1 / 34

Using social support and engagement to promote two-year college success Alan M. “Woody” Schwitzer

Using social support and engagement to promote two-year college success Alan M. “Woody” Schwitzer. American College Personnel Association March 2014 – Indianapolis, IN Commission for Counseling & Psychological Services Sponsored Program.

marlis
Download Presentation

Using social support and engagement to promote two-year college success Alan M. “Woody” Schwitzer

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Using social support and engagement to promote two-year college successAlan M. “Woody” Schwitzer American College Personnel Association March 2014 – Indianapolis, IN Commission for Counseling & Psychological Services Sponsored Program

  2. A well-established role of American community colleges is to provide educational and developmental opportunities that meet the learning needs of a wide range of constituents (Schwitzer, Ancis, & Brown, 2001). Two-year college missions include serving as catalysts for individuals’ academic achievement, career development, and ability to fill important life roles. Correspondingly, the job of college student personnel working in community college settings is to conceive and implement institutional practices and individual services which support learner success (Miller & Tuttle, 2007; Schwitzer, Ancis, & Brown, 2001).

  3. In turn, to achieve the learner success outcomes articulated by community college missions, professionals need best practices that are potentially effective with two-year campuses’ unique learner constituencies. Specifically, community college personnel, faculty, and leaders should have frameworks, constructs, and program strategies that have the potential for success in developmental courses, in orientation classes, during two-year academic disciplines, and among important specialized student populations.

  4. However, finding evidence about which strategies for supporting students – and producing outcomes including retention, academic success, and attainment of students’ goals – has been unusually difficult for community colleges. The approaches found successful on four-year campuses often do not produce hoped-for outcomes at two-year institutions (Bailey & Alfonso, 2005; Pascarella & Terenzini, 2005).Even so, social support and engagement – which are widely recognized as useful strategies for, and valuable predictors of, success on four-year campuses – are potentially important for community colleges, too.

  5. Social Support and Engagement: Background & Context – Major Four-Year College Best Practices Perception of the college climate, and engagement in the college interpersonal environment, are well-established factors in four-year adjustment, persistence, and success. More positive social experiences tend to be associated with greater student engagement in educational experiences and in the learning process and, in turn, academic success (Astin, 1993; Hu & Kuh, 2002, 2003).

  6. Social Support and Engagement: Background & Context – Student Development “Heavy Hitters” • Chickering (1969) and subsequent works up to the present: • Engage learners • Require interaction with other individuals • Perry (1970) and subsequent works up to the present: • Learners are supported by warm interpersonal environments • Kohlberg (1984) and subsequent works up to the present: • Expose individuals to social environments with diverse others

  7. Social Support and Engagement: Background & Context – Ongoing Four-Year Research on Adjustment and Student Success • Schwitzer, McGovern, & Robbins (1991). Adjustment outcomes of a freshman seminar. JCSD, 32, 484-489. • Schwitzer, Robbins, & McGovern (1993). Influences of goal instability and social support on college adjustment. JCSD, 34, 23-25. • Schwitzer, Grogan, Kaddoura, & Ochoa (1993). Effects of brief mandatory counseling on help-seeking and academic success among at-risk college students. JCSD, 34, 401-405.

  8. Schwitzer, Ancis, Brown (2001). Promoting student learning and student development at a distance. ACPA Books and Media/University Press of America: Lanham, MD. Jurgens & Schwitzer (2002). Designing, implementing, and evaluating a service-learning component in human services education. Human Service Education, 22, 35-45. Mohammadi, Schwitzer, & Nunnery (2010). Examining the effects of residence and gender on student adjustment in Iran: Implications for college psychotherapists. J College Student Psychotherapy, 24, 59-72.

  9. Taken Together #1: Two Powerful Tools for Promoting Student Adjustment and Success Using Psychosocial Support (Tricket & Moos, Moos & Colleagues): 1. Faculty/Teacher/Staff Support! 2. Peer Affiliation!

  10. Taken Together #2 – One Step Further: Curvilinear Effects of Social Support on Student Adjustment and Success (Schwitzer, Robbins, & Colleagues):

  11. So What About Two-Year Colleges? • Unfortunately, very little has appeared in the college student development literature to inform community college practice in these ways. In fact, historically, whereas community colleges educate about 44% of undergraduate students in the United States (American Association of Community Colleges, 2009), only 5% of educational research focusing on student adjustment, development, or learning has addressed community colleges (Pascarella & Terenzini, 2005; Schwitzer & Burnett, 2011).

  12. So What About Two-Year Colleges? • Further, many of the studies which have been published have produced only limited results or mixed findings; often the models tested in the research have proved less successful, less illuminating, or less helpful with community college populations than with the four-year college and university counterparts on whom the models were based (Bailey & Alfonso, 2005; Pascarella & Terenzini, 2005).

  13. So Let’s See What We Can Find Out! – The Emerging Research Program • Effect of outside employment, stress, and social support levels on academic success among full-time associate degree nursing students • Factors affecting Native American community college students’ intent to persist: collaboration, faculty-interaction, support for learners, campus engagement • Effects of psychosocial interaction via learning communities on developmental community college student satisfaction and achievement • Effects on psychosocial support via first-year student orientation on learner success

  14. Effect of outside employment, stress, and social support levels on academic success among full-time associate degree nursing students • J. Moore investigated the effects of hours of outside employment, career-related vs. non-career related outside employment, perceived stress levels, and levels of social support on the academic achievement of 208 associate degree nursing students at 5 two-year colleges. • It was thought that a curvilinear relationship in hours worked, higher hours of career-related work, higher hours for non-traditional learners, higher hours for those with less stress (Nurse Entrance Test, NET, Stress Index), and higher hours for those with higher support (Support Dimension Scale, SDS) – all would be found on academic achievement.

  15. GLASS HALF FULL FOR SOCIAL SUPPORT! (IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTITIONERS):Based on ANOVA analyses, contrary to previous findings for four-year students, a curvilinear effect of hours worked, type of work, whether non-traditional or traditional, etc., all were slightly significant factors, at best, in academic achievement.However, perceptions of social support did have a statistically significant effect on academic achievement (p < .001). Specifically, as predicted, higher levels of social support allowed students, particularly non-traditional students, to maintain satisfactory academic performance while being employed. That is, the mean difference in GPA among those reporting low, medium, and high social support was statistically significant. As the student reports increasing support from the college, community, or friends and family, GPA tends to rise.

  16. GLASS HALF EMPTY FOR SOCIAL SUPPORT? (IMPLICATIONS FOR OUTCOME ASSESSMENT PROFESSIONALS):Still, in this project, social support accounted for only 7% of the variance in GPA.

  17. Factors affecting Native American community college students’ intent to persist: collaboration, faculty-interaction, support for learners, campus engagement • G. Williams investigated whether academic challenge, active & collaborative learning, student effort, student-faculty interaction, support for learners, and/or engagement in campus activities were associated with the intent to persist of about 5300 Native American two-year students completing the national Community College Student Report (CCCSE, 2008, 2009, 2010). • It was thought that these factors each might contribute to Native American learners intentions regarding persistence.

  18. GLASS HALF FULL FOR SOCIAL SUPPORT! (IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTITIONERS):Based on multiple regression analyses, among the variables investigated, a statistically significant regression equation was found – with student-faculty interaction; support for learners; and learner involvement in campus activities all were statistically significant predictors (p < .01) of intent to persist. [Bivariate and partial correlations and further analyses were completed to confirm these findings].

  19. GLASS HALF EMPTY FOR SOCIALSUPPORT? (IMPLICATIONS FOR OUTCOME ASSESSMENT PROFESSIONALS):Still, in this project, student-faculty interactions; support for learners; and learner involvement in campus activities each accounted for only 1% of the variance in intent to persist.

  20. Effects of psychosocial interaction via learning communities on developmental student satisfaction and achievement • E. Wilmer investigated the types of interactions experienced by two-year learners in developmental English courses using a learning community format vs. those using a conventional non-learning community format – and whether satisfaction, academic achievement, and retention are influenced by levels of academic and social interaction, and the different course formats – among 120 two-year students in 9 developmental English classes at a rural community college (50 learning community class students, & 70 conventional class participants).

  21. Effects of psychosocial interaction via learning communities on developmental student satisfaction and achievement • It was thought that the learning community option would lead to greater faculty support and greater peer interaction, which in turn would lead to better academic adjustment and retention (using the Classroom Environment Scale, CES, Institutional Integration Scale, IIS, & SACQ).

  22. GLASS HALF FULL FOR SOCIAL SUPPORT! (IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTITIONERS):Based on independent t-tests, ANOVA and multiple regression analyses, statistically significant differences were found between learning community format classes and conventional classes for: level of peer interaction, level of faculty interaction, perceived faculty concern, and peer affiliation in the classroom (all significant at p < .01) with learning community students reporting greater support experiences.Further, as a general summary, faculty concern, faculty interaction and peer interaction all were strongly statistically significantly associated with academic achievement in the developmental course. Here, for example, as much as 24% of variance in achievement of a failing grade in the course was attributable to a negative relationship with faculty support.

  23. GLASS HALF EMPTY, TOO? (IMPLICATIONS FOR FURTHER STUDY):On the other hand, the social support variables were found to be only modestly associated with retention (p<.05) and none of these variables appeared to account for more than 4% of the variable in retention.

  24. Effects on psychosocial support via first-year student orientation on learner success • A. Ellis-O’Quinn investigated the effects of participating in a first-year orientation (a type of support intervention) to determine whether first-year students taking a supportive orientation course in their first semester would experience higher GPAs and greater retention than their peers not taking orientation in their first semester. Data for 1398 students (568 in orientations, 830 not enrolled in orientations) over 3 years (2007, 2008, 2009). • It was thought that participating the support experience of orientation would be associated with higher semester GPAs and greater retention.

  25. GLASS HALF FULL FOR SOCIAL SUPPORT (IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTITIONERS):Based on ANCOVA and logistic regression analyses, participating in first-semester orientation was statistically significantly associated with higher semester academic achievement in the form of GPA (p<.05).

  26. GLASS HALF EMPTY, TOO? (IMPLICATIONS FOR FURTHER STUDY):On the other hand, the amount of variance in GPA accounted for by orientation was minimal (about 1%); and orientation was not significantly associated with retention into the subsequent semester (however, semester GPA was a predictor of enrollment in the subsequent semester).

  27. SOCIAL SUPPORT ON TWO-YEAR CAMPUSES:SHOWING PROMISE BUT CHALLENGING TO DEMONSTRATE! SOCIAL SUPPORT AND ENGAGEMENT PRACTICES AND EXPERIENCES ON YOUR CAMPUS!

  28. VARIABLES! VARIABLES! VARIABLES! USING A FRAMEWORK TO MAKE OUR EVALUATION STUDIES LESS NOISY AND MORE PRECISE – TO HOPEFULLY BETTER SHOW THE BENEFITS OF OUR PRACTICES

  29. For assessment professionals, the variability in two-year students (demographics, goal-directions, circumstances, academic experiences) often makes outcome evaluation challenging and sometimes elusive. There may be a need for a framework or system to remind us to very carefully narrow and define our target populations – in other to make evaluation studies less noisy and more precise.

  30. Schwitzer, Pribesh, Ellis-O’Quinn, Huber, & Wilmer (In press). Community college counseling: Why are research outcomes so elusive? Journal of College Counseling. • Schwitzer (2009). Adapting to student social and health needs: Suggested framework for building inclusive models of practice. Journal of American College Health, 58, 5-10. • See the presentation handout!

  31. 1. Prepare to conduct a research or evaluation project assessing community college outcomes.2. Ask whether the research questions or hypotheses can be reasonable expected to be equally answered or confirmed – to be equally valid and useful – with all of the constituent populations comprising the sample of interest.

  32. 3. Ask 3 critical inclusivity questions:Are the results expected to apply accurately to all students?Are the results expected to apply accurately to all students but to be potentially insufficient for explaining some student needs or outcomes?Are the results expected to apply accurately to some groups but to be potentially inaccurate for others? [Including high, medium, low risk groups]4.Conduct the project on the basis of the critical inclusivity questions about population-specific student needs or outcomes.

  33. Alan M. “Woody” SchwitzerLicensed Psychologist and Professor of CounselingOld Dominion University aschwitz@odu.edu 757-683-3251

  34. Please Rate This Session in Guidebook • Find this session in Guidebook • Scroll to bottom and click on “Rate this session” • Complete Session Feedback Form

More Related