I also uncovered startling statistics concerning sexual assault rates
and attitudes towards sexual minorities in the college spectrum. Primary
research led my team and I to additional findings, principally that the need for
mandated gender studies education is lukewarm, at best. The student and
faculty attitude seems skeptical towards the implication of such a program. Out
of thirteen peer universities contacted, only one had a comparable program in
place. The most informative, yet also most disheartening, was a total deficiency
of any university learning objective dealing with gender issues, sexual assault
prevention, or tolerance.


When implicating the proposed tasks found in the initial proposal, some
exceptions had to be made in order to gather the necessary primary research in
the allotted time frame. Tasks that were initially scheduled to be stretched over
weeks were started and finished within days. Because of these constraints,
interviews that were proposed to be organized with administration were
replaced with email correspondence. Additionally, some of the elements of the
tasks were shifted to accommodate specific situations. For example, the
student survey was opened to Boise State students and alumni, whereas it was
planned to only be open to current students. Ultimately, the largest changes
came in the form of condensing tasks down to manageable levels that could
provide worthwhile quantifiable data that could be collected quickly and
efficiently. To allocate for these changes, the problems and discrepancies were
openly addressed within the final recommendation report.

Starting the process of primary research, I was extremely optimistic and certain
that a positive recommendation would arise from the data collected. However,
this was not the case. The data from both surveys was inconclusive and the
anticipated data from contacting peer institutes did not materialize. Because of
these things, I could not make a confident recommendation for a mandated
gender studies requirements at Boise State University.

As mentioned, several problems arose with research tactics that had to be
resolved within the report. In order to stay ethical and honest, these problems
were addressed openly. Additionally, issues were encountered with consistent
definitions. Some of the terminology we chose to use in our research was
confusing, as made apparent by the feedback offered on the surveys. A central
issue throughout the process was a lack of response to both emails and


Ultimately the final recommendation report had several strong sections, and
several weak sections. While the conclusion of data in the report was crucial,
more testing and data analysis could have been completed. Some sections
were written hurriedly and required more editing before the final submission.
More in-depth response could have also been included in several of the
The central ideas present in the report, however, were strong and the flow of
language used in the writing stands strong. The technical skill in formatting,
presenting, and writing is also noteworthy.

Considering the time constraints and the varying level of skills present our team,
the process of creating and curating the report stands as a learning exercise for
all members. Challenges were overcame and skillsets were applied were
needed. All members of the team exhibited teamwork and positive, encouraging
attitudes during the process.