Development is a compelling, but imprecise goal. Although the concept can motivate action and mobilize resources, fundamental questions about what it means to ‘develop’ and what actions are required to achieve that goal remain the subject of intense debate. Faced with this uncertainty, development actors can look to two sources of guidance: other disciplines, or the practice of development itself. This dissertation explores the origins of the theories which guide development action and argues that in order for development to deliver on its mandate it must reject supposedly universal theories borrowed from other disciplines (‘exogenous’ theories) and instead must develop contingent, local theories based in the on-the-ground experiences of those doing development (‘endogenous’ theories). This argument is demonstrated using the case of innovation theory in Guyana. Innovation and development are both popular ways to make sense of change and in recent decades they have become conflated, with innovation being presented as a near-universal fix for development problems. This discourse has taken root in Guyana, where the recent discovery of oil has made the questions of development increasingly urgent and the promise of innovation increasingly attractive. The argument proceeds in four phases: Chapter one explores how and why certain theories become influential in development, then discusses the implications of doing development work based on ‘exogenous’ versus ‘endogenous’ theory. It then proposes four guidelines for the use of theory in development. Chapter two traces how innovation came to become understood as a solution to development problems, and assesses whether and under what conditions it can be expected to contribute to development. Chapter three turns to Guyana, and builds on interviews and participant observation to present an endogenous theory of innovation in Guyana. The chapter also explores the practical and methodological challenges of building such a theory. Chapter four compares the endogenous theory of innovation presented in the previous chapter to several dominant exogenous theories, exploring the policy implications of each and demonstrating why the endogenous theory provides a superior source of guidance for development action in Guyana.

Education is one of the most important factors in a person’s life - it shapes your friends as a child, your future career, and has tangible effects on a person’s earning potential, health, and more. The state government has the responsibility, and privilege, to provide every child with a K-12 education through a system of public schools as directed by the Arizona Constitution. The Arizona State Legislature expanded the public school system to include charter schools to facilitate more choices for students and parents in the delivery of education. In the late 1990s and throughout the last two decades, Arizona would form, fund, and begin to prioritize a parallel publicly-funded private education system. Through the creation of the School Tuition Organization income tax credits, vouchers, and the Empowerment Scholarship Account program the Arizona State Legislature has systematically diverted funds from public schools to private education institutions. A report by the Center for the Future of Arizona, The Arizona We Want: The Decade Ahead, identified a range of issues, including education, that a majority of Arizonans find consensus on. Arizonans agree that a quality K-12 public education system is one of the most important issues to improving Arizona’s future and 73% agree that more money should be spent on K-12 education. Arizona leaders have shown a concerning willingness to ignore expressed public values in relation to education - these policy decisions have left our state public schools, which 88% of Arizona children attend, critically underfunded. Now is the time for all Arizonans to support the future we want by pushing for a strong, well-funded K-12 public education system.

The Luminosity Lab, located at Arizona State University, is a prototype for a novel model of interdisciplinary, student-led innovation. The model’s design was informed by the following desired outcomes: i) the model would be well-suited for the 21st century, ii) it would attract, motivate, and retain the university’s strongest student talent, iii) it would operate without the oversight of faculty, and iv) it would work towards the conceptualization, design, development, and deployment of solutions that would positively impact society. This model of interdisciplinary research was tested at Arizona State University across four academic years with participation of over 200 students, who represented more than 20 academic disciplines. The results have shown successful integration of interdisciplinary expertise to identify unmet needs, design innovative concepts, and develop research-informed solutions. This dissertation analyzes Luminosity’s model to determine the following: i) Can a collegiate, student-driven interdisciplinary model of innovation designed for the 21st century perform without faculty management? ii) What are the motivators and culture that enable student success within this model? and iii) How does Luminosity differ from traditional research opportunities and learning experiences?
Through a qualitative, grounded theory analysis, this dissertation examines the phenomena of the students engaging in Luminosity’s model, who have demonstrated their ability to serve as the principal investigators and innovators in conducting substantial discovery, research, and innovation work through full project life cycles. This study supports a theory that highly talented students often feel limited by the pace and scope of their college educations, and yearn for experiences that motivate them with agency, achievement, mastery, affinity for colleagues, and a desire to impact society. Through the cumulative effect of these motivators and an organizational design that facilitates a bottom-up approach to student-driven innovation, Luminosity has established itself as a novel model of research and development in the collegiate space.

This action research project was a concurrent mixed method case study design The purpose of this action research study was to begin to understand how an institution of higher education can best support creativity and innovation of university staff members. More specifically this study looked at the influence of a design thinking workshop on university staff perceived creative and innovative ability. Additionally, this study looked at the influence of individual attributes on staff creativity, and the influence of organizational attributes on staff innovation. Amabile and Pratt’s Dynamic Component Model of Creativity and Innovation in Organizations informed this study. Participants for this study were recruited from the Educational Outreach and Student Services division of Arizona State University at the Downtown Phoenix campus. Qualitative and quantitative data were collected using a Creativity and Innovation Survey (CIS) and individual interviews. The Creativity and Innovation Survey was distributed to staff before and after they participated in a two module design thinking workshop. Interviews with staff occurred after the conclusion of the workshops. In responses to the CIS and in interview staff had a strong belief in their ability to be creative and innovative in the workplace. A correlational analysis of CIS data indicated that a positive and significant relationship existed between creativity and individual attributes, as well as between, innovation and organizational attributes. Staff also expressed these relationships during interviews. The themes of collaboration, supervision, and resources each emerged from the interview data as important influencers of staff creativity and innovation. Although staff expressed there was a value in the design thinking workshops during interviews, a significant difference was not found in staffs’ perceived creativity and innovation after participating in the design thinking workshop. Implications for practice and for future research are discussed.

Visualizations are an integral component for communicating and evaluating modern networks. As data becomes more complex, info-graphics require a balance between visual noise and effective storytelling that is often restricted by layouts unsuitable for scalability. The challenge then rests upon researchers to effectively structure their information in a way that allows for flexible, transparent illustration. We propose network graphing as an operative alternative for demonstrating community behavior over traditional charts which are unable to look past numeric data. In this paper, we explore methods for manipulating, processing, cleaning, and aggregating data in Python; a programming language tailored for handling structured data, which can then be formatted for analysis and modeling of social network tendencies in Gephi. We implement this data by applying an algorithm known as the Fruchterman-Reingold force-directed layout to datasets of Arizona State University’s research and collaboration network. The result is a visualization that analyzes the university’s infrastructure by providing insight about community behaviors between colleges. Furthermore, we highlight how the flexibility of this visualization provides a foundation for specific use cases by demonstrating centrality measures to find important liaisons that connect distant communities.

With a fresh democratic energy emerging from newer generations, there is an increasing
number of youth becoming politically active and civically engaged. Many of whom are active
and engaged are college students, seeking change not only within politics and society, but within
their institution. At Arizona State University (ASU), the institution is spread across four unique
campuses in which each of the campuses holds its own undergraduate student government.
Within the Associated Students of Arizona State University (ASASU), each Undergraduate
Student Government (USG) experiences low voter turnout every year in their elections and high
turnover rates. Understanding why students chose to be involved in the first place is a major
question.

This paper introduces MisophoniAPP, a new website for managing misophonia. It will briefly discuss the nature of this chronic syndrome, which is the experience of reacting strongly to certain everyday sounds, or “triggers”. Various forms of Cognitive Behavioral Therapy and the Neural Repatterning Technique are currently used to treat misophonia, but they are not guaranteed to work for every patient. Few apps exist to help patients with their therapy, so this paper describes the design and creation of a new website that combines exposure therapy,
relaxation, and gamification to help patients alleviate their misophonic reflexes.

The quality and quantity of talented members of the US STEM workforce has

been a subject of great interest to policy and decision makers for the past 40 years.

Recent research indicates that while there exist specific shortages in specific disciplines

and areas of expertise in the private sector and the federal government, there is no

noticeable shortage in any STEM academic discipline, but rather a surplus of PhDs

vying for increasingly scarce tenure track positions. Despite the seeming availability

of industry and private sector jobs, recent PhDs still struggle to find employment in

those areas. I argue that the decades old narrative suggesting a shortage of STEM

PhDs in the US poses a threat to the value of the natural science PhD, and that

this narrative contributes significantly to why so many PhDs struggle to find career

employment in their fields. This study aims to address the following question: what is

the value of a STEM PhD outside academia? I begin with a critical review of existing

literature, and then analyze programmatic documents for STEM PhD programs at

ASU, interviews with industry employers, and an examination the public face of value

for these degrees. I then uncover the nature of the value alignment, value disconnect,

and value erosion in the ecosystem which produces and then employs STEM PhDs,

concluding with specific areas which merit special consideration in an effort to increase

the value of these degrees for all stakeholders involved.