Too Engaged? A Study of Student Involvement and Academic Success

Transcription

1 Draft paper to support conference presentation at the ACPA Annual Convention, Washington, DC, March 28-April 1, Not for attribution or publication. Too Engaged? A Study of Student Involvement and Academic Success David DiRamio and Andrew Stamp 1 Contact diramio@auburn.edu Address & phone: David DiRamio, Ph.D. Educational FLT Department Haley Center 4096 Auburn University, AL Office (334) Cell (334) David DiRamio is an assistant professor of higher education administration at Auburn University. He received both B.S. and M.B.A. degrees from the State University of New York at Buffalo and a Ph.D. in Educational Leadership from the University of Nevada, Las Vegas. DiRamio's research interests in student affairs administration include student life and involvement, assessment of campus programs, and issues in veteran's education. Andrew Stamp is a master s student in higher education administration at Auburn University and is graduating in May He earned a B.A. in History from Auburn University. Stamp s research interests include student engagement, retention, and success.

2 Too Engaged? A Study of Student Involvement and Academic Success Abstract: This study details findings from a survey of 2006 and 2007 graduates, with a focus on student activities and involvement. There was a negative correlation between hours of student activities per week and final grade point average (GPA), with students participating in 40 or more hours per week of student activities having a statistically significant lower degree GPA. Hyperinvolved students with 40 or more hours of activity were statistically more likely to be involved with minority student groups and political issue groups. These students also reported higher scores for aspects of general education preparation, awareness of global issues, and satisfaction with major department. Mixed results suggest that hyper-involvement in student activities has some positive outcomes, but may impact academics negatively.. 1

3 Too Engaged? A Study of Student Involvement and Academic Success Research on college students social and extracurricular involvement has a rich theoretical history including iconic studies such as Astin s I-E-O model (1993) and work by Kuh (1995) leading to the development of the National Survey of Student Engagement. Findings universally suggest that frequent involvement and meaningful engagement are important to student success. However, while student involvement is generally associated with success, at what point does involvement pay diminishing returns? Is there such a thing as too much of a good thing or hyper-involvement? This study investigates the phenomenon of students extreme involvement in campus activities, perhaps to the detriment of their academic success. This work builds on previous research showing a connection between over involvement in activities and high stress (DiRamio & Payne, 2006). That study found that some Millennial generation overachievers often found themselves overcommitted with campus activities, social commitments, and academics obligations. Method The population of interest for this study was approximately 7,800 baccalaureate recipients who graduated in the academic years 2004 and 2005 from a public research university in the southern United States. The student body was predominately Caucasian (90%), with only 5% African-American, and less than two percent Latino, Asian-Pacific Islander, or other ethnicity. One thousand four hundred eighteen (N=1,418) surveys were collected using a Web-based instrument 2

4 administered via three years after graduation (in 2007 and 2008). The sample represents approximately 18% of the total population of baccalaureate recipients who graduated in 2004 and In addition to standard demographic questions, the survey included questions about quality of education received, preparation for the workplace, student activities, degree major and college attended within the university, first job after graduation, and current employment. The types of student activities listed in the survey included all the typical social and academic organizations, student life and leadership positions, athletics (intramural, club, and sanctioned), ROTC, and off campus work. Survey participants were also asked to estimate their hours spent on each activity per week during college. Additionally, specifically for this study, staff from the university s institutional research office provided high school grade point average (GPA), ACT or converted SAT scores, and final degree GPA, all of which were matched to each survey respondent. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics, t-test comparison of means, and analysis of variance (ANOVA) testing with Tukey HSD follow-up. The t-test and ANOVA inferential techniques were chosen because they allow for testing for significant differences between groups (Turner & Thayer, 2001). Findings The trend line in the scatter plot (Figure 1) shows a negative correlation between college GPA and hours per week of participation in student activities. The negative correlation was significant at the.01 level (two-tailed), with a 3

5 Figure 1. Scatter plot with trend line showing negative correlation between students degree GPA and hours spent in student activities per week. Degree GPA and Activity Hours Grade Point Average Hours of activity per week Figure 2. Frequency distribution of hours spent in student activities per week. 300 Hours of student activity per week Frequency Std. Dev = Mean = 21.8 N = Hours of student activity per week 4

6 Pearson s r of The regression formula (y= x+3.14) suggests that the trend line crosses the 3.00 GPA threshold at 46.6 hours and continues decreasing as hours increase. Figure 2 shows the frequency distribution of total hours per week that students reported for participating in activities. The normal distribution curve indicates that most students participated in approximately 20 hours of activities per week, with 21.8 hours as the mean. Standard deviation was used as a guide to establish three groups of students based on their hours per week participating in student activities: Group One Low/No Involvement with 8 or fewer hours (n=254), Group Two Moderate to High Involvement with 9 to 39 hours (n=1,016), and Group Three Hyper- Involvement with 40 or more hours (n=148). Analysis using a one-way ANOVA with Tukey follow-up showed that the GPA of students in Group Three Hyper- Involvement with 40 or more hours was statistically significantly lower than Group One Low/No Involvement with 8 or fewer hours, at 2.98 versus 3.17 (F [2,1417]) =7.690, p<.001, η 2 =.01). A post-hoc effect size calculation using Cohen s d yielded -.38, indicating moderate practical significance for the difference in GPA. Interestingly, although not statistically significant, the Hyper-Involvement with 40 or more hours students had a slightly higher incoming high school GPA compared with the other groups, 3.51 (Group3-HSGPA) versus 3.45 (Group1-HSGPA) and 3.50 (Group2-HSGPA). Implications for these findings are provided in the discussion section. 5

7 The activities that hyper-involved students participated in were mostly similar to the rest of the student population, with a few exceptions. For example, students with 40 or more hours of activity were statistically significantly more likely to be involved with minority student groups (χ 2 [1,145]=7.737, p=.005) and political issue groups (χ 2 [1,145]=5.506, p=.019). While not significantly significant, hyper-involved students were slightly more likely to work on or off campus versus the rest of the student population (62.1% compared with 59.4%) and more likely to participate in social fraternity/sorority/pan-hellenic activities (38.6% compared with 32.3%). As shown in Table 1, the hyper-involved students answered several questions in the survey differently than the rest of the student population. These questions pertained to general education preparation and skills, college experience, and major department. Note that hyper-involved students answered all five questions statistically significantly higher that the rest of the student population, but with only small effect sizes (Cohen s d) indicating modest practical significance. 6

8 Table 1. Survey questions answered differently by students with 40 or more hours of activities per week. Mean (M) on 4-Point Scale M "Hyper-Involved" M "Other Students" Means Comparison Survey Question (n=145) (n=1228) (Independent-samples t-test) How well did [the university] prepare you in Written Communication skills? How well did [the university] prepare you in resourcefulness? My [university] experience increased my awareness of global issues and problems Opportunities existed outside of class for interactions between students and faculty members The interactions and discussions with my peers in the department were a major source of motivation and support t=2.554, p=.011, d= t=2.311, p=.021, d= t=2.676, p=.008, d= t=2.752, p=.006, d= t=2.170, p=.030, d=.20 Finally, it is important to note that, for the majority of survey questions, there were no statistical differences between hyper-involved students and the rest of the student population. This includes no differences in employment related data, such as how long it took survey participants to get their first job after college or starting salary. While not statistically significant, hyper-involved students were more likely to be females, at 56% versus 54% for the rest of the student population of survey respondents. Discussion Table 2 provides a summary of the findings and implications for student affairs educators. For example, the finding regarding a negative correlation between 7

9 involvement in student activities and degree GPA provided empirical evidence for student affairs practitioners to use in advising students not to overdo their extracurricular efforts. The same can be said for the statistically significant lower GPA for student involved in more than 40 hours per week of student activities. Student affairs personnel can use data from this study as evidence when counseling students about the perils of becoming over involved in too many student activities. Data from the survey questions about student experiences also supplied a few clues about the hyper-involved student. Interestingly, these students were statistically more likely to become involved with political issue groups and minority student groups on campus. This interest in politics and advocacy, coupled with a self-reported increased awareness of global issues and problems, hints at a type of student who might become over involved, with possible negative consequences for his or her classes and coursework. However, it is important to also consider the notion that valuable experience working on political causes and advocacy could outweigh a slightly smaller final degree GPA. Similarly, hyper-involved students with 40 or more hours per week of activities reported being better at written communications and felt more resourceful than the rest of the student population. These are important life skills that translate well to the workforce and may indeed be more valuable that slightly higher class grades and final degree GPA. 8

10 9 Running Head: Too Engaged?

11 Limitations Several limitations to this study are based on characteristics of the sample. For example, the sample is of traditional age undergraduates at a predominately-white regional university and does not include a broader range of contemporary student populations in higher education. Therefore, the generalizability of results is limited, although there are many regional universities, especially in the South and Midwest, with similar demographic characteristics. Due to the voluntary nature of past graduate surveys, those choosing to participate are, by definition, self-selected; it is not known how the characteristics of the volunteers differ from those who decide not to participate. Moreover, all data is self-reported and there is no way to check for honesty and accuracy in responses, other than GPA and ACT scores provided directly from the university. Moreover, the use of Likert-scale responses to survey statements, based upon the traditional Agree and Disagree scale, are subject to various interpretations because of their non-numerical nature. Additionally, survey respondents may not share common understandings of the various terms used in the statements. Where confusion exists about the precise meaning of a survey statement, there is a higher likelihood of poor quality data. As with most studies attempting to generalize results, this research should be considered preliminary and suggestive of how students with similar characteristics undergraduates at a large, public, predominately white institution (with a strong residential component) might 10

12 view the efficacy of campus activities. Despite these limitations, this research stands as a useful exploratory study. Future Agenda Results were mixed in this exploratory study investigating a relationship between involvement in student activities and academic outcomes. There was an empirically-proven negative relationship between high levels of involvement in student activities and final degree GPA. However, other findings supported the notion that the experiences and skills that hyper-involved students received were valuable. These results could provide information to start a Learning Reconsidered-type conversation between campus personnel representing student affairs and academic affairs (Keeling, 2004). This study uncovered a statistical difference between student subpopulations, but cannot answer the why questions associated with student over involvement in activities and organizations. Further research on this topic should include qualitative methods to investigate the findings, including in-depth interviews with students who report being involved with 40 or more hours of activities per week, in order to explore the phenomenon of a hyper-involvement. 11

13 References Astin, A. (1993). What matters in college? Four critical years revisited. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. DiRamio, D., & Payne, R. (2007). Assessing the relationship between campus programs, student self-efficacy, stress, and substance abuse. College Student Journal, 41(3), Keeling, R. (Ed.). (2004). Learning reconsidered: A campus-wide focus on the student experience. Washington, DC: National Association of Student Personnel Administrators and American College Personnel Association. Kuh, G. (1995). The other curriculum: Out-of-class experiences associated with student learning and personal development. Journal of Higher Education,662, Turner, J. R., & Thayer, J. (2001). Introduction to analysis of variance: Design, analysis & interpretation. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. 12