Download Impact of Role Strain on Non-Traditional Student Identity Development and more Exams Literature in PDF only on Docsity!
NONTRADITIONAL STUDENTS:
THE IMPACT OF ROLE STRAIN ON THEIR IDENTITY
by Sherri L. Rowlands A.A.S., Business & Accounting, Mohawk Valley Community College, 1997 B.S., Workforce Education & Development, Southern Illinois University, 1998 B.S. Business & Administration, Southern Illinois University, 1998
Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for theA Research Paper Master of Science in Education Degree
Department of Workforce Education and Development in the Graduate School Southern Illinois University Carbondale May, 2010
i
DEDICATION
I would like to dedicate this paper to my five children: James, Brendan, Gwendolyn, Zachary, and Michael. These wonderful children may not realize it but while I was going to school as a nontraditional student and single parent, they taught me what role strain was really all about and inspired my interest in the topic. Thanks, kids!
iii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
DEDICATION .................................................................................................................... i
- CHAPTER 1 – INTRODUCTION ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ii - Need for the Study - Purpose of the Study - Statement of the Problem - Research Questions - Definition of Terms................................................................................................
- RELATED LITERATURE CHAPTER 2—RESEARCH METHOD AND REVIEW OF
- Overview
- Methods and Procedures
- Review of Related Literature
- Nontraditional Students
- Student Identity
- Role Strain
- Student Supports and Accommodations
- CHAPTER 3—SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS - Summary of Findings - Conclusions - Nontraditional Students - Student Identity - Role Strain iv - Student Supports and Accommodations
- Recommendations
- Recommendations for Practice
- Recommendations for Further Study
- Final Recommendation
- REFERENCES
- VITA
student identity is influenced by role strain may help in designing better support systems for the nontraditional student.
Purpose of the Study The purpose of the study was to contribute to a better understanding of the development of student identity in nontraditional students. More specifically, the study attempted to define the influence of role conflict, role overload, and role contagion in the development of student identity in nontraditional students as an aid in designing better support systems for nontraditional students. Nontraditional students are the “fastest growing” population (Fairchild, 2003, p. 11) in higher education but the attrition rate for these students is around 32% (Allen, 1993). Support systems and accommodations for these students need to be developed by colleges and universities in order to attract and retain nontraditional students.
Statement of the Problem The problem addressed in this study was: To what extent does role strain (composed of role conflict, role overload, and role contagion) affect the development of the student identity in nontraditional students, and what accommodations should be available to the students to provide the support needed to succeed?
Research Questions
- Who is the nontraditional student?
- How is the development of student identity in nontraditional students affected by role strain?
- Which variable of role strain – role conflict, role overload, or role contagion – has the greatest influence on the development of student identity in nontraditional students?
- What supports do nontraditional students need, and what accommodations should faculty, staff, and institutions offer to eliminate or to mitigate the effects of role strain in nontraditional students?
Definition of Terms Nontraditional student : Defined as having one or more of the following characteristics: delayed enrollment in college, part-time attendance, financial independence, full-time employment, dependents other than a spouse, single parenthood, or failed to obtain a high school diploma (Choy, 2002; Horn, 1996). They can be defined further as “minimally nontraditional (one characteristic), moderately nontraditional (2 or 3 characteristics), or highly nontraditional (4 or more characteristics)” (Horn, 1996, p. i). Role conflict: Defined as simultaneous, incompatible demands from two or more sources (Home, 1998). Role contagion: Defined as a preoccupation with one role while performing another (Home, 1998). Role overload: Defined as insufficient time to meet all demands (Home, 1998).
CHAPTER 2
RESEARCH METHOD AND REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE
Overview The problem researched in this study was: To what extent does role strain (composed of role conflict, role overload, and role contagion) affect the development of the student identity in nontraditional students, and what accommodations should be available to the students to provide the support needed to succeed? A review of literature was conducted to answer the research questions stated. The scope of the study required research in four areas: (a) Nontraditional Students; (b) Student Identity; (c) Role Strain, and (d) Student Supports and Accommodations Available or Recommended for Nontraditional Students.
Methods and Procedures The type of research used in this study was descriptive research. Best and Kahn (2006) defined descriptive research as “…concerned with conditions or relationships that exist, opinions that are held, processes that are going on, effects that are evident or trends that are developing” (p. 118). A variety of literature was available for review including research studies in several scholarly journals. Material was reviewed from those journals, government brochures, books, monographs, and several presented papers from different educational, psychological, sociological, and other organizations. Much of the material was located from several databases on the Internet. Google Scholar was used primarily in locating relevant literature. The Morris Library at Southern Illinois University
Carbondale has an extensive e-journal library from which many journal articles and research studies were retrieved. Key words used to locate relevant literature included “nontraditional students”, “student identity”, “role strain”, and “adult learners”. All of the literature retrieved was printed and studied extensively for information that could be used to answer the research questions. Some of the retrieved data, while interesting, did not apply to this study and was set aside. The data that did apply to this study was reviewed, analyzed, and, finally, synthesized to make conclusions and recommendations for further study.
Review of Related Literature Nontraditional Students Who is the nontraditional student? Cross (1980) stated, “The term ‘nontraditional students’ is generally used to describe adult part-time learners who carry full-time adult responsibilities in addition to their study” (p. 627). In a comprehensive review of literature across the ERIC database, Kim (2002) identified three criteria researchers use to define nontraditional students. The first, and most common, was age. Students that were older than 25 years were typically classified as nontraditional (Allen, 1993; Benshoff, 1993; Bishop-Clark & Lynch, 1992; Bowl, 2001; Countryman, 2006; Darab, 2004; Donaldson & Graham, 1999; Johnson & Watson, 2004; Kasworm, 1990; Kasworm, 2003c; Kim, 2002; Richardson & King, 1998). The other two criteria identified by Kim (2002) were background characteristics and at-risk behaviors. Background characteristics included ethnicity and socioeconomic status. At-risk behaviors included part-time enrollment, full-time employment, single parenthood, or
Fairchild (2003) reported on other common traits shared by nontraditional students, “Typically, adults are on campus only for classes or administrative requirements, as opposed to social or athletic activities (O’Connor, 1994), and they navigate college independently, without an age cohort (Benshoff and Lewis, 1992)” (p. 11). Nontraditional students attended school for various reasons. According to Benshoff (1993), these included: changing job requirements, family life transitions, changes in leisure patterns, and self-fulfillment. Additionally, Kasworm (2003c) reported some students enrolled for “education in life areas of health, religion, and citizenship” (p. 5). As a population, nontraditional students usually chose community colleges as a provider of higher education because they were more accessible (Choy, 2002; Ely, 1997: Kasworm, 2003c; Kasworm, 2003d; Kim, 2002). Kasworm (2003c) explained the choice of an institution: Adult undergraduate students typically enroll in a college that is readily accessible, relevant to current life needs, cost-effective, flexible in course scheduling, and supportive of adult lifestyle commitments. However, some adults also are committed to pursuing colleges that are prestigious (and perhaps not adult-student friendly) or that offer specialized academic programs with requirements for full-time attendance (such as architecture). Enrollment in such programs is a significant financial and life commitment for adult students. (p. 7) In other research, Kasworm (2003d) concluded, “The majority of adult students are part- timers; they do not live on campus or participate in most collegiate activities nor rarely spend time out of class with faculty and other students” (p. 5). Polson (1993) concurred
saying, “most [adult] students are off-campus directed” (Other Characteristics section, para. 1). Nontraditional students also had more life roles, experiences, and responsibilities than traditional college students (Cross, 1980; Ely, 1997; Fairchild, 2003; Kasworm, 2003c, 2003d; Kim, 2002). This was both detrimental and beneficial to nontraditional students. Competing life roles and responsibilities demanded time and attention and detracted from the student role. The resulting role strain affected student performance and was often a factor in student attrition (Polson, 1993; Scott, Burns, & Cooney, 1996; Tyler, 1993). Role strain was a major source of stress in adult students (Dill & Henley, 1998; Giancola, Grawitch, & Borchert, 2009; Ross, Niebling, & Heckert, 1999). Life experiences were beneficial in some cases as they helped students understand and apply some classroom knowledge. Nontraditional students were often classified as a group with poor study skills, poor time management, deficits in basic general education skills, age-related deficits in cognition, and poor academic performance (Ely, 1997; Kasworm, 1990; Richardson & King, 1998). Richardson and King (1998) stated, as a result of their research, It is clear that adult students are consistently stigmatized in terms of their capacity to benefit from higher education and that these negative stereotypes are shared by at least some educators, both as individuals and also corporately through organizations such as the APA. (p. 69) Richardson and King further maintained, These stereotypes are ageist in their content and in their implications, because they obstruct legitimate opportunities for older people to achieve
well in introductory courses designed to improve these skills but disliked the courses being labeled “remedial.” (Ely, 1997). Nontraditional students tended to take longer than five years to complete a degree program and were far more likely to drop out than traditional students (Horn, 1996). This was primarily due to part-time attendance but also due to breaks in education as other life roles interfered. Horn (1996) reported Nontraditional students were more than twice as likely to leave school in their first year than were traditional students (38 percent versus 16 percent). However, for students who persisted to their second year, nontraditional rates of attrition were much closer to the rates of traditional students. (p. ii) Allen (1993) reported commuting students were at higher risk for attrition and most nontraditional students are commuters. Nontraditional students had different classroom experiences than traditional students. Some researchers observed nontraditional students experienced a feeling of discomfort in the classroom and they attributed this to “a lack of self-confidence among nontraditional students about their ability to succeed” (Bishop-Clark & Lynch, 1992, p. 115 ; see also Kasworm, 2005). Younger students in the classroom were observed to defer to the older students and expected them to be authorities equal to the instructor. They further observed hostility between younger students and older students when the older students failed to live up to the supposed image. Faculty expectations of nontraditional students are mixed. Bishop-Clark and Lynch (1992) observed, in many classes, older students treated faculty as peers and often expected reciprocation from the
faculty. Some nontraditional students reported, however, they felt the faculty was uninterested in them and that the faculty would have preferred only traditional students in class. Kasworm (2005) also reported adult students complained faculty expected more from them due to their life experience and graded them a little more harshly.
Student Identity How is the development of student identity in nontraditional students affected by role strain? In order to answer that research question, it was important to study the development of student identity in general. Research on identity led to one definition of identity as the “self-meanings that are formed in particular situations” (Burke & Reitzes, 1981, p. 84). The performance of a role leads to the development of the identity in that role. Burke and Reitzes (1981) noted In order to be (some identity), one must act like (some identity). In order not to be (some other identity), one must not act like (that other identity.) If being feminine, for example, means being tender and one defines oneself as being feminine, then one must act in ways that will be interpreted by oneself as well as by others as acting “tender” and not acting “tough.” In our case with the student roles and identities, if one has a student identity that is high in Academic Responsibility, then one should act in ways that have the same meaning. (pp. 90-91) Identity, then, was linked to role performance and the meanings attributed to the role by oneself and others.
- Student success—positive experiences foster feelings of success and accomplishment
- Perceived success—being seen as successful by other students and peers. The process was influenced by beliefs about appropriate student involvement, relationships with faculty, peers, and younger students, and by the reason for going to school. Curiously, adult students who returned to school for career advancement often had weaker student identities than students who returned for other reasons (Shields, 1995). Nontraditional students formed a student identity based on participation, involvement, and acceptance in the classroom (Kasworm, 2003d; O’Donnell & Tobbell, 2007). A program designed to help nontraditional students transition to higher education was examined and discussed by O’Donnell and Tobbell (2007). They reported that the peripheral program provided limited access to services available to matriculated students and its courses in study skills, essay writing, and note taking were disdained by the students. The student identity was weak or nonexistent as students complained they did not feel like “proper students” (p. 325). Kasworm (2005) found nontraditional students formed student identities based on relationships with faculty, peers, and younger students in the classroom. Classroom involvement was based on students’ “constructed image of the ideal college student” (p. 17). Multiple role students struggled with the student identity. Van Meter and Agronow (1992) researched whether choosing the student role as the salient role would reduce role strain. They found it increased role strain unless perceptions of spousal and family support were high. Several researchers reported multiple role students dropped
the student role first as a coping mechanism to role strain (Adebayo, 2006; Allen, 1993; Benshoff, 1993, Berkove, 1979; Blaxter & Tight, 1994; Carney-Crompton & Tan, 2002; Clouder, 1997; Darab, 2004; Eagan, 2004; Fairchild, 2002; Feldman & Marinez-Ponz, 1995; Home, 1992, 1997, 1998; Home & Hinds, 2004; Home, Hinds, Malenfant, & Boisjoll, 1995; Scott, Burns, & Cooney, 1996; Tyler, 1993; Van Meter & Agronow, 1982).
Role Strain Which variable of role strain—role conflict, role overload, or role contagion— have the greatest influence on the development of student identity in nontraditional students? Multiple identities or roles are a part of everyday existence for most people. Each role has its own demands and obligations. The student role becomes one role among many for nontraditional students and comes with a number of demands which may be difficult to fulfill and increases role strain. Adebayo (2006) commented: Students generally are faced with a number of stressors. These include continuous evaluation, pressure to earn good grades, time pressures, unclear assignments, heavy workload, uncomfortable classrooms, and relationships with family and friends (Ross, Niebling, & Heckert, 1999). In addition to these, nontraditional students are faced with employment demands and social and family responsibilities. No, doubt, combining work commitment, family responsibilities, and school obligations may be very complex and tasking. Ultimately, the struggling and juggling
