Hội nhập Đại học và Kiệt sức Sinh viên: So sánh Sinh viên Chuyển tiếp và Nội trú

COLLEGE ADJUSTMENT AND BURNOUT AMONG UNDERGRADUATE TRANSFER AND NATIVE STUDENTS by ECKART WERTHER (Under the Direction of Edward Delgado-Romero) ABSTRACT The present study explored between and within group differences among native and transfer student groups on measures of adjustment and burnout. The study also explored how specific variables impact transfer student adjustment and sought to determine if a relationship exists between college adjustment and student burnout. Three-hundred sixty five undergraduate native and transfer students enrolled in a college of agriculture at a large southeastern public institution were administered The Student Adaptation to College Questionnaire (SACQ; Baker & Siryk, 1989) and the Maslach Burnout Inventory- Student Survey (MBI-SS; Schaufeli et al. The results obtained in this study suggest that transfer students are experiencing more difficulty adjusting to the social and institutional demands of the university than do native students.

The study also revealed that students in the college of agriculture are experiencing moderately elevated levels of emotional exhaustion. Finally, the results of the study identified a significant correlation between college adjustment and student burnout. The relationship identified suggests that students are less likely to develop burnout symptomatology if they are better adjusted to their higher educational institution. The results of the present study may be beneficial for college administrators, faculty and staff who work with transfer student populations.

The results could inform the development of programs and intervention strategies to use with students experiencing adjustment difficulties and/or symptoms of burnout. INDEX WORDS: Transfer students, college adjustment, student burnout, college student retention. COLLEGE ADJUSTMENT AND BURNOUT AMONG UNDERGRADUATE TRANSFER AND NATIVE STUDENTS by ECKART WERTHER B., University of North Alabama, 2001 M., Alabama A&M University, 2006 COLLEGE ADJUSTMENT AND BURNOUT AMONG UNDERGRADUATE TRANSFER AND NATIVE STUDENTS by ECKART WERTHER Major Professor: Edward A. Delgado-Romero Committee: Rosemary E.

Bertrand TABLE OF CONTENTS Page CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION .1 Statement of the Problem .13 Purpose of the Study .16 Definition of Terms.19 Research Questions and Hypotheses .22 Student Integration Model .22 Adjustment to College .26 College Student Adjustment and Burnout .30 College Student Enrollment Patterns .33 Reasons Students Transfer .35 Two-Year Institutions and Vertical Transfers .36 Transfer Student Adjustment and Burnout .39 3 METHODOLOGY AND PROCEDURES .44 iv Target Population .45 Data Collection Procedures.47 Methods of Data Analysis .53 Description of the Sample .59 5 SUMMARY, IMPLICATIONS, & COCLUSIONS .65 Summary of Findings.74 Recommendations for Future Research .100 D Informed Consent Statement .104 vi LIST OF TABLES Page Table 1 Gender of Participants .54 Table 2 Ethnic/Racial make-up of Participants .54 Table 3 Participant time at UGA and Class Standing .55 Table 4 Academic Probation Status of Participants .55 Table 5 Student Employment and Mean Hours Worked .55 Table 6 Transfer Status of Participants .56 Table 7 Transfer Student Gender, Race/Ethnicity, and Class Standing .57 Table 8 Transfer Student Time at UGA, Transfer Credit, and Transfer GPA .57 Table 9 Transfer Student Employment and Mean Hours Worked .58 Table 10 Means, Standard Deviations, and Alpha Values for SACQ and MBI-SS .59 Table 11 Adjustment and Burnout Differences Based on Student Type .61 Table 12 Adjustment and Burnout Differences Based on Academic Probation Status .63 Table 13 Correlation Coefficients for SACQ and MBI-SS .64 vii CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION Policymakers, institutional personnel, employers, and educational researchers at various levels in higher education have become increasingly concerned with the retention of students (Wlazelek & Coulter, 1999; Bean, 2001; Ishitani, 2008). Although there have been increases in undergraduate college enrollment and various retention strategies implemented, low rates of academic achievement and high levels of attrition persist (Devonport & Lane, 2006; Lloyd, Tienda, & Zajacova, 2001; Tinto, 1993, as cited in Hsieh, Sullivan, & Guerra, 2007). Academic achievement refers to a student’s performance in scholarly related activities, a student’s ability to obtain a high grade point average (GPA), and may include accomplishments such as graduation (Brown, Lent, & Larkin, 1989; Armstrong, 2006; Answers. In an effort to assure continued institutional support and flow of revenue from the payment of tuition, institutions of higher education seek to have low rates of attrition (Bean, 2001).

Twenty-to-thirty percent of students do not return following their first year in college and an additional 20-30 percent will not return after their second year (Grayson & Grayson ,2003; Hamilton & Hamilton, 2006). Some estimates suggest that as many as 50 percent of students who enter higher education never earn a degree (Seidman, 2005) and that attrition rates as high as 20 percent are not uncommon at many institutions (Gerds & Mallinckrodt, 1994). Attrition Student attrition in higher education is a complex problem involving the interaction of numerous variables. Due to the many different causes and forms of attrition, it is difficult to 1 clearly define (Edwards, Cangemi, & Kowalski, 1990; Polansky, Horan, & Hanish, 1993; McGrath & Braunstein, 1997).

Voluntary withdrawals, non-continuous enrollment, transferring to another institution, and/or academic failure are all considered to be a type of attrition (Wintre, Bowers, Gordner, & Lange, 2006; Ishitani, 2008). Due to these numerous forms of departure, attrition rates may group a diverse set of factors and/or populations which have very little in common. Tinto (1975) asserted that the inadequate definition of student departure has led to the lumping together of behaviors that are very different in character. Due to the many variables involved, attrition rates are misleading and may vary from one institution to the next (Astin, 1997; Grayson et al, 2003).

A better understanding of the factors that contribute to college success (and failure) is needed (Proctor et al, 2006). Factors impacting attrition Although high school GPA and standardized test scores have been traditionally used as predictors of college performance (Proctor et al., 2006), researchers have identified numerous factors that impact attrition and a student’s ability to succeed in college (Petry & Craft, 1976; Edwards, Cangemi, & Kowalski, 1990; Proctor, Prevatt, Adams, Hurst, & Petscher, 2006). Some have suggested that attrition rates may be attributed to one of three general factors: the failings of the student, the failing of the university, and/or a combination of both (Wintre et al, 2006).d) suggested that some of the key factors involved in attrition include: academic problems, lack of interest in the academic material, and psychological adjustment problems. Other factors that have been identified include self-efficacy, stress, anxiety, low motivation, emotional problems, and academic burnout (Moneta, 2011; Caballero-Domínguez, Hederich, & Palacio-Sañudo, 2010; Arias, Justo, & Mañas, 2010; Ong & Cheong, 2009; Pisarik, 2009; Ngai & Cheung, 2009; Asberg, Bowers, Renk & McKinney, 2008; Schwitzer & Choate, 2007; 2 Ramos-Sánchez & Nichols, 2007; Zajacova, Lynch, & Espenshade, 2005; Chemers, Hu & Garcia, 2001; Hirose, Wada & Watanabe, 1999; Anderson & Cole, 1988).

Edwards and colleagues, (1990) condensed the numerous factors believed to impact attrition into five general domains: personal, financial, emotional/psychological, environmental, and academic. Personal factors include personality characteristics, immaturity, attitude towards the institution, and low motivation. Solberg Nes and colleagues, (2009) as well as Balduf (2009) suggest that a student’s motivation and goal valuation are crucial factors in determining success. Lack of family or social/emotional support and other personal problems have also been suggested as factors that impact attrition rates (Mohr, Eiche, & Sedlacek, 1998; Dewitz, Woolsey, & Walsh, 2009).

Smith & Winterbottom (1970) found personality characteristics that seemed to be relevant factors involved in a college student’s academic success. In their study, students who experienced academic problems seemed indifferent to their plight and did not avail themselves to remedial services. In a separate examination of non-intellectual factors, it was suggested that students experiencing academic problems experienced difficulty accepting responsibility for their academic circumstances, were unwilling to accept that they were doing poorly, and lacked enthusiasm for their courses (Smith et al, 1970). Hsieh et al (2007) found that students experiencing difficulty expressed goals that were counterproductive to their efforts to succeed.

Financial factors in college such as tuition, financial aid, employment, student fees, and book and supply expenses are not uncommon in the lives of many college students. The cost of attending an institution of higher education has steadily risen over the past two decades (Bozick, 2007). Although college students have a number of options for financing their higher educational expenses, many don’t take full advantage of options such as government-sponsored 3 financial aid programs. Many times, college students rely on family, personal savings, and employment to fund their college education as opposed to federal grants and loans (Bozick, 2007).

There are various reasons why college students underutilize financial aid resources (American Council on Education, 2004). Some college students do not apply for financial aid despite being eligible, others may be unaware of the different types of financial aid available to them, and some do not apply because they believe that a college education is not affordable despite financial assistance (Bozick, 2007). Additionally, despite increases in funding to federal and state financial aid programs, these increases have not kept up with the pace of rising tuition and fees. Financial aid programs play a vital role in many students ability to pay for their education.

If the funding provided by these programs is not sufficient or if students are not able to access them, they many times turn to alternative resources to fund their educational and related expenses. One way that many students address their financial issues while in college is through employment. Riggert and colleagues (2006) reported that an estimated 80 percent of college students are employed while completing their undergraduate education. Students may take advantage of many on and off campus employment opportunities while in college.

While on- campus employment is federally funded and regulates the number of hours that students can work, off campus employment such as restaurants, department stores, and fast food locations do not. Pike and colleagues (2008) found a significant relationship between student employment and academic performance. Their study suggests that the number of hours a student spends working each week is correlated with their academic achievement. Pike and colleagues (2008) found that students who worked more than 20 hours per week earned substantially lower grades than students who did not work that many hours.

4 Emotional and psychological factors are also key variables that impact a college student’s ability to succeed. Factors such as feelings of homesickness, loneliness, low self-esteem, indecisiveness, reduced self-efficacy, stress, and high levels of anxiety have been found to impact attrition of college students (Gerdes et al., 1994; Daugherty & Lane,1999; Twenge, 2001; Brissette, Scheier, & Carver, 2002). Research suggests that students who struggle academically display increased levels of anxiety, problems with concentration, and many experience adjustment difficulties as they encounter the stressors of college (Proctor, Prevatt, Adams, Hurst, & Petscher, 2006; Pittman & Richmond, 2008). Elevated levels of stress is common among college student populations (Ong et al., 2009) and has been linked to various negative psychological symptoms such as anxiety and burnout (Moneta, 2011, Salanova, Schaufeli, Martínez, & Bresó, 2010, Pissarik, 2009).

Environmental factors are also considered to be instrumental due to the role they play in college student success (Astin, 1997). College students many times experience various difficulties as they engage with the organizational and pedagogical demands of the academic environment (Duchesne, Ratelle, Larose, & Guay, 2007). The literature provides an overwhelming amount of evidence regarding the environmental difficulties experienced by students enrolled in higher education and the potential negative consequences these difficulties may produce (Compas, Wagner, Salvin, & Vannatta, 1986; Pascarella & Terenzini, 1991; Rieke & Conn, 1994; Gerdes & Mallinckrodt, 1994; Brooks & DuBois, 1995; Pratt, Hunsberger, Pancer, Alisat, Bowers, Mackey, Osteniewicz, Rog, Terzian, & Thomas, 2000; Jackson & Finney, 2002; Lidy &Kahn, 2006). Some of the difficulties experienced many times include separation and restructuring of family or social networks; time management issues, adjustment problems, and conflicts between study and leisure activities.

These barriers may impact a 5 student’s social integration which has been cited as being a vital component of college student success (Braxton, Sullivan, & Johnson, 1997; Belch, Gebel, & Maas, 2001; Pascarella & Terenzini, 2005).