High School to College Transition Research Studies 9780761864790, 9780761864783

Citation preview

HIGH SCHOOL TO COLLEGE TRANSITION RESEARCH STUDIES _____________________________

Edited by Terence Hicks and Chance W. Lewis

University Press of America,® Inc. Lanham · Boulder · New York · Toronto · Plymouth, UK

Copyright © 2015 by University Press of America,® Inc. 4501 Forbes Boulevard Suite 200 Lanham, Maryland 20706 UPA Acquisitions Department (301) 459-3366 Unit A, Whitacre Mews, 26-34 Stannary Street, London SE11 4AB, United Kingdom All rights reserved Printed in the United States of America British Library Cataloging in Publication Information Available Library of Congress Control Number: 2015930640 ISBN: 978-0-7618-6478-3 (clothbound : alk. paper) eISBN: 978-0-7618-6479-0

The paper used in this publication meets the minimum requirements of American National Standard for Information Sciences—Permanence of Paper for Printed Library Materials, ANSI Z39.48-1992

CONTENTS List of Figures and Tables Foreword by Robert T. Palmer Acknowledgments Introduction

v vii ix xi Section One

Chapter One— Navigating the New: Examining the Transition Experiences of First-Semester College Students Molly Reynolds, Ph.D., University of Kentucky Deanna Sellnow, Ph.D., University of Kentucky

1

3

Chapter Two— The High School to College Transition: College-Going Culture, Student-Counselor Interactions, and the College Preparation Process 26 Chenoa S. W oods, Ph.D., University of California, Irvine Chapter Three— High School to College Transition: “I’ve Always Been College-Bound”: A Case Study of a Successful First-Generation, Latina College Student Desireé Vega, Ph.D., Texas State University Section Two Chapter Four— Academic and Social Adjustment of Students Transitioning from an Early College High School Program to an Institution of Higher Education Catie McCorry-Andalis, Ed.D., The University of Texas at El Paso

50

73

74

iv

Contents

Chapter Five— Assessing the Preparedness of Former Nebraska 4-H Participants to Transition and Adapt to College Jill S. W alahoski, Ph.D., University of Nebraska— Lincoln Chapter Six— High School to College Transition: An Examination of the Influence of Social and Academic Integration on Multiracial College Student Persistence Ashley D. Spicer-Runnels, Ed.D., Texas State University Index Editors Contributors

107

129

153 156 158

LIST OF FIGURES AND TABLES Table Table Table Table Table Table

2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.5 2.6

Table 2.7

Table Table Table Table

4.1 4.2 4.3 4.4

Table 4.5 Table 4.6 Figure 5.1 Table 5.1 Table 5.2 Table 5.3 Table 5.4 Table 5.5 Table 5.6 Table 5.7

Student Sample School Profiles Reasons Students See High School Counselors Factors Influencing Student-Counselor Meetings Students’ College Preparation The Relationship Between College-Going Culture, Student-Counselor Meetings, Taking the SAT, and Filing a Financial Aid Application The Relationship Between College-Going Culture, Student-Counselor Meetings, Completing a College Application, and Filing a Financial Aid Form Demographic Profile Academic Adjustment from High School to College Academic Adjustment at Four-Year Public Institution T-test Results for Academic Adjustment During First Full Semester at Institution Social Adjustment High School/College T-test Results for Social Adjustment During First Full Semester at Institution SACQ Sub-Scale Clusters Descriptive Statistics, Attachment: This College Levene’s Test of Equality of Error Variance, Attachment: This College Tests of Between Subject Effects: Attachment: This College Tests of Between Subject Effects: Personal and Emotional Adjustment: Psychological Tests of Between Subject Effects: Personal and Emotional Adjustment: Physical Tests of Between Subject Effects: Social Adjustment General Tests of Between Subject Effects: Social Adjustment: Social Environment

33 34 35 37 38

41

43 90 95 95 96 98 100 114 116 116 118 119 119 122 122

vi Table 6.1

List of Figures and Tables Comparison of Sample Demographics with Population of Senior Class

137

FOREWORD W hen someone finds out that I am a professor and that I teach education courses, they often ask me about my opinions and perspectives on topics such as the Common Core, No Child Left Behind, and other critical issues germane to student achievement in preK-12. W hile I will share my perspective, I quickly point out that my educational training and research interests lies in higher education, not necessarily in preK-12. I also share with the person that although I am interested in student achievement, particularly among racial and ethnic minorities, I am more interested in student achievement in higher education than in primary or secondary schools. W hen I think about this statement from a more critical perspective, I realize that it is problematic. One cannot be concerned with academic achievement for students in higher education while ignoring the factors and experiences that have shaped who they are and their views toward education in PreK-12. However, much of education is organized in this manner. For example, there are one set of conferences and professional organizations devoted to deeply examining issues affecting student achievement in higher education and there are a completely different set of conferences and professional organizations focused on ameliorating student success in preK-12. W hile I do understand that this division is warranted because it allows professionals in either context to have a comprehensive understanding of some of the core aspects helping to facilitate or hinder student success, researchers must be more intentional about looking at the intersection between higher education and preK-12 when examining student achievement. Tyrone Howard voiced a similar observation. Specifically, in a chapter that he authored for Jerlando Jackson’s book, Strengthening the African American Educational Pipeline: Informing Research, Policy, and Practice, Howard explained that in order to improve the success of African American students in higher education, postsecondary education and preK-12 must work collectively. He emphasized that it is impossible for higher education to make significant inroads toward increasing academic outcomes among African American students if they do not form a stronger partnership with PreK-12 systems. This book, of high school to college transition research studies, by Terence Hicks and Chance W . Lewis not only embrace this perspective, but also provide

viii

Foreword

concrete, actionable plans, grounded in research, to help facilitate a seamless connection between preK-12 and higher education in order to help increase college enrollment and persistence among racial and ethnic minority students. For example, while chapter one discusses some of the struggles first-generation students experience as they transition from high school to college, chapter two delineates how high schools can engender a college-going culture by encourage studentcounseling interaction in order to help students focus on the college preparation process. Moreover, chapter three underscores findings from a case study about a first-generation Latina student who successfully transitioned from high school to college. This chapter offers critical information to help increase the college-going rate among Latino/a high school students. The aforementioned chapters are just a small sample of the rich information offered in this important book. Given the nature of this book, educators in preK-12 and postsecondary, administrators, policymakers, researchers, and graduate students interested in increasing academic outcomes among racial and ethnic minority students will find this book an invaluable resource to have in their collection. Robert T. Palmer, PhD Associate Professor State University of New York, Binghamton

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS W e would like to thank the production and marketing staff at University Press of America, Inc., a Division of Rowman Littlefield Publishers Group for endorsing and assisting with this important project on the high school to college transition. W e are grateful for the expert assistance of Sylvia Macey. W e are also thankful for an exceptional group of contributors, it has been a privilege to collaborate with a dynamic cadre of educational researchers.

INTRODUCTION Terence Hicks, Ph.D., Ed.D. Prairie View A&M University, Texas Chance W . Lewis, Ph.D. University of North Carolina, Charlotte The transition from high school to college is a time of great challenges and changes for the student. Many students experience personal and emotional problems, psychological distress, anxiety, depression, and low self-esteem when making the transition from high school to college. This High School to College Transition Research Studies book edited by Terence Hicks and Chance W . Lewis builds upon the usefulness of both qualitative and quantitative method and integrates them by providing important recommendations for university administrators, faculty, and staff in supporting the transition that students make from high school to college. This groundbreaking book discusses and addresses the transition from high school to college and some of the major efforts and interventions under way by various universities across the United States to improve college readiness, particularly among low-income and minority students. The chapter authors provide important recommendations for high school counselors and teachers, university administrators, faculty and staff in supporting the transition that high school students make to college. This book offers two uniquely designed sections. In the first section of the High School to College Transition Research Studies book, the chapter authors provide quantitative and qualitative research findings on a diverse group of college students. In Chapter One, Molly Reynolds and Deanna Sellnow examined how messages concerning home may impact first-semester college students’ successful transition. Using relational dialectics theory (RDT) as a sensitizing framework, three discursive struggles and associated radiants of meaning were discovered in the free write responses provided by 135 first semester college students over the course of their first semester at college. Specifically, students identified discursive struggles of independence, integration, and expression. This study proposed practical implications for students, parents, and the academy regarding messages to, from, and about home as they might impact the transition and retention of first-semester

xii

Introduction

college students. In Chapter Two, Cheneo W oods study explored the precollege counseling model of a School District and examined student-counselor interactions and their relationships with students’ college preparation within various collegegoing culture contexts. W oods study uses ordinary least squares and logistic regressions to explore how students utilize and interact with school counselors and how meeting with school counselors is related to several important college preparation steps. Chapter Three by Desireé Vega explored a case study method to examine the high school to college transition process of a first-generation, Latina college student at a Hispanic Serving Institution (HSI). Vega study sought to advance her understanding of this student’s perspective of her college preparation in high school, her experiences in transitioning to college, and how her identities as a first-generation, Latina college student influenced her journey. The investigation explored the following research questions: (1) W hat are the college preparation experiences of a first-generation, Latina college student? (2) How does a firstgeneration, Latina college student navigate the transition from high school to college? (3) How does being as first-generation, Latina college student influence her goals? (4) Does the university’s designation as a Hispanic Serving Institution (HSI) influence college enrollment? In the second section of the High School to College Transition Research Studies book, the chapter authors used quantitative research designs in their studies. In Chapter Four, Catie McCorry-Andalis study examined the following: (a) students’ perceptions of their academic achievement and social involvement while in high school (b) students’ perceptions of academics and campus involvement prior to entering the four-year, public institution (c) students’ perceptions of how academically successful and socially involved they were the first semester at the four-year, public institution. The following research questions were posed: (1) W hat is the academic adjustment of students who participated in an early college high school and matriculated to a large four-year, public, research intensive institution compared to students who did not participate in an early college high school program and matriculated to the same institution after their senior year of a traditional high school? (2) W hat is the social adjustment of students who participated in an early college high school and matriculated to a large four-year, public, research intensive institution compared to students who did not participate in an early college high school program and matriculated to the same institution after their senior year of a traditional high school? In Chapter Five, Jill W alahoski study assessed the preparedness of former Nebraska 4-H participant’s transition and adjustment to college. The study administered the Student Adaptation to College Questionnaire to former 4-H participants who were recent high school graduates. Dr. W alahoski explored an ANCOVA in this study to examine the influence of engagement. Using ANCOVA, the results of the quantitative analysis indicated that generally, former 4-H participants reported a positive adaptation to college. Significant differences were found between the variable groups or with the influence of the covariate in the clusters of (a) Attachment: This College; (b) Personal and Emotional Adjustment: Psychological; (c) Personal and Emotional Adjustment: Physical; (d) Social

Introduction

xiii

Adjustment: General; and (e) Social Adjustment: Social Environment. Chapter Six by Ashley Spicer-Runnels examined Tinto’s theory of college student integration by measuring the social and academic integration of multiracial students. This study used a correlational design that investigated the relationship between racial identity and measures of student integration. The study was guided by the following research questions: (1) Is there a relationship between multiracial identity and social integration, as measured by the Institutional Integration Scale-R (IIS-R), for seniorlevel college students? (2) Is there a relationship between multiracial identity and academic integration measures using the Institutional Integration Scale-R (IIS-R) for senior college students? (3) Do the relationships exist when controlling for gender? (4) Do the relationships exist when controlling for birth year? The results of the research found that there was a statistically significant, positive correlation between the multiracial variable and social integration, but there was not a statistically significant relationship between the multiracial variable and academic integration. These results also applied when controlling for gender and age.

SECTION ONE

CHAPTER ONE NAVIGATING THE NEW: EXAMINING THE TRANSITION EXPERIENCES OF FIRST-SEMESTER COLLEGE STUDENTS Molly Reynolds, Ph.D. Deanna Sellnow, Ph.D. University of Kentucky

INTRODUCTION Individuals may experience many transition periods over the course of a lifetime, for example, when starting a new job, getting married, or having children. Paul and Brier (2001) explain that one critical transition point occurs when young adults move away from their childhood homes to attend college. Pope, Miklitsch, and W eigand (2005) acknowledge that even for students who live close enough to commute or return home frequently, “venturing temporarily outside of their familiar community of family and friends” is challenging (p. 51). W hether students live on or off campus, this transition period is filled with many “firsts,” for example, “independent living, learning to manage finances, and developing decision-making skills” (Darling, McW ey, Howard, & Holmstead, 2007, p. 216). Understanding students’ first semester transition experiences is crucial for creating effective strategies to promote retention and student success. Tinto (1987, 1993) argues that students transition effectively when they navigate through three stages of development: separation, transition, and identification. The separation stage is the time during which students distance themselves from their pre-college identities. As students move through this stage, they “may require some personal transformation and possibly some rejection of the norms of past communities” (Elkins, Braxton, & James, 2000, p. 253). Consequently, students may struggle as they experience conflicting emotions when separating

4

Chapter One

from their familiar childhood support systems for the first time (e.g., Larose & Boivin, 1998; Mounts, 2004). Students are not the only ones who may grapple with conflicting emotions associated with this transition period. According to Darling et al. (2007), “families struggling with conflicts may be related to an increase in stress of both children leaving for college and feelings of failure associated with an inability to adequately cope with stressor pile-up often associated with college life” (p. 228). Tinto (1987; 1993) points out that when students do not feel supported by family members, they will be less likely to succeed in college. Strong social support may help students adjust successfully to college and reduce stress (e.g., DeBerard, Spielmans, & Julka, 2004; Fisher & Hood, 1987; Richmond, Rosenfeld, & Bowen, 1998). Gerdes and Mallinckrodt (1994) explain that successful student adjustment has to do with “becoming integrated into the social life of college, forming a support network, and managing social freedoms” (p. 281). Social support can come from family, friends, romantic partners, peers, roommates, instructors, and advisors. Research suggests that parents (and mothers in particular) may provide a secure base of support for students as they transition into this new environment and take on new roles (Smith & Zhang, 2009). High parental support is correlated to high levels of psychological adjustment in college (Holahan, Valentiner, & Moos, 1994; Mounts, 2004). Trice (2002) found that college students communicate with their parents to confirm decisions they are making rather than to solicit advice. Moreover, parents should proceed with caution when communicating via social networks sites (e.g. Facebook, MySpace) and do so in ways that abide by clear privacy boundaries (Bernstein, 2009). W hen boundaries are invaded or ignored, parents may be engaging in helicopter parenting, which may actually impede their child’s successful transition. Coburn (2006) defines helicopter parents as “the baby boomer generation of parents” (p. 9). They are used to being involved in their child’s life and still have a strong desire to do so. However, such a high level of involvement is not always desired once students arrive at college. Petronio (1994) explains that many college students seek to separate and gain independence from parents. Yet, many parents continue to hover and engage in invasive behaviors that “send a message to their children that indicates a reluctance of parents to let go” (p. 245). High parental involvement and expectations can also increase anxiety in students. The challenge “is to figure out how to enlist these already involved parents in our [sic] mutual goal of helping students become engaged learners, competent and creative problem solvers, and responsible and effective citizens— in essence, helping students grow up” (Coburn, 2006, p. 11). First-semester students may also get social support from peers. In fact, Astin (1993) contends that “the student’s peer group is the single most potent source of influence on growth and development during the undergraduate years” (p. 398). Paul and Brier (2001) explain that having strong peer relationships may ease the transition of moving away from one’s childhood home.

Navigating the New

5

Although establishing new peer relationships at college is critical to student retention and success, several barriers may impede such relationship formation. Paul and Brier (2001) explore the concept of friendsickness, which is the concern over the potential loss of pre-college friendships. W hen students fail to successfully negotiate the terms of moving on from pre-college relationships, they may “experience difficulty in synthesizing and integrating their continuing attachments with their new relationships” (p. 78). Facebook and other social networking sites now afford college students opportunities to stay in contact with pre-college relationships while also meeting new friends. This can be both a blessing and a curse. Stephenson-Abetz and Holman (2012), for example, see the value of Facebook friends for new college students. As they “move into their dorm rooms and wave goodbye to their parents, many students are simultaneously connected to hundreds of ‘friends’ from home, friends who are communicating their experiences, feelings, excitements, and struggles in the same situations through Facebook” (p. 177). Orenstein (2009), on the other hand, questions whether constant communication to and from home encumbers students from successfully separating from their pre-college identities. Similarly, Ling and Baron (2007) contend that technology does afford students opportunities to stay connected; however, students may also feel trapped by technology as they try to forge new relationships on campus while maintaining old ones on Facebook. To date, relatively little is known about the discourses first-semester students engage in with hometown family and friends and how such communication might impact an effective transition. M oreover, very few of these publications are based on theoretically grounded data-driven empirical research and none focus on data collected from students during the course of their first semester. Thus, the current study, which is focused on student experiences while engaging in their first semester of college may, in fact, contribute to what is known about the kinds of messages to, from, and concerning home that help and hinder student retention and success. RELATIONAL DIALECTICS THEORY Relational dialectics theory (RDT) focuses on “meaning-making between relationship parties that emerges from the interplay of competing discourses” (Baxter & Braithwaite, 2008, p. 349). RDT typically focuses on communication that occurs in interpersonal and family contexts. It is a particularly appropriate theoretical framework for grounding this study because it may highlight the conflicting struggles college students must manage during their transition from home to college. Ultimately, doing so may reveal insight into how such messages influence decisions to return to college after the first semester. According to RDT, meaning does not result from singular, isolated discourses, but through competing discourses “when the meanings they advance negate one another in a zero-sum manner” (Baxter, 2011, p. 2). These discourses serve as “systems of meaning” (p. 2). Dialectical tensions emerge as a result of these

Chapter One

6

competing discourses or discursive struggles (Baxter & Montgomery, 1996). As such, relationships are in constant flux wherein both stability and change punctuate the communication. Baxter (2011) contends not only that “meanings are wrought from the struggle of competing, often contradictory discourses” (p. 2), but also that “what something means in the moment depends on the interplay of competing discourses that are circulating in the moment” (pp. 2–3). Rather than merely identify what dialectical tensions are at play, then, one must also focus “on the interplay of contrasting discourses in spoken or written texts” (p. 152). In sum, this study is grounded in RDT because we examine the complementary and competing discursive struggles that first-semester students identify and negotiate regarding messages to, from, and about home. The study goes beyond just recognizing and identifying these struggles, however, to also explore how students deal with such dialectical tensions as they attempt to manage the transition from home to college. Ultimately, these conclusions may provide insight into first year college student retention and success. Therefore, the study proposes the following research question: RQ: W hat, if any, discursive struggles do first-semester college students report regarding communication to, from, and about home?

METHODS Participants The participants were drawn from students enrolled in 15 sections of CIS 110 (Composition and Communication I). The study employed purposive sampling (Frey, Botan, & Kreps, 2000), targeting only first-semester students enrolled in these CIS courses. In total, 135 students met the criteria. The participants ranged in age from 18-25 (M = 18.15, SD = .714) and included 48.8 percent men (n=62) and 51.2 percent women (n=65). The majority identified their race as Caucasian (85.7 percent, n=109), followed by African-American (8.7 percent, n=11), Asian (1.6 percent, n=2), Hispanic (1.6 percent, n=2), Native American or Alaskan Native (.8 percent, n=1), Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander (.8 percent, n=1), and Asian/Caucasian (.8 percent, n=1). In addition, 56.3 percent (n=71) had already declared a major, 27.8 percent (n=35) knew what major they were intending to declare, and 15.9 percent (n=20) were undecided. Participants reported majors ranging from nursing, psychology, engineering, elementary education, biology, social work, philosophy, business, architecture, economics, computer science, kinesiology, landscape architecture, and math, to integrated strategic communication. Most of the participants (80.2 percent; n=101) lived on campus and 31 percent (n=39) of the students= hometowns were less than 60 miles away. Of those reporting hometowns farther than 60 miles from campus, 43 percent (n=54) of students’ hometowns were between 61 and 120 miles away, 13 percent (n=16) were

Navigating the New

7

120 to 240 miles away, and 13 percent (n=16) were more than 240 miles from campus. One student did not provide their hometown location.

Instruments The data for this study comes from an online survey of demographic questions and three in-class free write (a.k.a. journaling) assignments. The participants completed in-class free write responses during the first 10–15 minutes of class at three different times during the semester. Participants were asked in each free write prompt to identify times during the semester when they felt caught between a desire (of yours) or expectation (of others) to do something here at the university (academic or social) and a desire (of yours) or expectation (of others) to do something at home. More specifically, participants were asked to identify (a) the competing desires or expectations that made you feel caught in a no-win situation so-to-speak, (b) the people involved in the competing desires or expectations, and to describe any mixed messages you perceived in (1) a particular message and/or conversation (over e-mail, on Facebook, on the phone, in person, etc.) and (2) whether that message or conversation is part of an ongoing struggle between competing desires or expectations you have been having. Participants were also asked to identify whether the struggle was positive or negative, ongoing or resolved, and whether the struggle was affecting students’ performance at the university.

Data Collection Researchers visited each of the 15 sections of CIS 110 to oversee the completion of the free write responses. To participate in the study, students had to: 1) agree to participate by signing and returning an informed consent form and 2) have graduated from high school. Once consent forms were signed, a member of the research team collected and filed them. Although all students complete the in-class free write assignments, only those narratives from students that signed consent forms were used in the study. These same students were directed to complete the online survey of demographic information. The first free write (FW 1) was completed early in the semester, the second (FW 2) midway through the semester, and the third (FW 3) toward the end of the semester (just before Thanksgiving break). FW 3 was collected prior to Thanksgiving break because existing research suggests many students who do not return after the first semester actually drop out at this point. Moreover, Palmer, O’Kane, and Owens (2009) contend that the majority of turning points occur for first semester college students during the first six to eight weeks of the term. To ensure anonymity, researchers assigned each student an arbitrary three digit identification code number. These code numbers provided the research team a concise way to link participants with their responses, their demographic

8

Chapter One

information, the free write period of collection, and whether the participants returned or did not return to the university the following semester.

Data Analysis A total of 405 free write responses (FW 1, FW 2, FW 3) were examined using a qualitative thematic analysis approach. To make sense of such a large number of responses, researchers began by outlining responses and inserting the information from the responses into a word document that was later transferred onto an Excel spreadsheet. Researchers then reread the free writes to further reflect on the responses provided. Next, researchers examined all responses provided from each of the three sets of free writes for emergent themes. Finally, researchers prepared a thick description using direct quotations from the students themselves to emphasize how first-semester students discursively negotiate and assign meaning to their lived experiences during the college transition. Ultimately, validity was confirmed through multiple cycles of coding and reliability assessed through discussions among researchers until they reached consensus.

RESULTS The results of this study contribute to the understanding of first-semester students’ communication to, from, and about home, specifically related to managing discursive struggles and dialectical tensions (Baxter & Montgomery, 1996). Three discursive struggles emerged from this analysis: independence, integration, and expression. Of the 405 narratives collected from the three rounds of free writes, the discursive struggle of integration was most prevalent at 43 percent (n=177), followed by the discursive struggle of independence at 27 percent (n=116), and the discursive struggle of expression at 21 percent (n=85). Finally, 7 percent (n=27) of the narratives did not report any discursive struggles related to messages to, from, or about home.

The Discursive Struggle of Independence Overall, 22 percent (n=30) free writes in FW 1, 30 percent (n=41) free writes in FW 2, and 33 percent (n=45) free writes in FW 3 reflected the discursive struggle of independence. Students revealed that messages concerning both campus and home challenged their changing identities as first-semester college students. The narratives reflected competing discourses about attending to their own needs (i.e., academically or socially) or satisfying the needs of others (e.g., friends, family, romantic partners, roommates). Students addressed the difficulties in making the “right choice.” Specifically, students discussed wanting to do things on their own, but still feeling (inter)dependent on pre-college relationships. Student narratives reflected the need to stay connected to family, friends, romantic partners, and pre-college identities even at the cost of their emerging

Navigating the New

9

adulthood identity needs. By invoking the discourse of independence with the discourse of interdependence, students attempted to construct their new identities as being free, responsible, and self-regulated, yet dependent on others and dependent to others. Students feared that if they did not make their own decisions, they would be stuck in their pre-college identities. For example, four students wrote: I have been waiting to be independent for so long now I don’t see why I would go home. (Student 244, FW1) I’d like space and more general respect as I am old enough to make my own decisions. (Student 226, FW 3) My parents tell me to make sure that school is my #1 priority however they also want to make sure I stay connected to them. (Student 281, FW2) I’ll still put someone before me but I need to start weighing priorities. (Student 131, FW1) W ithin this discursive struggle, students recognized the need to balance demands imposed by self and others. Through this struggle of independence, one radiant of meaning was the desire to stay connected to pre-college identities and relationships. Desire to Stay Connected to Pre-College Identities and Relationships Across all free write rounds, students reported being torn between doing things they wanted to do socially or completing tasks expected of them by friends and family. Students explained that while they were accomplishing academic tasks, they were making social decisions and plans that affected pre-college relationships. Students conferred that the majority of their decisions to selfishly choose social and extracurricular events came at the expense of letting someone down. One student wrote: A while back my friends and I made plans to go to the beach and stay at a friend’s beach house. I told everyone I could drive-consequently finalizing our plans. My mom told me that she was changing the date of my dad’s birthday party to a time I planned to go to the beach. My mom strongly encouraged me to attend my dad’s bday [sic] but understands that I am 18 and she allows me to make my own decisions. (Student 215, FW1) Like Student 215, other students claimed it was important to spend time with friends but did not consider how the choice would affect family members who had high expectations of spending time with them, as well. For example, one student stated: Of course it was expected of me to go with my family to see the fireworks but they made plans after I made plans with my friends so I refuse to break plans with my friends. (Student 349, FW1)

10

Chapter One

Although students reported that the tough decisions they faced put them at odds with their family and friends, none discussed how negotiating their changing relationships and newly independent status might affect later academic success(es). W ith FW 1 occurring early in the first semester, students may have been engaging in a “honeymoon” stage of college where they were following rules and expectations placed upon them at school. Students may not have realized until later in the semester that they still had to maintain familial ties and actively engage in relationships from home. The responses across the free writes reflected numerous instances where students caved to on-campus or off-campus pressures due to promises of tangible rewards from family members and friends. Students discussed, for example, a desire to stay on campus to spend time forging new friendships or to complete assignments, yet were drawn to the rewards and promises made by others at home. Students wrote: I called my mom and she said I should come home. She would fix my favorite meal for me if I did [come home]. (Student 235, FW1) My mom kept telling me that she and my dad missed me and she would take me shopping if I came home. (Student 223, FW1) My mom wanted me to come for Labor day weekend and she used me setting up my bank account as an excuse so I could have access to my money even though I wanted to stay here. (Student 336, FW1) These examples illustrate the fact that even though students may have felt more independent living on their own and desire that independence, they also realized that they still had ties to their communities. Parents not only provided students with incentives to return home, they also relied on pre-college responsibilities to get students to return home. Students explained having to return home more frequently than they would like because parents expected them to mow the lawn (Student 232), fix a friend’s car (Student 171), and help a sister plan a wedding (Student 160). Students also explained that new relationships sometimes impeded them from satisfying independent needs: My roommate has kind of taken on the role of mom. Not necessarily in a bad way, just cleaning, seeing where we are, and when we are coming home. (Student 133, FW1) Students also discussed wanting to join groups or organizations, but worried how their family members or friends would judge these decisions or felt the need to ask permission to engage in these activities: I joined (sorority) after I made an agreement with my parents that I wouldn’t let my school work slip. (Student 165, FW 1)

Navigating the New

11

These free writes clearly illustrate that first semester college students struggle to manage their desire for independence and expectation to maintain ties with family and friends. The Discursive Struggle of Integration The discursive struggle of integration was the most prevalent across the three rounds of transcripts. The students were clearly conflicted about how to immerse themselves in the college culture. Students discussed their desire to integrate and be accepted as college students and the struggles they experienced in trying to do so. This discursive struggle reflects the discourse of individualism and community. During all rounds of data collection, five radiants of meaning revealed themselves within this discursive struggle: Individual-Identity Construction Surrounding Physical (In)dependence, Individual Identity Construction as Coupled or Free of Commitment, Voluntary or Involuntary Interdependence with a Relational Other, Competing Demands on Time and Energy, and Competing Loyalty Demand. Individual-identity Construction Surrounding Physical (In)dependence Baxter (2011) explains that research exploring integration has focused on whether an individual’s identity is that of an autonomous being or is physically dependent on others. Students explained that their autonomy was threatened at times due to feeling physically constrained by a vehicle (or lack thereof), and through parental physical dependencies. Vehicle Constraints Numerous students discussed feeling stuck on campus because they did not have a car or a ride to visit home more frequently, or that other individuals, such as roommates or friends depended on them to take them places. For instance, one student (233, FW 1), discussed that he did not want to go home to visit family but felt pressured to do so by his hometown friend who was driving home: I feel obligated to take my friend up on his offer to let me drive him home because I don’t have a car. Conversely, Student 226 felt a desperate need to visit home, but did not have a car or friends that could drive him home: I am wanting to go home but my family thinks that they only need to get me to come home once a month. I feel stuck here and am becoming stressed. I have no life. My family just sort of ditched me. (Student 226, FW 3) Another student (177, FW 1) focused on a different issue that affected his need for autonomy. His roommate depended on him:

Chapter One

12

I just want to go and get my car fixed but my roommate needed me to drive him somewhere. Parental Dependencies During the free writes, students also reported that it was comforting to have family members living close to the university. But, with that closeness came additional stressors including expectations for visits and to maintain pre-college responsibilities. Students 129 and 381, for example, reported feeling they had to go home to help out family members because no one else would: I have a desire to stay here on the weekends, but I feel conflicted to go home and help my mom move into her new place. My mom and younger sister are who I feel like I am expected to go home and help them out because my parents are divorced and there’s no one else to help them move. (Student 381, FW1) My mom and dad want me to come home because they need me to help them around the house and since I am an only child it is my responsibility. (Student 235, FW 2) They [parents] expect me to do everything for them and to drop everything I’m doing for them. (Student 206, FW 2) In addition to physical constraints, Baxter (2011) also explains that students may struggle with emotional and social pulls that affect their needs for autonomy and connection. This radiant of meaning is identified as Individual Identity Construction as Coupled or Free of Commitment. Individual Identity Construction as Coupled or Free of Commitment Students discussed the desires of wanting to join on-campus groups and organizations, such as intramural teams and Greek life, yet at the same time wanting to construct a separate identity of being a “regular” college student. Students also reported a fear that if they joined an on-campus group, their friends and family at home would disapprove. For example, these students discussed this tension involving joining a sorority: During rush week I felt like I was being pressured to join my sister’s sorority at first. She’s in KKT and every time I would go to that house I would be called a ‘little kronie’ or they would say something about my sister. I felt that if I joined it would only be because of Claire, my sister. But if I joined somewhere else I would disappoint her. (Student 336, FW1) Not many people back home expect me to join a sorority but I have been thinking about it a lot lately because I kind of feel left out. For some people I hear it isn’t worth the money or time to be in a sorority, which I do want to concentrate on my academics for the first year, and I don’t have a lot of money to spend. But from other people I hear it is so much fun and you meet a lot of people that you are friends with forever. (Student 341, FW1)

Navigating the New

13

Students also discussed tensions associated with integrating into other oncampus organizations and teams: My friends like Frisbee and want to be on the club team. I enjoy it too but I don’t feel like going to practice every Monday and Wednesday. (Student 218, FW1) The more clubs I join and can get involved in, the harder it is to focus on my grades. (Student 331, FW 2) Although students explored the desire to integrate into the university through teams and organizations, they also noted their need for autonomy while also drawing upon a discourse of integration to hold onto their pre-college relationships and identity. Conversely, students also discussed their need for autonomy when their families and partners were seeking connection. Student 154, for example, explained that he thought he made the right decision when coming to college by terminating his relationship with his girlfriend so he would not have to deal with the associated stressors of being involved within a long distance relationship (LDR). However, rather than feeling relief about being single, he was struggling with regret and missing his girlfriend: I thought it would be too difficult having a long distance relationship while so much is changing in our lives right now. I just want a partial relationship, like we would still see each other and do things like we did while we were together. (Student 154, FW1) For other students, the struggle deciding to maintain or terminate a relationship was just beginning. For example, Student 208 questioned whether having a significant other would negatively impact her social desires and needs: I saw things that I could be missing out on because I had a boyfriend and wouldn’t do them. I am afraid I am holding back from doing things that I enjoy and that I will regret later. (Student 208, FW 2) Students also discussed a desire to maintain their current relationship and integrate into the college culture. Student #246 wrote, for example: He [boyfriend] didn’t understand that I did want to see him but also live out the whole college experience. This was putting even more stress on me between fighting with him and classes. (Student 246, FW1) Although these examples reflect family pressures and pressures imposed by a relational partner, many college students also struggled with needs for integration and separation from individuals they were forced to live with, such as roommates.

14

Chapter One

Voluntary or Involuntary Interdependence with a Relational Other Baxter (2011) notes “the discourse of individualism presumes that individuals have full selection of their relational partners. However, the discourse of community emphasizes membership into a larger social group where choice may be constrained” (p. 67). Therefore, like families where individuals are stuck with one another, students noted feeling stuck with a roommate. Exploring this voluntary /involuntary radiant of meaning provides insight into students feeling torn in their needs for integration and separation. During the first semester, some students felt that roommates were negatively affecting impacting their academic goals: I wanted to study and my roommates wanted to play video games and watch television. They had already done their homework but I was just getting started. (Student 272, FW1) When I first came to (college), I found my roommate was valedictorian of her class, majoring in biology and someday hopes to become a pharmacist. I felt very intimidated because even though I was tenth in my class, I certainly wasn’t as smart as she was. As the weeks started coming she studied a lot. My classes didn’t require me to study as much as hers but I felt like she expected me to study as much as she does. I almost felt looked down upon while she studied for hours and I wasted time on Facebook. (Student 422, FW1) When you live in the same room as someone you feel as if you are constantly invading each other’s space and it creates an uncomfortable living situation. (Student 228, FW2) Students also wrote that roommates affected their needs to socially integrate or separate: There have been times that my roommate and I will go to events and once I am ready to go I tell her I am leaving so she says she will go too but on the way out she stops at every person to talk and say goodbye. So about 30 minutes later I am finally headed back to my dorm. (Student 166, FW1) Some of the roommate conflict involved roommates making decisions on whether they were planning on staying for the remainder of the semester, or depart college early. One student wrote for example: I want her (roommate) to stay but also need to find another roommate if she leaves. (Student 160, FW3) In addition to students struggling with voluntary and involuntary demands, they also struggled with competing demands on time and energy.

Navigating the New

15

Competing Demands on Time and Energy During the first semester, students identified the most common struggle as being able to balance demands on time and energy. Students discussed feeling pulled between completing tasks they wanted and needed to accomplish, while being present for friends, family, and romantic partners. Baxter (2011) explains that “the discourse of community privileges spending time and investing energy in the relational partner, whereas the discourse of individualism privileges a decision by the person to honor the demands on his or her time and energy” (p. 69). First, students identified discourses from home that were placing demands on their time and energy. Student 234, for example, had numerous school assignments to complete but received continuous pleads from his girlfriend to visit on weekends: She [girlfriend] kept begging and begging for me to come visit her so I finally called and we worked out a plan so I could see her Friday after class. I think I made the right choice. (Student 234, FW1) For Student 346, the continuous pleas from a boyfriend were not just to visit more frequently, but to leave college altogether and transfer to a school closer to home: My boyfriend wants me to transfer but she (mom) doesn’t know. Now my relationship with my boyfriend is on thin ice. (Student 346, FW2) In addition to feeling torn between satisfying the demands of relational partners and their own desires for autonomy, students also reported feeling pressured by friends and roommates to spend more time with them. Students explained these pressures and both short term and long term consequences for them as college students: They were trying to get me to go, but I resisted the urge and stayed in my dorm. They said things like c’mon it’ll be fun and your [sic] always inside studying. (Student 193, FW1) All of my friends want to go out but I have way too much homework and not enough time to get it done. They were all begging me to come and making me feel guilty saying things like you always have hw [sic] and you never come out. I had to choose between my homework and skipping parties and memories. But more parties will come. The real reason we are here is for the academics. (Student 179, FW1) Despite these struggles about prioritizing homework and academic goals over personal and social needs and the desires of family members, friends, and loved ones, all of the students who prioritized academics explained that their decisions resulted in positive outcomes. Students wrote, for example:

Chapter One

16

It [sic] actually makes me feel better like I’m being a good and dedicated student. More parties will come but the real reason I am at school is for the academics. (Student 179, FW1) I finished my hw [sic]. It was a weight lifted off my chest. This way I can get good grades and then have fun. (Student 217, FW1) I think it paid off. I got a lot done and then next day in class I understood what was going on and felt prepared. (Student 193, FW1) Additional narratives reflected the true altruistic drive of students balancing their time and energy. Students explained that by putting academics first they would be able to eventually take care of their families and loved ones: I know I am expected to be here getting my education so I can provide for my family one day with the career of my choice. My desire is to be home right now but I am expected to be here. I know by sticking college out and earning my degree the inconveniences will be well worth the struggle someday. (Student 144, FW1) The majority of the narratives that showed students struggling with choosing school or social needs actually resulted in students putting schoolwork before social desires. W hile at school, students were making the necessary sacrifices regarding time and energy to become adults by working toward academic goals and accomplishments when challenged by friends. However, the narratives from students regarding family and romantic partners reflected more issues concerning balancing time and energy. Students also discussed a struggle that affected their transition regarding competing loyalty demands. Competing Loyalty Demands Baxter (2011) explains that how and whom a person spends time can create competing expectations concerning loyalty. Specifically, Baxter notes, “often, how a person spends his or her time and energy is regarded as a marker of loyalty, but loyalty is enacted (and violated) in ways other than time/energy expenditure” (pp. 70–71). Students identified four struggles about feeling torn over “choosing sides”: choosing romantic partners or family, choosing between parents, choosing new friends or pre-college friends, and choosing friends or family. Students discussed that these decisions created turmoil for them both at college and at home. In FW 1, many students identified this loyalty demand to be a source of tension, especially with regard to the Labor Day weekend. Students who did intend to go home for the weekend felt torn because even though they were “home,” they still wanted to spend the majority of their time with their romantic partners: I had a desire to go see my boyfriend who attends a different school while my mom [was] leaving for Florida to go take care of my grandma. With my mom going to Florida I would not see her for a while and she really wanted to see me. I ended up going home to see her and while it felt good to be with her, my

Navigating the New

17

boyfriend and I had an even longer time apart. My mom wants to be with me all time (which has gotten better) and she said it was okay to see Ryan (boyfriend) one night but I could tell she was upset in a way where I’d choose him over her. (Student 382, FW1) I had to make a decision to go bowling with my boyfriend and his friends or stay home with her before going back to school that night. The message I was getting from my mom was that I like Chris (boyfriend) more than her and don’t ever want to hang out with just her anymore. This struggle makes me wish I went to school at School A (school close to home) so I could spend more time with my mom. (Student 159, FW1) My boyfriend wants me to transfer but she [mom] doesn’t know. Now my relationship with my boyfriend is on thin ice. (Student 346, FW2) Student narratives reflected the difficulties of choosing between spending time with romantic partners and family members. Students also discussed loyalty demands between parents: My parents are divorced. So over the Labor Day weekend they both wanted me to go home and visit. It felt good to not let my dad down, and I felt somewhat obligated to see him. My mother came back Monday and did not know I was at my father’s. I think she was kind of upset when she found out that I had seen him and not her. (Student 270, FW1) Another struggle that students identified involved balancing demands from new friends from college and old friend from home. Students acknowledged that they wanted to spend time with both groups of friends, yet due to time and proximity had to make decisions that prioritize some, while offending others: I had a close friend back home that was in need of my direct support. He and his girlfriend of one year had broken up earlier that week and he was taking it very hard. So in essence I had to decide between my own happiness and pleasure, and truly pleasing my best friend. I came to the conclusion that it would mean a lot more to my old friend just to see me than for me to hang out with my new friends. (Student 148, FW1) Before Labor Day weekend, my friends from back home were expecting me to come back for the holiday. I had told them before leaving that I would be coming back then. However, I had met several new friends at UK, and they wanted me to stay here. I really wanted to continue making friends here, and use the weekend to hang out with new people, but I also didn’t want to risk loosing [sic] my old friends. (Student 147, FW1) Finally, the loyalty demand that was present the most during FW 1 involved students struggling with choosing to spend time with friends or family: My second weekend at (school) I felt confident on whether I should stay or go. All of my newly-met friends wanted to stay while my family really wanted to see me. I felt like I should hang out with my friends, but I also thought my family would be offended by that. (Student 140, FW1)

Chapter One

18

This past weekend I was debating between going home on Friday or Saturday. My parents and siblings wanted me to meet them at my lake house on Friday, but my friends wanted to stay here. I could tell my mom really wanted me to meet up with my family, but she told me to stay if that was what all my friends were doing. (Student 176, FW1) Clearly, students’ communication exchanges and decisions were influenced by numerous competing and complementary discourses. Students explained that they have discourses that permeate their needs for individualism and community, some of which support their own needs, while others contradict students’ wants and desires. Baxter (2011) notes that “from a dialogic perspective, communicative life is riddled with a myriad of discourses, all in play with and against one another at the same time” (p. 73). The Discursive Struggle of Expression Baxter (2011) contends that the discursive struggle of expression has been mistakenly reduced by researchers to exploring how individuals are either open or not (p. 75). However, the student narratives revealed a more in-depth examination of this struggle. Students desired openness from individuals from home, but that openness also created feelings of homesickness and doubt during the first semester. Additionally, students discussed communicating openly about relationships and fears with friends, family members, and relational partners, both at school and home; yet that disclosure came with a risk for students. Students discussed that their openness caused others to offer messages that they perceived as being critical rather than supportive. Across the free writes, three radiants of meaning emerged related to the discursive struggle of expression: Individualism at Play, Rationality at Play, and Romance at Play. Individualism at Play W hen exploring this radiant of meaning, it is important to identify discourses that individuals choose to reveal at the cost(s) of others. Students revealed that the narratives that create hurt and confusion involved individuals telling them that they desired the students to transfer to different colleges and universities: My parents tell me to do what I want to do but then bring up the idea of staying home or attending a school closer to home. (Student 274, FW2) My friend continually tries to persuade me to give up on my desire to attend college in [city] and attend college with him. This situation puts more stress on me at [school]. (Student 274, FW1) Mom said you should just transfer to (a different college). It surprised and confused me because she is always the one telling me to never give up. This makes me want to succeed more but it also makes me think how easy it would be to transfer. I just don’t know what I am going to do. (Student 385, FW1)

Navigating the New

19

Students also discussed wishing their loved ones at home would not send messages conveying how much they missed them. These messages made students feel homesick and lonely: Everyday my mom will talk to me and say how much she and everyone back home misses me. She doesn’t try to pull me back home but this does tug at the heartstrings. (Student 240, FW1) My mom was telling me how much she missed me and making me feel more obligated to go home. (Student 200, FW1) I have been getting mixed messages from my parents in many conversations I have had with them. Every time I see them they will joke with me and say things like, “Hi I’m your mom” and “Haven’t seen you in ages!” These messages seem mixed because my parents are laughing, but at the same time I think it is how they really feel. These messages are a huge part of my conflicted feelings because I don’t know how to take them and they linger in my head. (Student 342, FW1) She (mom) posted on Facebook multiple times she wishes her child would come home. (Student 140, FW2) My parents pretty much stalk me through my card swipes and Facebook. (Student 145, FW 3) My mom has been sending me the most sad and depressing text messages about how miserable she is and how much she wishes I was home. (Student 179, FW2) I had a talk with my parents and they said they wanted me to come home every weekend. (Student 416, FW2) Students also reported wishing they did not see messages from friends and family discussing their fun activities or status updates because they experienced jealousy or feelings that everyone was moving on without them: I see all of my friends’ FB [sic] (Facebook) statuses that didn=t go to college or went to community college and see all of the fun they are having without me. (Student 372, FW1) I saw messages and pictures on Facebook from everyone at home and I wanted to be there with them. (Student 233, FW 2) Rationality at Play In the narratives, students identified thinking their parents were attempting to be supportive in their disclosures or candid communication, yet the revealing of information made students feel uncertain and criticized about their adult decisionmaking. Students explained that parents’ openness concerning health practices, employment, course withdrawal, and joining groups or organizations created tension: Not many people back home expect me to join a sorority but I have been thinking about it a lot lately because I kind of feel left out. (Student 341, FW1) My parents want me to do good in school but also be in a sorority that will take away from school work. That is a mixed message to me. (Student 151, FW3)

Chapter One

20

My mom assumes that I party instead of studying because I dropped the course. She randomly still mentions this to show her disappointment. (Student 271, FW3) Romance at Play W ithin the discursive struggle of expression, students discussed times in which they used ambiguity to spare a romantic partners, friend, or roommate’s feeling. In turn, students provided instances where their family members and friends used ambiguity to spare their feelings. Yet the ambiguous messages created tension and uncertainty for students: My dad would say I want you to be close to home but I want you to be happy. (Student 318, FW1) My parents told me that they love when I come home but also said they wanted me to come back to (school). (Student 175, FW1) My floormates would say no don’t go stay here and then two seconds later they would say go visit him at his college. (Student 376, FW1) Identifying the three discursive struggles and associated radiants of meaning provides insight into the discourses that created support and tension for students during their first semester on campus. In essence, students struggled with dialectical tensions surrounding independence from home, integration to school, and expression.

DISCUSSION Three discursive struggles emerged from this analysis of first-semester college student in-class free write responses. First, students struggled with their desire for independence and the interdependent constraints imposed by themselves and by others about family and friends at home. Second, students experienced a discursive struggle regarding integration, noting the desire to engage with new individuals and experiences, but also needing to maintain connections with pre-college relationships. Third, students reported a discursive struggle regarding expression. Students wanted to be open with others, but also desired to conceal some information from others. Interestingly, they also reported a desire for others to conceal information from them. Results from this study confirm existing literature suggesting the complex nature of communication for first-semester college students (e.g., Pope et al., 2005). That is to say that students’ communication “is a multivocal process that involves the weaving of numerous significant meaning systems— or discourses” (MarkoHarrigan & Braithwaite, 2010, p. 138). More specifically, this study provides insight into how first-semester students experience and attempt to manage the discursive struggles resulting from discourses to, from, and about home. The following paragraphs further clarify several conclusions arising from this analysis.

Navigating the New

21

Based on this analysis, three distinct discursive struggles appear to impact firstsemester students’ transition from home to school. Students negotiated discursive struggles of independence, integration, and expression. For many, these dialectical tensions arose from communication by people both at home and at school. This extends RDT by going beyond the examination of communication in a single dyad or group exploring the various discursive struggles that emerged from a complex network of relationships in which first-semester college students find themselves (Baxter, 2011). Included in this complex network are new relationships formed at college and existing relationships from home (e.g., hometown friends, new friends, family members, professors, advisors, roommates, romantic partners, teammates, coworkers, classmates). Moreover, this study took Baxter’s (2011) advice and placed college students at the center of a complex web of discourses. This study prioritized the goals of dialogic inquiry and focused on “contradiction— the unity of opposites is the discursive struggle, not a conflict between individuals, and not a psychological tension within an individual between competing needs and motivations. Discourses are struggling” (p. 17). Thus, the main focus of analysis was on the “discourses not the individuals” (Baxter, 2011, p. 18). As such, this study is the first to prioritize the central discourses that affect first-semester students’ communication related to successful transition to college and retention. Interestingly, the majority of discursive struggles faced by first-semester college students result from discourses both on campus and off campus. This finding confirms what Bean (2005) suggested about first year college student transitions, specifically the role people off campus (e.g., family, friends, romantic partners) may play in the decision to stay, to transfer to an institution closer to home, or to leave college altogether. On campus discourses appear to challenge or support students’ existing goals and self-concepts. For example, students who discussed prioritizing social needs seemed to identify similar discourses that seek the same outcome. Although these discourses are unifying, they still potentially may have negative outcomes for the student while at college. Similarly, messages from and about home appear to unify and complement one another in that students feel they are the marginalized voice within the web of discourses (Baxter, 2011). For example, those students that reported their parents, high school friends, and romantic partners as making frequent requests to “come home” tended to cave in to these requests more frequently than students who reported only having one or two individuals making demands on their time and energy. This finding is important for two specific reasons. First, it highlights the need to critique “the dominant voices” (Baxter, 2004, p. 16) when examining the dialectical tensions experienced by first-semester college students. Critical sensibility recognizes the issues of power, dominance, and control in relationships. Not only is it important to recognize the prevailing dominant forces in different relational types; but it is also essential to examine what are the messages being communicated and then “pursue how it is that relationship parties jointly conduct their interactional life in such a way that some voices (whether verbal-ideological

22

Chapter One

or the literal, embodied kind) are silenced while others are heard” (p. 17). Second, it explores how unity affects discursive struggles, which as previously noted, Baxter (2004) discusses as being under-explored in RDT research. This study was able to address what discourses interpenetrate and reflect dialectical unity as first-semester students communicate messages to, from, and about home. By examining RDT in this light, Baxter (2011) suggests it may be of more utility across various fields of inquiry. By focusing on discursive struggles and not simply dyadic conflict, numerous research topics could be examined or reexamined using RDT as theoretical grounding. Certainly, this study points to its utility for understanding first-semester student transition and retention issues. In other words, relational communication ought to be examined as a piece of the departure puzzle because they are “meanings rather than contextual containers. They are constructed in communication, rather than being mere settings in which communication occurs” (Baxter, 2011, p. 15). The conclusions drawn from this analysis provide beneficial insight regarding communication among first-semester students and their friends and families, as well as instructors and advisors during the transition from home to college. More specifically, they point to several strategies that may be employed to improve firstsemester student transition to college and, thus, retention. First, the free-write experience seemed to create an opportunity for students to bring underlying discursive struggles from a subconscious to conscious level. Doing so may allow them to deal more effectively with them during the transition. Creating opportunities to work through such struggles on paper may have cathartic opportunities for students faced with institutional and self uncertainty. Perhaps first year experience courses should incorporate such assignments as standard in order to help students work through the discursive struggles related to transitioning successfully from home to school. Second, college and university personnel ought to work with student life organizations to sponsor workshops and seminars that address the relational communication issues revealed in this study. Seminars could focus, for example, on how to balance school work and social needs, how to survive a breakup, how to maintain long-distanced relationships, how to communicate with parents, how to manage social network relationships, how to survive a bad roommate, how to communicate with one’s residence hall advisor and academic advisor, how to make connections with faculty members, and what strategies to follow for graduating on a four-year plan.

LIMITATIONS As with any study, this project has several limitations. First, the student population was not very diverse. Although the 135 students varied across demographics, the pool of students who did not return was only seven students, the majority sharing similar racial, sexual, and socioeconomic backgrounds. Second, the current study only examines the struggles present across the first semester. An examination

Navigating the New

23

of free writes collected throughout the entire first year could help shed light into additional discursive struggles. Third, the third free write occurred before Thanksgiving break. In hindsight, it may have been more beneficial to have asked students to complete the final free write during final exams week at the end of the semester rather than just before the Thanksgiving break. Fourth, the methodology employed is both a strength and weakness. Relying only on free writes limited the researchers from being able to engage in member checking and gaining more-in depth questioning that could be gleaned from interviews or focus groups. Fifth, the results of this study may not be generalizable as they represent only one university in one specific geographic region of the United States.

FUTURE RESEARCH Conclusions illustrated in the present study give rise to numerous directions for future research. For example, RDT could be used to explore the entire first year college experience. Although the first semester has been identified as a high marker for early departure, such longitudinal exploration may provide additional insight into the departure puzzle. Future research could also focus on first-semester college students’ discursive struggles at other colleges and universities to discover any generalizability of the results of this study. This study highlights the utility of using unstructured writing experiences (Ortlipp, 2008) as a research methodology. Although this methodological choice has been used by researchers studying English and creative writing as a means to help participants “sharpen their language skills, to write and edit, and to use these skills to explore themselves and their world” (Allen, 2008, p. 78), very few communication studies have used in-class free write journaling as a qualitative methodology. Although the use of free writes is a clear strength in this study, future research efforts would benefit from in-depth interviewing and focus groups consisting of both returning and non-returning students. The purpose of this study was to gain insight into the experiences of first-semester students while they were happening rather than through self-reported recollections after the fact. Still such research could add breadth and depth to what was learned from this analysis. This analysis focused on the dialectical tensions of first-semester college students. Future research could examine the discursive struggles of families and friends. Doing so could provide additional insight into the complex webs of meaning first-year students grapple with during this critical transition period. In sum, this study confirms the fact that first-semester college students experience complex discursive struggles as they negotiate their transition from home to school. Communication research projects such as this one can begin to reveal reasons students choose to persist or not based on negotiating competing messages to, from, and about home. Ultimately, conclusions like those revealed here can inform educators’ with strategies to help both students and their families

24

Chapter One

and friends “back home” to work together to help make the transition a successful one.

REFERENCES Allen, G. (2008). Language, power, and consciousness: A writing experiment at the University of Toronto. In T. R. Johnson (Eds.) Teaching Composition (pp.65-98). Boston: Bedford/St. Martin’s. Astin, A. W. (1993). What matters in college?: Four critical years revisited. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Baxter, L. A. (2004). Relationships as dialogues. Personal Relationships, 11, 1–22. ———. (2011). Voicing Relationships: A dialogic perspective. Los Angeles: Sage. ——— & Braithwaite, D. O. (2008). Relational dialectics theory: Crafting meaning from competing discourses. In L. A. Baxter & D. O. Braithwaite (Ed.), Engaging Theories in Interpersonal Communication: Multiple Perspectives (pp. 349–361). Los Angeles: Sage. Baxter, L. A., & Montgomery, B. M. (1996). Relating: Dialogues and dialectics. New York: Guilford Press. Bean, J. P. (2005). Nine themes of college student retention. In A. Steidman (Ed.), College student retention: Formula for student success (pp. 215–243). Westport, CT: Praeger. Bernstein, E. (2009). The helicopter parents are hovering on Facebook. Wall Street JournalEastern Edition, 254, B7. Coburn, K. L. (2006). Organizing a ground crew for today’s helicopter parents. About Campus, 11, 9–16. Darling, C. A., McWey, L. M., Howard, S. N., & Olmstead, S. B. (2007). College student stress: The influence of interpersonal relationships on sense of coherence. Stress and Health, 23, 215–229. doi: 10.1002/smi DeBerard, M. S., Spielmans, G. I., & Julka, D.C. (2004). Predictors of academic achievement and retention among college freshman: A longitudinal study. College Student Journal, 38, 66–80. Elkins, S. A., Braxton, J. M., & James, G. W. (2000). Tinto’s separation stage and its influence on first-semester college student persistence. Research in Higher Education, 41, 251–268. Fisher, S., & Hood, B. (1987). The stress of transition to university: A longitudinal study of psychological disturbance, absent-mindedness and vulnerability to homesickness. British Journal of Psychology, 78, 425–411. Frey, L., Botan, C., & Kreps, G. (2000). Investigating communication. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn and Bacon. Gerdes, H., & Mallinckrodt, B. (1994). Emotional, social, and academic adjustment of college students: A longitudinal study of retention. Journal of Counseling and Development, 72, 281–289. Holahan, C. J., Valentiner, D. P., & Moos, R. (1994). Parental support and psychological adjustment during the transition to young adulthood in a college sample. Journal of Family Psychology, 8, 215–223. Larose, S., & Boivin, M. (1998). Attachment to parents, social support expectations, and socioemotional adjustment during the high school--college transition. Journal of Research on Adolescence (Lawrence Erlbaum), 8(1), 1–27.

Navigating the New

25

Ling, R., & Baron, N. S. (2007). Text messaging and IM linguistic comparison of American college data. Journal of Language & Social Psychology, 26, 291–298. doi: 10.1177/0261927X06303480 Marko-Harrigan, M., & Braithwaite, D. (2010). Discursive struggles in families formed through visible adoption: An exploration of dialectical unity. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 38, 127–144. Mounts, N. S. (2004). Contributions of parenting and campus climate to freshmen adjustment in a multiethnic sample. Journal of Adolescent Research, 19, 468–491. Orenstein, P. (2009, March 15). Growing up on Facebook. The New York Times, p. 11. Ortlipp, M. (2008). Keeping and using reflective journals in the qualitative research process. The Qualitative Report, Vol. 13, No. 4, December 2008, 695B705 http://www. nova.edu/ ssss/QR/QR.13–4/ortlipp.pdf Palmer, M., O’Kane, P., & Owens, M. (2009). Betwixt spaces: student accounts of turning point experiences in the first-year transition. Studies in Higher Education, 34, 37–54. Paul, E. L., & Brier, S. (2001). Friendsickness in the transition to college: College Predictors and college adjustment correlates. Journal of Counseling & Development, 79, 77–89. Petronio, S. (1994). Privacy binds in family interactions: The case of parental privacy invasion. In W. R. Cupach & B. H. Spitzberg (Eds.), The dark side of interpersonal communication (pp. 241–258). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Pope, R. L., Miklitsch, T.A., & Weigand, M. J. (2005). First-year students: Embracing their diversity, enhancing our practice. In R. S. Feldman (Ed.), Improving the first year of college: Research and practice (pp. 51–72). Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Richmond, J. M., Rosenfeld, L. B., & Bowen, G. L. (1998). Social support for adolescents at risk of school failure. Social Work, 43, 309–323. Smith, W. L., & Zhang, P. (2009). Students’ perceptions and experiences with key factors during the transition from high school to college, College Student Journal, 43, 643–657. Stephenson-Abetz, J., & Holman, A. (2012). Home is where the heart is: Facebook and the negotiation of “old” and “new” during the transition to college. Western Journal of Communication, 76, 175–193. doi:10.1080/10570314.2011. 654309 Tinto, V. (1987). Leaving college: Rethinking the causes and cures of student attrition, The University of Chicago Press, Chicago. ———. (1993). Leaving college: Rethinking the causes and cures of student attrition (second edition). Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, Chicago. Trice, A. D. (2002). First semester college students’ email to parents: Frequency and content related to parenting style. College Student Journal, 36, 327–334.

CHAPTER TWO THE HIGH SCHOOL TO COLLEGE TRANSITION: COLLEGE-GOING CULTURE, STUDENT-COUNSELOR INTERACTIONS, AND THE COLLEGE PREPARATION PROCESS Chenoa S. W oods, Ph.D. University of California, Irvine In 2009 President Obama introduced the American Graduation Initiative and the Obama-Biden Agenda for College Affordability in order to increase college degree attainment. President Obama’s (2009) goals of increasing community college completion and establishing the United States as the global leader in college graduates underscores the importance of understanding how high schools and school personnel prepare their students for college. Given the changing demographics of the U.S., and California in particular, some of the energies spent to achieve these goals must focus on low-income, minority, and future first-generation college students. Students across the country prepare for college in a variety of ways and in multiple contexts, the most salient of which is arguably the high school they attend. Most students believe they will attend college and plan to do so, but the high schools they attend can play a large role in students’ postsecondary trajectories. High school students prepare for college by taking required courses, taking the SAT, filing for financial aid, and completing college applications, but the opportunities to complete such actions vary with students’ access to key resources at their schools and within their local communities. At the focal point of academic preparation are teachers, whereas school counselors often spearhead the college preparation and guidance process. Notably, the American School Counselor Association (ASCA, 2013) argues that part of a

The High School to College Transition

27

high school counseling program is providing assistance in the “postsecondary planning and application process” and “career awareness and the world of work.” Counselors can engage in precollege counseling through classroom guidance, individual guidance, and/or collaborating with teachers and parents (ASCA, 2013). High school counselors serve a variety of roles, and allocating time for precollege counseling can be difficult. Public school counselors have a variety of roles and duties, and precollege counseling accounts for nearly a quarter of their time; nevertheless, private school counselors spend more than half of their time on college advising, indicating that public school students may be at a disadvantage when it comes to college knowledge and access to college preparation opportunities (Clinedinst, Hurley, & Hawkins, 2011). Previous research indicates that counselors and adequate access to precollege resources are influential in students’ postsecondary preparation, application, and enrollment (e.g. Belasco, 2013; Bryan, Holcomb- McCoy, Moore-Thomas, & Day-Vines, 2009; Hill, 2012; Freeman, 1997; Kimura-W alsh, Yamamura, Griffin, & Allen, 2008; Lee & Eckstrom, 1987; McDonough, 1997; Muhammad, 2008; W oods & Domina, forthcoming). One aspect of preparing students for a range of postsecondary options, including college, is having consistent and intentional conversations with students about college. These conversations, combined with hands-on assistance and opportunities for preparation can contribute to a precollege counseling model, a key principle of college-going culture (MacDonald & Dorr, 2006). This study aims to unpack previous findings that indicate counselors’ effectiveness in the college preparation process. Specifically, this study explores the precollege counseling model of Towering Pines School District (pseudonym) and examines studentcounselor interactions and their relationships with students’ college preparation within various college-going culture contexts.

BACKGROUND TO THE STUDY Although most students believe they will attend college, there is incongruence between students’ college aspirations, their preparation habits, and their ultimate postsecondary destinations. For example, although more than 90 percent of students aspire for a bachelor’s degree in 10th grade, fewer than 50 percent of these students enroll in a four-year institution after high school (Klasik, 2012). As recent as 2012, less than 34 percent of all 25- to 29-year-olds had completed a bachelor’s degree or higher; the completion rates are even lower for Black, Latino, Pacific Islander, and American Indian/Alaska Natives (Aud, et al. 2013). Particularly for low-income students and students of color, this gap could be evidence of limited access to or differential uptake of school-based precollege resources. Although most parents value education and support their child’s postsecondary goals, some parents have limited experience with U.S. education systems, formal schooling experiences, and concrete college information (Aud, Fox, & KewelRamani, 2010; Zarate, Saenz, & Oseguera, 2011; Gandara,1982; Tornatzky, Cutler, & Lee, 2002). Thus, they tend to rely on schools to provide college guidance to

28

Chapter Two

their child, which positions schools and school personnel as key players in students’ college preparation processes. Therefore, the school environment and its leaders can shape students’ postsecondary trajectories in meaningful ways. In particular, counselors, who are charged with the duties of college preparation and guidance, become the key people to prepare students for the college choice and transition processes. Part of preparing for college is having the ability to navigate through the multiple steps of the college preparation “gauntlet” by acquiring “college knowledge” or information about the college and financial aid application processes at multiple stages throughout the college choice process (Conley, 2007; Klasik, 2012; Roderick, Nagaoka, & Coca, 2009). Testing and curriculum is another aspect of students’ college knowledge and college-going culture. The importance of college admissions tests, test dates, fees, and opportunities for test preparation must be communicated to all students. Students also need access to courses required for college admission including higher-level courses and Advanced Placement (AP) or International Baccalaureate (IB) classes and tests. Taking the SAT or ACT and completing required coursework are both important steps in preparing for college, and four-year institutions in particular (Adelman, 2006; Attewell & Domina, 2008; Belasco, 2013; Cabrera & La Nasa. 2000; Conley, 2007; Klasik, 2012). Counselors and school counseling departments within high schools influence students’ postsecondary trajectories (McDonough, 1997). However, despite good intentions, counselors face limited resources to engage in precollege counseling. Counselors have large caseloads and scarce resources, and need to focus their time and energy on certain groups of students, often average or underachieving students (McDonough, 1997; Perna, et al. 2008; W oods & Domina, forthcoming). Certain students, particularly those from underrepresented backgrounds or rural areas, have even less access to school counselors (Lee & Eckstrom, 1987). Nevertheless, there is ample evidence that school counselors can positively impact students’ college destinations, particularly when equipped with adequate resources and reasonably-sized caseloads. Counselors can do this in a variety of ways, all of which should include clear, consistent, and accurate information and guidance about the college preparation and application processes. School counselors shape how schools promote college going, create a college-going culture, and offer opportunities for students to prepare for college. Encouragement from school counselors can be particularly influential for underrepresented students and their college preparation process (Farmer-Hinton & Adams, 2006; W imberly & Noeth, 2004). Developing and maintaining a college-going culture across the high school campus can communicate to all students that college is a likely and viable option for life after high school. Postsecondary preparation for all students, including access to reliable college information and resources, and awareness of and access to college admissions tests and a college-preparatory curriculum are several key aspects of a college-going culture (Corwin & Tierney, 2007; Holland & Farmer Hinton, 2009; MacDonald & Dorr, 2006). Implementing a college-going culture requires the effort of all school staff, students, and parents alike. MacDonald and

The High School to College Transition

29

Dorr argue that “the overarching goal of cultivating a college going culture is for all students to be prepared for a full range of post-secondary options through structural, motivational, and experiential college preparatory opportunities” (p. 3). There are nine critical principles of college-going culture, each of which can be used to create a plan that will initiate and facilitate a college-going culture on campus. As Corwin and Tierney (2007) state, “culture is the intersection of beliefs and practices” indicating that actions, on behalf of the school personnel, the students, and their families are integral in a college-going culture (p. 1). Nevertheless, school counselors often provide the college counseling infrastructure. Unlike teachers who lead academic preparation for college, school counselors guide students through the planning and application process (Hill, 2012). Following the framework of MacDonald and Dorr (2006), this paper focuses on a precollege counseling model, an adaptation of their comprehensive counseling model. One aspect of a precollege counseling model is engaging in college talk with all students. College talk includes the “clear, ongoing communication about college so that all students develop a college-going identity,” allowing students to understand the requirements and expectations of adequately preparing for college, and staff to understand their own role in promoting a college-going culture (MacDonald & Dorr, 2006, p. 5). W orking from the definition provided by MacDonald and Dorr (2006), I define the precollege counseling model as one in which continuous and meaningful conversations about college occur in combination with access to assistance, preparation, and information. A precollege counseling model must include counselorstudent interactions about college information and admissions requirements, financial aid, and the application process. Although interactions with school counselors about college entrance requirements are related to college applications and college attendance (Belasco, 2013; Bryan et al. 2011) we know little about how and what students and counselors talk about when they engage in precollege guidance, and how these student-counselor interactions relate to other measures of college preparation.

METHODS Context of the Study Towering Pines School District (TPSD) is located in California and serves a large, diverse, urban population. It has a strong centralized district and college preparation initiatives flow from the district to each of the high schools. Nevertheless, school counselors are responsible for nearly all of the college outreach efforts including instruction of college and career units, college and financial aid information sessions, and course planning. Most of the college emphasis originates at the district level but each high school has flexibility to implement programs and policies that fit their school.

30

Chapter Two

Semi-structured interviews with high school counselors (n=7) provide a broad illustration of how each school describes its college-going culture and college preparation practices. Inductive analysis and open coding are used to loosely group schools based on their college preparation beliefs and practices. All of the school counselor interviewees had a variety of counseling and other education-related experience; no counselors were new to the school counseling profession or Towering Pines School District. All counselors were female except for the counselor at Lupine Hills High School. For the interview with Hibiscus High School, two counselors participated simultaneously in the same interview. Although this study is not a qualitative investigation, the counselors’ descriptions of the schools provide context and a general understanding of schools’ college-going culture. I used broad, holistic coding to explore the interview data (Miles, Huberman, & Saldaña, 2013; Saldaña, 2012). Two main themes emerged from the interview data: school counselors described college-going culture as either a way to expand horizons or as a means to focus students’ preparation for a four-year institution. W hereas there are multiple aspects of college-going culture, for the purpose of this study, college-going culture is conceptualized as either expanding students’ horizons for college, preparing students for four-year university admissions, or a combination of the two. Although, as noted above, college-going culture has been defined in the literature, those implementing the culture on campus (i.e. school counselors) can conceptualize and put into place a college-going culture quite differently. Expanding Horizons Golden Poppy, W estern Azalea, and Mountain Lilac High Schools explain collegegoing culture as a way to expand students’ horizons, help them think about and plan for the future, and provide them with a range of options for postsecondary life. For example, the counselor at Golden Poppy emphasizes that “education doesn’t end with high school” and “there are different opportunities out there.” Similarly, the counselor at W estern Azalea explains that a college-going culture involves “looking beyond just getting your high school diploma” so students can “move on and have a nice career, life after high school.” The counselor at Mountain Lilac envisions a college-going culture that “[creates] an environment where kids are exposed to different options when they graduate high school . . . and especially on this campus, college-going culture doesn’t necessarily have to be a four-year college.” Counselors in these schools believe that there are multiple ways to gain a postsecondary education, including certificates, trade schools, or through participating in the military. Schools that fall into the Expanding Horizons category do not focus narrowly on local four-year institutions, but understand and support a broad range of postsecondary educational options, including private schools, the military, and community colleges.

The High School to College Transition

31

Focused Preparation Other schools in the district place a heavy emphasis on completing mandatory coursework and other college application requirements to bolster admissions into four-year universities, namely California State Universities (CSU) and University of California (UC) institutions. Counselors in these schools talk consistently about making sure students have high enough grades to satisfy the A-G requirements (i.e. required coursework), ensuring that students register for and take the SAT, and apply to at least one university, likely a CSU. For example, at Seaside Daisy High School, sophomores create a CSU Mentor online account to enter their grades and courses starting in their freshman year. They continue this annually so when students are seniors, their profile is nearly complete. Likewise, the counselor at Desert Sage notes that “everyone fills out a Cal State app. W hether they are eligible or not, just to get familiar with it.” Also, when Desert Sage counselors do classroom presentations, they are “based around completing the required coursework and everyone being eligible to apply to a four-year; whether they choose to go or not, that’s a different story.” At these schools there is little discussion about trade or technical schools or the military. Desert Sage, Hibiscus, and Seaside Daisy all fall into the Focused Preparation category. The Middle Ground Lupine Hills High School operates in the middle ground, preparing all students for college, while also aiming to create the best match between students and their postsecondary choice. W hereas there is heavy focus on high grades, completing the A-G requirements, and taking the SAT, the counselor there does not focus solely on Cal State and UC campuses for his students. In fact, he laments that students don’t consider “options for other institutions… because when they don’t get into a UC of their choice, I see a lot of students go to a community college and try to transfer to a UC.” He wants students to know “‘Hey, you still have your dream, you still have college dreams out there. You still have college options”’ even if they are not admitted to the top UC campuses. He asserts that there are postsecondary options for the middle achieving student, but it might not be a UC or CSU, and he is wary of students’ relying on the transfer path to achieve the goal of attending a top-tier university. Lupine Hills is the only school in this category and it draws from both the Expanding Horizons and Focused Preparation viewpoints. Notably, Lupine Hills also looks less like the other schools in the district; it serves a much smaller Latino population and a much larger Vietnamese population. It is also the highest performing school, with an Academic Performance Index (API) of 873. For these reasons, the effects of the Middle Ground category may be a result of other school-level factors in addition to its college-going culture. Although many of the college preparation practices are replicated in the high schools across the district, the way counselors discuss college-going culture and college preparation, and the methods for implementing opportunities to engage in the college preparation process vary. For example, schools in both the Expanding

32

Chapter Two

Horizons and College Preparation categories help students create an online profile for the CSU application. However, the Expanding Horizons schools put a greater emphasis on exposing students to a range of postsecondary options, instead of focusing solely on four-year college admissions. Similarly, if asked, all counselors would indicate that their goals are to prepare students for college, but it is the way in which counselors define or explain college-going culture that distinguish schools into the aforementioned categories. It is also worth noting that college-going culture includes much more than these broad categories. In this study these three descriptions serve as a mean to differentiate how schools conceptualize collegegoing culture and the college preparation process, but are not meant to be exhaustive or wholly inclusive of every definition or aspect of college-going culture.

DATA AND ANALYTIC SAMPLE Together with Towering Pines School District’s college and career readiness coordinator and assistant superintendent I developed a senior survey asking students about their high school experiences, their use of school resources and interactions with personnel, and their postsecondary preparation and plans. The school counselors administered the survey to all seniors before graduating, and more than 3,000 students completed it in June 2012. The survey was administered in two parts, and the current study includes only students who had responses on both sections of the survey. Additionally, survey data was matched with district-reported demographic information, such as previous academic achievement and background variables. For the purposes of this study, analyses are limited to students who attended the seven comprehensive high schools in the district. Although there are two additional continuation/adult education high schools, this study focuses on the experiences of students in more traditional high school settings, where precollege counseling is likely more available and a college-going culture is more salient. The final analytic sample includes data from 2,808 high school seniors. The student sample is largely Latino (46 percent) and Vietnamese (32 percent) (see Table 2.1). Slightly over half of the students are female (53 percent) and 21 percent are English language learners. Thirty-six percent of the students have at least one parent who has attended some college and 81 percent aspire to complete a bachelor’s degree or higher. Although the student survey data do not indicate students’ socioeconomic status or household income, a majority of the students in TPSD are considered low-income (see Table 2.2). W hen considering the seven comprehensive high schools in the district, there are some noticeable differences between schools (see Table 2.2). For example, schools’ Academic Performance Index (API) scores range from a low of 735 to a high of 873, a spread of 138 points. Hibiscus High School has the second highest API score in the district, and has the smallest population of English language learners and students from low-socioeconomic backgrounds. However, Desert Sage High School has the lowest API score and serves the most students who are English

The High School to College Transition

33

learners or are from low-SES backgrounds. Comparing these two schools and examining Table 2.2, it is apparent that the schools in the district vary dramatically in their academic ratings and the student populations they serve. Table 2.1. Student Sample Latino Other Other Asian Vietnamese W hite Female English Language Learner Parents have some college Aspires for bachelor’s degree or higher Mountain Lilac Golden Poppy Hibiscus Desert Sage Lupine Hills W estern Azalea Seaside Daisy

Percent 45.6 1.8 6.9 32.2 13.5 52.8 21.0 35.7 81.1 15.2 12.9 13.2 14.2 15.1 15.4 13.8

N 1280 51 193 905 379 1482 591 1001 2276 428 363 372 400 425 433 388

To that end, research questions for this study are (1) W hich factors predict students’ utilization of precollege counseling? and (2) How do student-school counselor interactions about college relate to preparing for college within various college-going cultures?

Analysis The study uses ordinary least squares and logistic regressions to explore how students utilize and interact with school counselors and how meeting with school counselors is related to several important college preparation steps. OLS regression is used when the outcome is continuous and logistic regression is used when the outcome variable is dichotomous. Standard errors are clustered by school, since students are grouped by schools and are not assumed to have independent errors. I employed multiple imputation using a multivariate normal model to account for missing data. The dependent variables are not imputed, resulting in varying sample sizes for each outcome measure.

Table 2.2. School Profiles

White

English Language Learner

Percent of School LowIncome

1.0

4.6

30.6

85.0

7.8

2.6

14.9

22

75.1

6.2

15.2

3.3

52.0

7.3

27.6

74.8

16.7

3.1

0.8

4.6

31.4

85.9

873

13.0

74.7

6.1

0.7

5.4

12.1

71.9

Western Azalea

804

48.9

29.9

5.8

2.8

12.5

17.4

63.3

Seaside Daisy

820

33.1

53.6

7.0

1.8

4.3

26.0

74.8

2011 API Score

Latino

Vietnamese

Other Asian

Other Race

Mountain Lilac

737

76.7

13.7

4.0

Golden Poppy

757

46.8

27.8

Hibiscus

845

23.4

Desert Sage

735

Lupine Hills

Note. The percent of schools that is designated as low-income is reported by the California Department of Education for 2011.

.

The High School to College Transition

35

Precollege Counseling Scale The composite counseling variable was created from several items (described in more detail below) resulting in a scale with a mean of 2.5 and a range from 0 to 5 (see Table 2.3). Students with a score of 0 had not met with a school counselor about college at all, and students with a score of 5 met with a school counselor for five college-related reasons. This variable is the dependent variable for research question (1) and the independent variable of interest for research question (2). Table 2.3. Reasons Students See High School Counselors N Percent College Application Assistance 32.1 815 College Entrance Requirements 58.2 1477 College Information 57.4 1457 College Plans and Processes 63.6 1615 Financial Aid 41.6 1056 Precollege Counseling Scale 2.5 (.032) Note. The precollege counseling scale variable is a 0-5 scale measuring whether the student met with a school counselor for any of the reasons indicated. Mean and standard deviation presented. Reasons for Meeting with School Counselors These variables come from the survey question “Did you meet with your school counselor for any of the following reasons while you were at this high school?” Students could select as many answers as appropriate, and possible answers ranged from academic issues to college preparation, to career assistance. Meeting for (a) scholarship/financial aid information; (b) college information; and (c) college application assistance are included in the precollege counseling scale. College Plans and Processes A survey question asked students to select from a list the college preparation activities or steps they had done. One option was “met with counselor to discuss college plans and processes”. This dichotomous variable is also included in the precollege counseling scale. College Entrance Requirements Students were also asked to indicate with whom they met to discuss college entrance requirements and their school counselor was one of the possible options. This is the final variable that contributes to the precollege counseling scale.

36

Chapter Two

Engagement with the College Preparation Process Engagement with the college preparation process includes (1) taking the SAT, and/or ACT; (2) filing a financial aid application; (3) completing one or more college applications; and (4) submitting transcripts to a postsecondary institution. Each of these variables is dichotomous and serves as the dependent variables for research question (2). Control Variables Each full model accounts for students’ gender, race/ethnicity, educational aspirations, parental college participation, English language status, English language arts and math standardized test scores, and math test subject. Dummy variables indicate whether the student was female; aspired to obtain a bachelor’s degree or higher; whether a parent had attended at least some college; and whether the student tested in algebra I/geometry or summative high school/integrated math, as compared to algebra II (see Table 2.1). This distinction is made because algebra II is the required math for high school graduation, thus students testing in summative high school or integrated math are testing in a math that is higher than required, and students testing in algebra I or geometry are testing in a math below the 12th grade level. Because this sample is heavily Vietnamese (32 percent) it is important to isolate the effects for Vietnamese students versus students of other Asian backgrounds. Therefore, the race/ethnicity categories include Vietnamese, other Asian, Latino/ Hispanic, W hite, and all other students. Latino is used as the reference category for all equations because it is the modal response.

RESULTS Precollege Counseling Model Students meet with school counselors for a variety of reasons related to preparing for college (see Table 2.3). The most common reason students met with a school counselor was for college plans and processes (63.6 percent). More than half of the students indicated meeting for college entrance requirements (58.2 percent) and college information (57.4 percent). Over one-third of the students met with a counselor for financial aid assistance and 32.1 percent of students met with their counselors for help on college applications. Table 2.4 uncovers the school college-going culture and student-level variables that impact whether students meet with a school counselor for a variety of reasons. First, model (1) indicates the influence of the college-going culture on their likelihood of meeting with a counselor for a variety of college-related reasons. In reference to the Focused Preparation schools, students attending Expanding Horizons schools or Lupine Hills (which borrows from both the Focused Preparation and Expanding Horizons practices) meet with counselors for more college-related

The High School to College Transition

37

Table 2.4. Factors Influencing Student-Counselor Meetings Student-School Counselor Meetings (1) (2) (3) College-going Culture 0.356*** 0.362** 0.338** Expanding Horizons (0.043) (0.079) (0.082) Middle Ground

0.173* (0.064) 0.150** (0.034)

0.144 (0.061) 0.163** (0.032)

Parents have at least some college

0.245** (0.043) 0.253 (0.127) –0.095 (0.084) –0.152 (0.230) –0.232* (0.064) 0.027 (0.044)

0.086 (0.048) 0.130 (0.139) –0.110 (0.081) –0.128 (0.227) –0.059 (0.067) 0.013 (0.043)

Aspires for a Bachelor’s Degree or Higher

0.493*** (0.062)

0.048*** (0.066)

Female Race/Ethnicity Vietnamese Other Asian White Other Race/Ethnicity English language learner

0.384*** (0.059)

Math Subjects Tested Algebra I or Geometry Higher-level Math

–0.269* (0.086) 0.219* (0.071) Standardized Math Score 0.042 (0.023) Standardized English Language 0.042 Arts Score (0.021) Constant –0.215*** –0.716*** –0.688*** (0.031) (0.087) (0.087) N 2467 2467 2467 Note: *=p