Upload
ejloveu
View
350
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
This study compares traditional students to non-traditional students in a rural area in terms of their academic experience.
Citation preview
Eunjin Hwang
Sam Houston State University
Integration of Higher Education in Rural Area : Comparison of Traditional and Non-traditional Students
•73% of students in U.S higher education is non-traditional students.
Introduction
1. Definition of Non-traditional Student NCEB provides the definition of non-traditional students by
six characteristics.
•Financial Status•Family
Status
•Academic Status
•Enrollment Status
Attend part time/
Work full time
Do not have a high
school diploma
Financially
dependentHave
dependents/
Single parent
Source: U.S. Department of Education, NCES. National Postsecondary Student Aid Study (NPSAS) 2000
Source : NCES. National Postsecondary Student Aid Study 2000
Figure 1. Percentage of students with nontraditional characteristics 1992-1993 and 1999-2000
Figure 2. Percentage distribution of undergraduates according to their student status, by type of institution: 1999–2000
Highly nontra-ditional
Moderately nontraditional
Minimally nontraditional
Traditional
Public 2-year
Public 4-year
PrivateNot-for-profit4-year
PrivateFor-profit 4-year
Total
Source : NCES. National Postsecondary Student Aid Study 2000
According to data analysis of NCEB, the most common characteristic of non-traditional students is financially independent, attend part time, and delayed enrollment. Also, within public 2 –year institution, highly non-traditional students are highly distributed.
2. Social Factors
• Aging population
• Educational requirement for professions, vocation, occupations• Equal
opportunities women and minorities
What is the problem?
1. Non-traditional students have barriers in pursuing their academic career.
1) Financial poverty2) Time poverty
- Work full time- Multiple roles
3) Institutional Barriers-Learning the rules of academia
- Reading and writing assignment, etc.
2. Non traditional students from low socioeconomic (LSES) backgrounds are more likely to have intensified barriers.
3. University students from a LSES background often belong to multiple equity group, the most common of which is living in a rural or isolated area.
The Purpose of the Study is..
To understand the barriers of non-traditional student in a rural area.
To provides a new interpretation of non-traditional students of low socio economic status and racial or ethnical minor group.
To provide the social framework for better school policy and practice for supporting students of low socioeconomic status.
Research Question
1. How institutional rhetoric of higher education is differently experienced by traditional students and non-traditional students in the first academic year ?
2. What barriers are experienced by non-traditional students in a rural area?
Significance of This Study
1. This study examines barriers of non traditional students by comparing the difference of academic experience in higher education between non-traditional students and traditional students.
2. Previous studies examined barriers based on qualitative method approach. This study focus on non-traditional students, particularly in a rural area based on quantitative method approach.
Theoretical Framework
1. Tinto’s Model of Student Retention
Figure 4. Tinto, V. Dropout from Higher Education (1975)
*Criticism : The validity generalizing its constructs to explain attrition among non-traditional students since the model was developed mostly in relation to traditional students and residential academic context.
2. Revised Model : Rovai’s model for adult dropouts
Learner Characteristic-Age-Gender-Education-Employment status
External factors-Scheduling conflicts-Family issues-Financial problems-Managerial support-Personal issues(e.g.health)
Internal factors-Social integration-Academic integration ( instructor follow-up, activity level, instructional design, assignment level, etc. )-Technology/technical/usability issues-Lack of motivation
Learner Skills
Dropout/Persiste
nce
l--------------Prior to the course
-------------------------ll-----------------During the course------------------l
Conclusion
1. Non traditional students, particularly of low socioeconomic status in a rural area experience intensified study barriers.
2. To reduce the rate of attrition and support non-traditional students, institutional support such as financial aids and counseling services, etc. should be provided.
Bibliography
Bamber, J.,& Tett, L (2000). Transforming the learning experiences of non-traditional students: a perspective from higher education. Studies in Continuing Education, 22(1), 57-75.
Deil-Amen, R (2011). Socio-academic integrative moments: rethinking academic and social integration among two-year college students in career-related programs. Journal of Higher Education, 82(1), 54-91.
Gilardi, S.,& Guqlielmetti,C (2011). University life of non-traditional students: engagement styles and impact on attrition. Journal of Higher Education, 82(1), 33-53.
Hermida, J (2010). Inclusive teaching: an approach for encouraging non-traditional student success. International Journal of Research& Review, 5(1), 19-30.
Marandet, E.,& Wainwright, E (2009). Discourses of integration and exclusion: equal opportunities for university students with dependent children? Space & Polity, 13(2), 109 -125.
Marion, B (2001). Experiencing the barriers: non-traditional students entering higher education.Policy & Practice, 16(2), 141-60.
Park,J.,& Choi, H (2009) Factors influencing adult learners’ decision to drop out or persist in online learning. Educational Technology& Society, 12(4), 207-217.
Tones, M., Fraser, J., Elder, R.,& White, K (2009). Supporting mature-aged students from a low Socio-economic background. Higher Education, 58(4), 505-529.