Academic Behaviors: Cognitive and Behavioral … Behaviors: Cognitive and Behavioral Characteristics...
-
Upload
hoangxuyen -
Category
Documents
-
view
239 -
download
0
Transcript of Academic Behaviors: Cognitive and Behavioral … Behaviors: Cognitive and Behavioral Characteristics...
OFFICE OF PLANNING, RESEARCH, AND ACCREDITATION
Academic Behaviors: Cognitive and Behavioral Characteristics of
Saddleback StudentsResearch Report
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Background
During a time when global economic challenges have imposed new constraints on higher education institutionsi, the undergraduate student population has changed to include more part-time students. This has elevated the importance of community collegesii. However, a growing number of students are called away from higher education institutions, citing financial and work obligations as hurdles to gaining full-time enrollment. The implications for community colleges are far-reaching. This study was designed to unpack the rich ways in which students engage their peers and faculty, in addition to exploring differences, if any, between part-time and full-time students on measures of habits of mind. This work also looks at indicators of academic success. Broader interpretations and implications are offered for Saddleback College faculty and students. Methodology
During the Fall 2012 term, the Office of Planning, Research, and Accreditation (OPRA) developed and implemented the first Saddleback College survey related to students’ academic behaviors. The survey was distributed via email to a random sample of over 6,000 students from a list of 22,523. A total of 496 students took the survey, resulting in a 10% response rate, roughly. The instrument consists of 42 items, which cover the four general areas of students’ background, behavior, support, and outcomes. Data were analyzed using several descriptive and inferential tools. Findings
This investigation turned first to in-class behaviors and discovered that over a third to two thirds of Saddleback students indicate building a presentation for class (40.6%), preparing several drafts of an assignment prior to submission (55.9%), and integrating ideas or information on a course assignment using multiple sources (67.5%). Students report engaging their instructors through e-mail (70.5%) more frequently than not at all (6.7%) and over a third of students frequently discuss their career plans with their instructor or advisors (43.1%). Other findings indicated that part-time students made class presentations less often than their full-time counterparts, prepared fewer drafts of assignments prior to submission, and came to class more often without completing readings or assignments. Evidence highlighted that, while part-time students and full-time students tended to differ across a variety of behavioral outcomes related to their academic effort, they differed less across measures of habits of mind. Findings also revealed that part-time students were more likely than full-time students to have lower cumulative grade point averages.
P a g e | 1
Office of Planning, Research, and Accreditation
INTRODUCTION
During a time when global economic
challenges have imposed new constraints
on higher education institutionsiii, including
shrinking financial support, the
undergraduate student population has
changed to include more part-time
students. Indeed, the number of part-time
undergraduates in higher education
doubled between 1970 and 1998 (from 2.8
million to 6 million)iv, which has increased
the importance of community collegesv.
Part-time students experience several
hurdles, including more financial difficulty
than full-time students, more student loan
debt, and less participation and
engagement with the collegevi. There is a
belief that the incidence of outside
employment for students is increasing,
causing detrimental effects on academic
performancevii, an empirically supported
assertionviii, ix, x.
What’s more, certain student
outcomes are found to share strong,
positive relationships with life-long learning
and life success. As students continue to
flock to community colleges in pursuit of
transfer to four-year institutions and to
complete a degree or certificate program,
exploring such outcomes is imperative. This
is especially important as legislators have
responded to public demands for evidence
of student success by increasing measures
of accountability.
One such outcome, labeled by
investigators as “habits of mind,” refers to a
way of thinking that enables students to
efficiently identify patterns, experiment
with ideas, effectively describe complex
processes, visualize alternative solutions,
and become innovatorsxi. When students
become active practitioners of habits of
mind, they tend to persist, manage
impulsivity, practice understanding and
empathy, reflect on their thinking
(metacognition), and strive for accuracy, in
addition to engaging in many other
documented positive behaviorsxii. Skills like
these, which may also relate to students’
academic success, are cultivated through
their interactions with peers and faculty
and are practiced through course-related
assignments.
At the same time, while we know
that students are becoming increasingly
reliant on funding sources outside of higher
education, less is known about how part-
time community college students compare
to their full-time counterparts across
measures of engagement and ways of
thinking. This study was designed to unpack
the rich ways in which students engage
their peers and faculty, in addition to
exploring differences, if any, between part-
time and full-time students on measures of
habits of mind. Finally, this work looks at
indicators of academic success, while
controlling for a variety of student
background characteristics. Broader
interpretations and implications are offered
for Saddleback College faculty and students.
P a g e | 2
Office of Planning, Research, and Accreditation
3.1%
45.3%
10.1%
11.6%
11.6%
10.7%
7.6%
Figure 1. Respondents' Age
Under 18
18-24
25-29
30-39
40-49
50-59
Over 59
METHODS
Instrument. During the Fall 2012
term, the Office of Planning, Research, and
Accreditation (OPRA) developed and
implemented the first Saddleback College
survey related to students’ academic
behaviors. The development and
administration of the instrument was
spearheaded by the Office of Planning,
Research, and Accreditation (OPRA). The
initial construction of the instrument was
supported by a review of several other
fundamental measures, which helped form
this survey’s core themes. In addition to
fueling the college’s strategic planning
efforts, the instrument was designed to
holistically understand students’ academic
experiences and collected information
surrounding perceptions, academic
behaviors, and outcomes. Specifically, the
survey included items geared toward
understanding the population of students at
Saddleback College, including their
backgrounds, strategies for learning,
academic experiences, and intentions.
The survey was distributed via email
to a random sample of over 6,000 students
from a list of 22,523. The survey response
period was open from November 2012 to
January of 2013. Following the initial email
invitation to participate, three reminder
emails were distributed in November and
December of 2012 and January of 2013.
Exclusion criteria included zero registered
units or if a student had withdrawn. A total
of 496 students took the survey, resulting in
a 10% response rate, roughly. The
instrument consists of 42 items which cover
the four general areas of students’
background, behavior, support, and
outcomes.
Sample. Survey respondents were
primarily traditional college age students.
Indeed, 45.3 percent of the sample was
between the ages of 18 and 24. The
remaining respondents were evenly
distributed across age categories. It should
be noted that, for the purposes of analyses
in this report, students over the age
of 59 (Emeritus students) were
excluded from the sample. See
Figure 1 for a full break down of
respondents by age.
While nearly 40 percent of survey
respondents indicated enrollment in at
In addition to fueling the college’s strategic planning efforts, the
instrument was designed to holistically understand students’ academic
experiences and collected information surrounding perceptions,
academic behaviors, and outcomes.
P a g e | 3
Office of Planning, Research, and Accreditation
63.2%
1.2%
8.3%
12.3%
8.3%
6.7%
Figure 2. Respondents' Ethnicity
White African-American
Asian/Pacific Islander Hispanic/Latino
Other (non-white) More than one ethnicity
least 12 units, the majority of participants
were part-time students at Saddleback
College. What’s more, the majority of
respondents were female (68.4%), white
(63.2%), and native English speakers
(82.7%), with grade point averages between
3.0 and 4.0 (71.5%). Although the ethnic
composition of respondents was primarily
white, other represented groups were
Hispanic/Latino (12.3%), and Asian (7.7%)1.
See Figure 2 for descriptive information on
students’ ethnicity2.
Descriptives of the study’s sample
were compared with the population
parameters of Saddleback students to
explore potential threats to generalizability.
Specifically, the age, ethnicity, cumulative
GPA, and gender of the sample were
1 For the purpose of describing the initial sample, these figures include emeritus students. 2 The study’s sample was compared to the demographic information of the population. No noteworthy compromises to the representativeness of the sample were found.
compared with the population.
Comparisons did not reveal differences in
regard to ethnicity or age. However, the
proportion of women in the sample is much
higher than the population and the
disparity is further exaggerated by the fact
that men were underrepresented.
Consequently, results may be biased only in
regards to participants’ gender. What’s
more, a higher percentage of academically
successful students (GPA 3.01 – 4.00)
composed the sample, such that the
proportion of academically successful
students was nearly double in the sample
than in the Saddleback population. This is to
be expected, however, as GPA was a self-
reported measure.
In summary, while our findings
might not have threats to external validity
by age and ethnicity, we can reasonably
conclude that the generalizability of the
study is skewed toward academically
successful, female students. This further
confounds the study’s initial findings and
offers support to the argument that
differences between part-time and full-time
students were underestimated, which is
presented later in the report. However, GPA
was self-reported and such measures are
frequently overestimated when students
are asked to rate themselves. The disparity
between the measures of grade point
average might actually be less than
estimated here, since one measure of GPA
is not self-reported. See Tables 1, 2, 3, and
4 for a full comparison of sample
descriptives with population parameters.
P a g e | 4
Office of Planning, Research, and Accreditation
Analyses. Data were analyzed using
several descriptive and inferential tools.
First, general frequency distributions were
inspected across items to get a sense of the
nature and characteristics of student data.
General measures of distributional shape
were explored, including histograms with
superimposed normal curve distributions to
detect any significant departures from
normality. These descriptive tools were
used primarily to contextualize students’
academic behaviors. Second, categorical
variables were cross-tabulated against one
another (two-way crosstabs) so as to
uncover emergent patterns and significant
relationships between key qualitative items.
Finally, advanced multivariate techniques
were used to explore behavioral indicators
of academically successful students at the
college. No predetermination of statistical
power or sample size was made.
This exploration of students’
characteristics, behaviors, and cognitive
indicators was guided by the following
questions:
1. What is the cognitive and behavioral
nature of Saddleback students’
academic behaviors?
2. Do students’ behavioral and
cognitive indicators differ between
part-time and full-time students?
3. Which student characteristics are
predictive of academic success at
Saddleback College?
FINDINGS
Data indicate that students’
academic behaviors are reflected through
their engagements with faculty and peers,
their ways of thinking, and their preparation
for coursework.
Cognitive and Behavioral3 Indicators
Students’ self-perceptions of
course-related engagements. This
investigation turned first to in-class
behaviors, which included students’
methods of learning and engagement.
While a majority (77.8%) reported spending
at least half of their time, or more, asking
questions in class and contributing to
course discussions, 22.3% of students
indicated very low to no levels of
engagement during class. What’s more, a
third to two thirds of Saddleback students
indicate building a presentation for class
(40.6%), preparing several drafts of an
assignment prior to submission (55.9%),
and integrating ideas or information on a
course assignment using multiple sources
(67.5%). See Figure 3 for a visual
representation of said academic behaviors.
Results also suggest that students are
engaging in the classroom in other ways
conducive to their academic success.
3 In this inquiry, cognition refers to patterns of thinking, attitudes, and dispositions. Behavioral markers are referred to as directly measurable constructs (e.g., students number of hours studying, or amount of time spent perform a task).
P a g e | 5
Office of Planning, Research, and Accreditation
40.6%
55.9% 67.5%
34.3%
25.2%
22.0%
25.1% 19.0%
10.5%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Presentations Multiple Drafts Multiple Sources
Figure 3. Frequency of Academic Activities
Not at all
Infrequently
Frequently
Results revealed that a majority of
students at Saddleback College indicate
having read or completed their assignments
prior to coming to class more than half of
the time (87.4%). The majority of
Saddleback students also tend to
frequently4 discuss their grades with their
instructors (52.4%). In fact, findings
generally suggested that students at the
college are engaging their instructors in
several ways. Although students report
discussing ideas and engaging faculty
outside of class infrequently or not at all
4 The original scale on the 2012 survey instrument was divided into the four categories of more than half the time, at least half of the time, less than half of the time, or never. At places in this report, the scale was converted to frequencies, whereby frequently was conceptualized as half of the time or more.
(80.4%), they tend to perceive themselves
as working more frequently to meet
instructors’ standards or expectations
(70.4%). Likewise, students
engage their instructors through
e-mail (70.5%) more frequently
than not at all (6.7%) and over a
third of students frequently
discuss their career plans with
their instructor or advisors
(43.1%). In addition to engaging
their instructors, Saddleback
students interact with their peers
in ways that might affect their
outcomes and academic
experiences.
Data suggest that just
under half of students worked
with other students on projects during class
(47.5%). While a sizeable proportion of
students report lower levels of interaction
with their peers outside of class (52.5%),
Saddleback students appear to interact with
their classmates in other ways. For
example, the majority of students engage
one another more frequently with regard to
their religious beliefs, political opinions, and
personal values (65.8%). Apart from
engagements with faculty and peers, data
suggest that students practice certain
patterns of thinking, which may be related
to their academic success.
Students’ habits of mind and
cognitive indices of students’ academic
behavior and development. Overall,
students report engaging more frequently
in a variety of cognitive traits that may be
P a g e | 6
Office of Planning, Research, and Accreditation
75.0%
18.5%
6.5% 0.0%
10.0%
20.0%
30.0%
40.0%
50.0%
60.0%
70.0%
80.0%
Synthesize ideas, information, or experiences
Figure 4. Frequency of higher-order intellectual exercise.
Frequently Infrequently Not at all
related to their experiences and academic
behaviors at the college. The vast majority
of students report having to memorize
facts, ideas, or methods during their
coursework in order to repeat them in the
same form (75.4%), which may represent a
type of rote learning and memorization.
Indeed, 75% of Saddleback students report
spending half of their time or more
synthesizing and organizing their ideas,
information, or experiences in new ways.
Findings also revealed more frequent
engagement in higher level intellectual
tasks, like making judgments about the
value or soundness of information (70.5%),
applying concepts to practical problems
(70.5%), and using course information to
perform a new skill (81%). Overall, most
survey respondents indicated engaging in
activities related to cultivating habits of
mind about half the time or more (n =
291)5. See Figure 4.
Students’ Academic preparation
and investments. Data are variable in
regard to the extent to which students
prepare for their academic and intellectual
pursuits6. The majority of survey
respondents report having between one
and four assigned textbooks or similar
course materials during a term (51.1%),
while the remainder of students reported
having more than five textbooks per term.
Also, just over half of students indicate
having to write term papers longer than five
pages (50.9%).
An inspection of a Pearson’s r
correlation matrix revealed several
statistically significant relationships
between the three previously mentioned
academic demands and students’ effort. For
instance, results suggest that the more
books that Saddleback faculty assign to
students, the more likely students are to
report reading for pleasure (r = .11, p < .05),
and engage more frequently in writing
course papers (r = .33, p < .01)7. Likewise,
students who are assigned more course
readings and writings are likely to devote
5 This figure was extracted from a frequency distribution for the item labeled as synthesizing and organizing ideas, information, or experiences in new ways. 6 Nearly 60% of this study’s sample consisted of part-time students. There is reason to believe that part-time students may behave differently than their full-time counterparts. 7 It should be noted that these findings do not imply causality, as all data were collected at a single point in time and other experimental criteria were not met in the design of this investigation.
P a g e | 7
Office of Planning, Research, and Accreditation
3.08
3.40
2.9
3
3.1
3.2
3.3
3.4
3.5
Full-time Students Part-time Students
Figure 5. Mean frequencies of coming to class unprepared.
more time to prepare for class (r = .22, p <
.01). On the other hand, students who felt
they had more course writings were less
likely to spend time synthesizing new
information (r = -.17, p < .01), less likely to
apply theories or concepts to practical
problems (r = -.11, p < .05), and less likely to
think critically and analytically (r = -.16, p <
.01)8.
To more fully unpack these
descriptive patterns regarding students’
course-related engagements, ways of
thinking, and academic preparations, this
study turned to the second question: Do
students’ behavioral and cognitive
indicators differ by their background
characteristics? To answer this question,
differences were explored by part-time
status.
Students’ Background Characteristics
Part-time versus full-time students.
There is reason to suspect that this study’s
descriptive findings might be explained, at
least in part, by a student’s enrollment
status, as a large portion of the sample
consisted of students enrolled in fewer
than 12 units of coursework. Specifically,
55.9% of the study’s sample consisted of
part-time students, compared to 52% at
Saddleback. Prior to exploring group
differences, students’ reasons for not
enrolling full-time were explored. Data
indicate that while 39.4% of participants
8 While some study variables were found to have a significant relationship, the strength of such variables was no stronger than moderate.
did not intend to enroll full-time, nearly 8%
of students wanted to enroll full-time, but
classes were already full. Of students that
did not intend to enroll full-time, 18.3%
reported having work obligations, 5.5%
expressed financial worries, and 5% had
concerns about their academic success. To
further explore differences between full-
time and part-time status, t-tests were run
on the data with attention to examining
variance equality between groups. See
Appendix A for a full display of difference
testing between the two groups.
Results revealed that part-time and
full-time students differed from one
another across several outcomes. A two-
tailed significance test indicated that part-
time students made class presentations less
often than their full-time counterparts (t =
-2.61, p < .05), prepared fewer drafts of
assignments prior to submission (t = -3.46, p
< .01, and came to class more often without
completing readings or assignments (t =
-3.89, p < .01). See Figure 5 for a graphical
representation of group
means.
P a g e | 8
Office of Planning, Research, and Accreditation
Further analysis of group differences
on academic behaviors showed that part-
time students tended to work less with
classmates outside of class (t = -5.27, p <
.01), to communicate with instructors less
via e-mail (t = -2.90, p < .01), and to discuss
grades or assignments with faculty less
frequently than their full-time colleagues (t
= -3.05, p < .01). Following academic
behaviors, students’ patterns of thinking
was explored.
Habits of mind comparisons
between part-time and full-time students.
Evidence highlighted that while part-
time students and full-time students tended
to differ across a variety of behavioral
outcomes related to their academic effort,
they differed less across measures of habits
of mind. That is, both student subgroupings
are more similar than they are different on
estimates of analytical thinking, including
their evaluation of the value or soundness
of information, and the application of
theoretical concepts to new problems.
Although part-time and full-time
students did not differ across complex ways
of thinking and knowing, they did
differentially engage their peers in ways
that influence their beliefs and attitudes.
Results suggest that full-time students have
serious conversations with classmates who
differ in religious, political, and personal
beliefs more frequently than part-time
students (t = -4.24, p < .01). Likewise, on
average, part-time students had fewer
conversations with students of a different
race or ethnicity than their full-time
counterparts (t = -3.90, p < .01). Given that
results suggested several differences across
both attitudinal and behavioral measures of
part-time and full-time students, this
investigation was interested with regard to
the extent to which such markers shared
relationships with tangible student
outcomes, like grade point average. Turning
to this study’s final interest, data were
analyzed to respond to the following
question: Which student characteristics are
predictive of academic success at
Saddleback College?
Demarcating Academic Success
Data were analyzed using an ordinal,
logistic regression technique, or a
proportional odds modeling approach, to
understand how student characteristics
contributed to their success at Saddleback
College. As mentioned, this was done given
emergent findings which suggested
significant differences in students’ attitudes
and behaviors. As part of the iterative
model-building process, students’ full-time
and part-time statuses were inspected first.
Findings revealed that part-time students
were more likely than full-time students to
have lower cumulative grade point averages
(GPA’s9), such that the odds of obtaining
GPA’s between 3.01 and 4.00 versus the
combined lower categories of GPA are 0.61
times lower for part-time students
compared to full-time students. Likewise,
the odds for full-time students earning
9 Cumulative grade point average was self-reported and the case for bias and confound could be made.
P a g e | 9
Office of Planning, Research, and Accreditation
Figure 6. Cumulative percentages of Latino and white students.
GPA’s of the combined lower, less
academically successful categories is 0.61
times lower for full-time students than for
part-time students.
To gain a richer portrait of
academically successful Saddleback
students, several other behavioral and
attitudinal measures were added into the
model in an iterative fashion. Findings
suggest that more academically
successful students at the college
(i.e., students with higher
cumulative grade point averages)
tended to be older, to engage more
frequently in new ways that
synthesized and organized course-
related information, and came to
class with completed assignments
more often.
Finally, students’ ethnicity
was explored to determine group
differences in academic
achievement. White students
served as the reference group. For
some, students’ ethnic
background was found to share
relationship with their academic success.
Asian and Latino students were found to
generally have lower cumulative GPAs than
their white counterparts. For instance, the
odds for Latino students of earning lower
GPA’s (i.e., combined categories of 0 – 3.00)
were 3.75 times higher than for white
students. See Figure 6 for a graphical
representation of Latino and white
students’ cumulative percentages grouped
by GPA categories10. Other student
background characteristics did not emerge
as significant predictors11 of their academic
success. Taken together, these findings
offer important implications and
conclusions for Saddleback college and
student success.
This exploration into Saddleback
students’ academic lives responded to three
questions. Results revealed that students’ 10 Although this significant finding in relation to a student’s ethnic background suggests that ethnicity plays an important role in students’ academic achievement, other races were not explored or controlled for as a consequence of very low group sizes. 11 Chi-square values of both the test of parallel lines and goodness of fit were inspected to determine whether or not a major assumption of the preferred test was met. It was concluded that no anomalies were found and assumptions were satisfied.
P a g e | 10
Office of Planning, Research, and Accreditation
generally came to class prepared, used a
variety of techniques to learn, and more
often called upon higher-order thinking
skills to synthesize and generalize course-
related information. Findings also
demonstrated differences between part-
time and full-time students in terms of their
engagement with peers and faculty and
differences between ethnic groups in terms
of their achievement. There are three
overarching implications for Saddleback
College, connected to this study.
Implications
First, the characteristics and nature
of students learning techniques offer
implications for college faculty. Provided
that nearly a quarter of students indicate
low to no active engagement or
participation in class, faculty might reflect
on current teaching practices. Engagement
and participation, for instance, might be
maximized with a more student-centered
pedagogyxiii, like the Socratic methodxiv.
Evidence suggests that implementing a
more student-centered teaching
approachxv, one that moves away from
lecture formatting, elevates student
engagement. Similarly, faculty ought to
consider diversifying types of assignments
for students, such that course objectives
require a variety of types of evidence of
student learning.
Second, the patterns of students’
course-related participation and habits of
mind suggest that some practices might
provide stronger benefits to students. For
instance, the finding that students who felt
they had more course writings were less
likely to spend time synthesizing new
information, less likely to apply concepts to
practical problems, and less likely to think
critically and analytically ought to be
interpreted carefully by faculty considering
any shifts in their methods and techniques.
It is likely not the case that written
assignments do not cultivate students’
habits of mindxvi, but might be stronger
indicator of a different student profile.
Third, faculty and administration
must consider the assertion that part-time
students are less likely to persist than their
full-time counterpartsxvii. Students with a
part-time enrollment status are more likely
to experience personal and financial
barriers than full-time studentsxviii. Such
barriers might explain the finding that part-
time students tended to prepare fewer
drafts of assignments prior to submission
and came to class more often without
completing readings or assignments. This
was further evidenced by the fact that the
majority of part-time students indicated
work as the primary reason for preventing
them from enrolling full-time.
Work and other factors identified
from this inquiry as preventing students
from enrolling full-time also may explain
the significant differences in regards to
their peer engagements. This study found
that full-time students have serious
conversations with peers who differ in
religious, political, and personal beliefs
more frequently than part-time students.
P a g e | 11
Office of Planning, Research, and Accreditation
As mentioned, part-time students
experience a host of obligations that call
them away from the college campus, which
might disable them in regards to their
engagement with their colleagues. It is,
also, important to note that, while part-
time and full-time students engaged
similarly across several measures, like
habits of mind, the sample of this study was
predominantly composed of students with
GPA’s higher than 3.0. It is likely the case,
therefore, that those measures highlighting
similarities between part-time and full-time
students are overestimated, given that
respondents across the sample tended to
be academically successful. This further
suggests that estimates of differences might
also be underestimated, with students’
mean level of academic success weighting
down differences across measures.
Finally, two general
recommendations for future empirical
inquiry are offered to help complicate our
understanding of Saddleback students’
academic experiences. First, data must be
collected longitudinally so as to develop
strong baseline measures of students’
incoming traits. Second, student-level data
should be connected to faculty-level data,
like perceptions of student behaviors and
general goals for education. Such an
undertaking allows for a clearer image of a
variety of educational phenomena to
emerge, including the effects of course
characteristics on student learning.
P a g e | 12
Office of Planning, Research, and Accreditation
Table 1
Comparison between sample and population by age
Frequency Percent Frequency Percent
Below 18 721 3% 10 3%
18-21 9951 36% 148 45%
22-29 5967 22% 33 10%
30-39 2364 9% 38 12%
40-49 1666 6% 38 12%
50-59 1519 6% 35 11%
Over 59 5097 19% 25 8%
Undefined 4 0%
Grand Total 27289 100% 327 100%
Table 2
Comparison between sample and population by ethnicity
Frequency Percent Frequency Percent
African American 519 2% 4 1%
Asian 2670 10% 25 8%
Decline to State 1377 5% 12 4%
Hispanic / Latino 2760 10% 40 12%
Middle Eastern 30 0% 12 4%
Mixed Ethnicity 3513 13% 22 7%
Native American 76 0% 1 0%
Other Non-White 32 0% 2 1%
Pacific Islander 59 0% 2 1%
White, Non-Hispanic 16253 60% 206 63%
Grand Total 27289 100% 326 100%
Table 3
Comparison between sample and population by gender
Frequency Percent Frequency Percent
Decline 437 2% unknown unknown
Female 15727 58% 225 68%
Male 11125 41% 104 32%
Grand Total 27289 100% 329 100%
Table 4
Comparison between sample and population by GPA
Population
Frequency Percent Frequency Percent
0.00-1.00 5347 20% 3 1%
1.01-2.00 3181 12% 12 4%
2.01-3.00 7711 28% 78 24%
3.01-4.00 11050 40% 233 71%
Grand Total 27289 100% 326 100%
Sample
Population
Population
Population Sample
Sample
Sample
P a g e | 13
Office of Planning, Research, and Accreditation
Table 5
Differences between part-time and full-time students across select academic behaviors and habits of mind
Academic Behaviors FT Student mean Sig.
Asked questions in class or contributed to class discussions
Made a class presentation *
Prepared two or more drafts of a paper or assignment **
before submission
Worked on a paper or project that required integrating ideas *
from multiple sources
Came to class without completing readings or assignments ***
Worked with other students on projects during class **
Worked with classmates outside of class to prepare assignments ***
Tutored or taught other students *
Participated in a community-based project as part of a course **
project
Used the internet or instant-messaging to work on an assignment **
Used e-mail to communicate with an instructor **
Discussed grades or an assignment with an instructor **
Talked about career plans with an instructor or advisor
Discussed ideas from your readings or classes with instructors
outside of class
Received prompt feedback from instructors on your performance
Worked harder than you thought you could to meet an instructor's
standards or expectations
Worked with instructors on activities other than coursework
Discussed ideas from readings or class with others outside of class
(students, family members, co-workers, etc)
Habits of Mind and Thinking Patterns
Had serious conversations with students of a different race or ***
ethnicity other than your own
Had serious conversations with students who differ in terms of ***
their religious beliefs, political opinions, or personal value
Skipped class
Memorizing facts, ideas, or methods from course and readings **
Analyzing basic elements of an idea, experience, or theory
Synthesizing and organizing ideas, information, or experiences
Making judgments about the value or soundness of information
arguments, or methods
Applying theories or concepts to practical problems or in new
situations
Using information you have read or heard to perform a new skill
*p <.05 **p <.01 ***p <.001
1.71
3.42
1.73
1.72
1.91
1.89
1.86
1.99
2.02
3.41
2.13
2.30
2.56
3.16
1.84
1.79
2.21
2.59
3.08
1.91
1.78
1.82
2.542.18
1.91
3.09
2.35
2.53
3.26
3.01
3.53
2.04
1.90
1.94
2.07
3.24
2.05
2.10
3.58
2.30
2.74
3.45
3.47
2.18
2.07
2.51
2.73
PT Student mean1.79
2.80
2.54
2.16
3.39
2.65
3.06
P a g e | 14
Office of Planning, Research, and Accreditation
Appendix A
2012 Academic Behaviors Survey Instrument
1. Did you begin at Saddleback or at another college?
•Started here
•Started somewhere else
2. Is this your first semester at Saddleback College? (yes, no)
3. Thinking about this current academic term, how would you describe your enrollment at Saddleback
College?
• Full-time (I am enrolled in at least 12 units)
•Part-time (I am enrolled in less than 12 units)
•It was not my intent to enroll full-time (in at least 12 units)
4. What is the primary reason you have chosen to enroll part-time (in less than 12 units)?
•I wanted to enroll full-time (in at least 12 units), but the classes I needed
were already full
•I wanted to enroll full-time (in at least 12 units), but the class I needed were not offered at
times that would work with my schedule
•It was not my intent to enroll full-time (in at least 12 units)
5. If it was not your intent to enroll full-time (in at least 23 units), what was your reason?
•Work
•Other commitments
•Finances
•Concerns about academic success
•Other
6. When choosing classes in which to enroll, please indicate how frequently you do any of the
following when you register for the term. (always, often, seldom, never)
•Select a class schedule that is based upon the requirements to meet educational goals
or program requirements
•Make an appointment with a counselor to discuss appropriate classes in which to enroll
•Use online sources (such as ratemyprofessor.com) to make a decision about registering for
classes
•Select classes based upon your work schedule
•Look for online classes rather than traditional classes
•Try to enroll in the same classes friends are taking
•Select classes based upon knowledge about the instructor and course material
•Look for courses at other colleges when courses at Saddleback are full
•Register for short-term classes (fewer than 16 weeks)
•Refer to your academic plan when selecting classes
•Discuss the classes you are thinking about taking with an instructor
•Look for classes offered on campus during the late afternoon or evening
•Discuss the classes you are thinking about taking with your friends
•Look for classes offered on campus during the day
•Take into consideration pre-requisite or placement recommendations prior to enrolling
•Look for classes offered on campus on the weekend
7. Thinking about your experiences at Saddleback College during the current term, about how often
have you done each of the following? (more than half the time, about half the time, less than
half the time, never)
P a g e | 15
Office of Planning, Research, and Accreditation
P a g e | 16
Office of Planning, Research, and Accreditation
P a g e | 17
Office of Planning, Research, and Accreditation
P a g e | 18
Office of Planning, Research, and Accreditation
P a g e | 19
Office of Planning, Research, and Accreditation
REFERENCES ii Pascarella, E. T., & Terenzini, P. T. (1997). Studying college students in the 21st century: Meeting new challenges. The Review of Higher Education, 21(2), 151-165. iii Slaughter, S., & Rhoades, G. (2004). Academic capitalism and the new economy: Markets, state, and higher education. JHU Press. iv O'Toole, D. M., Stratton, L. S., & Wetzel, J. N. (2003). A longitudinal analysis of the frequency of part-time enrollment and the persistence of students who enroll part time. Research in Higher Education, 44(5), 519-537. v Pascarella, E. T., & Terenzini, P. T. (1997). Studying college students in the 21st century: Meeting new challenges. The Review of Higher Education, 21(2), 151-165. vi Callender, C., & Kemp, M. (2000). Changing Student Finances: Income, Expenditure and Take-up of Student Loans among Full-and Part-time higher education students in 1998/9. vii Ford, J., Bosworth, D., & Wilson, R. (1995). Part-time work and full-time higher education. Studies in Higher Education, 20(2), 187-202. viii Hunt, A., Lincoln, I., & Walker, A. (2004). Term-time employment and academic attainment: evidence from a large-scale survey of undergraduates at Northumbria University. Journal of Further and Higher Education, 28(1), 3-18. ix Callender, C. (2008). The impact of term-time employment on higher education students’ academic attainment and achievement. Journal of Education Policy, 23(4), 359-377. x Metcalf, H. (2003). Increasing inequality in higher education: the role of term-time working. Oxford Review of Education, 29(3), 315-329. xi Cuoco, A., Paul Goldenberg, E., & Mark, J. (1996). Habits of mind: An organizing principle for mathematics curricula. The Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 15(4), 375-402.
xii Costa, A. L., & Kallick, B. (Eds.). (2009). Habits of mind across the curriculum: Practical and creative strategies for teachers. ASCD. xiii Kain, D. J. (2003). Teacher-centered versus student-centered: Balancing constraint and theory in the composition classroom. Pedagogy, 3(1), 104-108. xiv Hawkins-Leon, C. G. (1998). Socratic Method-Problem Method Dichotomy: The Debate Over Teaching Method Continues, The. BYU Educ. & LJ, 1. xv Land, S. M., & Hannafin, M. J. (2000). Student-centered learning environments. Theoretical foundations of learning environments, 1-23. xvi Paul, R. (1992). Critical thinking: What, why, and how. New Directions for Community Colleges, 1992(77), 3-24. xvii Laird, T. F. N., & Cruce, T. M. (2009). Individual and environmental effects of part-time enrollment status on student-faculty interaction and self-reported gains. The Journal of Higher Education, 80(3), 290-314. xviii King, J. E. (2003). Nontraditional attendance and persistence: The cost of students' choices. New Directions for Higher Education, 2003(121), 69-83.