@article{serow_2004, title={Policy as symbol: Title II of the 1944 GI Bill}, volume={27}, DOI={10.1353/rhe.2004.0022}, abstractNote={
The 1944 G.I. Bill is often thought to have democratized higher education in the United States. This paper reviews evidence showing that the G.I. Bill's impact on education enrollments was more limited than is generally recognized. It attributes the gap between the law's perceived and documented effects to the symbolism surrounding postwar educational expansion and concludes by discussing the legacy of the G.I. Bill for contemporary policies in higher education.
}, number={4}, journal={Review of Higher Education}, author={Serow, R. C.}, year={2004}, pages={481-} }
 @article{brawner_anderson_zorowski_serow_2001, title={Quality approach supports engineering education reform}, volume={34}, number={7}, journal={Quality Progress}, author={Brawner, C. E. and Anderson, T. J. and Zorowski, C. F. and Serow, R. C.}, year={2001}, pages={75–81} }
 @article{serow_2000, title={Research and teaching at a research university}, volume={40}, ISSN={["0018-1560"]}, DOI={10.1023/a:1004154512833}, number={4}, journal={HIGHER EDUCATION}, author={Serow, RC}, year={2000}, month={Dec}, pages={449–463} }
 @book{serow_2000, title={Social foundations of American education}, ISBN={0890899347}, publisher={Durham, NC: Carolina Academic Press}, author={Serow, R. C.}, year={2000} }
 @article{serow_brawner_demery_1999, title={Instructional reform at research universities: studying faculty motivation}, volume={22}, DOI={10.1353/rhe.1999.0018}, abstractNote={ Concerns about the quality of undergraduate teaching
               have focused new attention on the motives underlying
               faculty role performance at research universities. This
               article reports findings from a case study of faculty
               participation in one instructional reform coalition.
               Results indicate three distinct motivational patterns,
               corresponding roughly to variations in individuals'
               faculty status. The implications of these findings are
               considered in light of recent calls for the restructuring
               of universities' faculty rewards systems.}, number={4}, journal={Review of Higher Education}, author={Serow, R. C. and Brawner, C. E. and Demery, J.}, year={1999}, pages={411} }
 @inbook{serow_hess_abt_ukpabi_1998, title={Evaluating a web-based course}, ISBN={0536010536}, booktitle={Program evaluation handbook}, publisher={Needham Heights, Mass.: Simon & Schuster Custom Publishing}, author={Serow, R. C. and Hess, G. R. and Abt, R. C. and Ukpabi, C. V.}, year={1998}, pages={57–60} }
 @article{hess_abt_serow_1998, title={Reshaping expectations for web-based collaborative learning}, volume={7}, number={1998}, journal={Natural Resources and Environmental Issues}, author={Hess, G. R. and Abt, R. and Serow, R.}, year={1998}, pages={104–109} }
 @inbook{serow_1997, title={Research and evaluation on service-learning: The case for holistic assessment}, booktitle={Service-learning: Applications from the research}, publisher={Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Assoc.}, author={Serow, R. C.}, year={1997} }