2 research outputs found

    First-Year Seminar Course and Academic Performance: An Examination of Differences by Student Characteristics

    Get PDF
    Purpose The purpose of this study was to investigate the extent to which the relationship between (a) student demographic variables (i.e., ethnicity, gender, first generation status, low income), college admission variables (i.e., admission status, SAT/ACT scores, remediation requirements), and (b) GPA and retention was influenced by first-year seminar (FYS) course participation at one Tier II doctoral university in the southwestern United States. Method To examine differences among students who took the FYS and students who did not take the FYS among specific student variable groups an explanatory, quantitative, non-experimental, cross-sectional research study was conducted. Institutional data for the entering first-time first-year class of 2014 at one 4-year university were examined. Six research questions were constructed to examine the differences in GPA outcomes and FYS course participation by student variable group using six separate two-way ANOVAs. In cases where data were non-normal, a Kruskal-Wallis was presented for comparison. If there was heterogeneity of variance, a Welch test was presented for comparison. Six additional research questions were constructed to examine the differences in one-year retention and FYS course participation using a chi-squared statistical test of independence. Findings For ANOVA results that compared GPA outcomes and the statistical interactions with the FYS course, several student groups had statistically significantly higher GPAs when compared to their peers in the same student group who did not take the FYS course: Black, Hispanic, at-risk (development education), first-generation, and low-income (Pell Grant recipients). For chi-squared statistical results comparing student variables and one-year retention outcomes, male students, students reporting as not first-generation status, and students who did not receive the Pell Grant (low-income status) had statistically significantly higher retention rates if they took the FYS course. Although statistical significant was present within several variable groups who took the FYS, small effect sizes were also present in each finding indicating negligible practical significance. Implications for practitioners and researchers are discussed in the context of Tinto’s (1975) theory of student departure and Astin’s (1984) theory of student development theory

    Survival Strategies: Doctoral Students’ Perceptions of Challenges and Coping Methods

    Get PDF
    The purpose of this collective case study was to use a critical dialectical pluralistic (CDP) philosophical lens to investigate select doctoral students’ perceptions about the challenges that they encountered while in a doctorate program and the coping strategies that they found effective in mitigating these challenges. A major goal of CDP is to empower research participants maximally by giving them the role of participant-researchers. Participants were 10 doctoral students enrolled at a Tier-II university in the United States, who were selected via convenience sampling. Each student participated in a face-to-face interview with a member of the research team—consistent with a CDP approach. A qualitative-dominant crossover mixed analysis was used wherein both quantitative and qualitative analyses were used to analyze the qualitative data, with the qualitative analysis phase being dominant. The qualitative analyses (e.g., constant comparison analysis, classical content analysis) revealed the following five themes: compartmentalization of life, outside support systems, justification for participation in program, emotional status, and structure of program. These themes indicated that although challenges are plentiful, particularly in terms of balancing one’s academic life with other obligations, participants found support and encouragement from family, friends, and other doctoral students to be the most beneficial coping strategy. These findings have important implications for the structuring of doctoral programs
    corecore