Date of Award:

5-2012

Document Type:

Dissertation

Degree Name:

Doctor of Education (EdD)

Department:

Human Development and Family Studies

Department name when degree awarded

Family, Consumer, and Human Development

Committee Chair(s)

Ann M. Berghout Austin

Committee

Ann M. Berghout Austin

Committee

Michael K. Freeman

Committee

Steven O. Laing

Committee

Edward M. Reeve

Committee

Gary S. Straquadine

Abstract

This study was undertaken by David Roos, a USU doctoral student and an employee at Dixie State College, in fall semester 2009. The purpose of the study was to measure the possible impact that nonacademic student information would have on retention when used by advisors and shared in an advising session with students. This information was gathered using an in-class survey that identified nonacademic or "noncognitive" risk factors not apparent by looking at a high school transcript or reviewing a student's demographic background. Such factors as college commitment, self-efficacy, and resiliency were measured using a survey instrument called the Student Strengths Inventory (SSI).

With the assistance of course instructors, the 48-question survey was administered to 1,054 students enrolled in the college's First Year Experience (FYE) course during the first week of October 2009. The results were tabulated and individual "student strengths profiles" were made available to students. These profiles showed each individual student his/her strengths and weaknesses relative to the likelihood of staying enrolled and persisting to graduation.

The researcher thought that student retention could be increased by making the survey results available to advisors and asking them to utilize this information to help students develop an individualized action plan to address the areas of concern. To test this hypothesis, 200 students were randomly selected to either participate in a general advising session or a more targeted advising session where the survey results were discussed and an action plan created.

In fall semester 2010, the retention rates were calculated and the students in the targeted advising sample group did, in fact, reenroll at a higher rate (49% vs. 43%), although this difference was not statistically significant. On the other hand, an important, statistically significant finding was that first-generation students were retained at a much higher rate (62%) within the targeted advising group than first-generation students who did not receive targeted advising.

Although additional research is needed, the possible benefit for individual students and for colleges and universities is that targeted advising represents a powerful tool for advisors and others to assist first-generation students, a group who are at greater risk of dropping out than the overall freshmen population.

Checksum

9002f085a1c9786b718e23d1e55e1b44

Comments

This work made publicly available electronically on April 10, 2012.

Download

Included in

Education Commons

Share

COinS

Copyright for this work is retained by the student. If you have any questions regarding the inclusion of this work in the Digital Commons, please email us at .