University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

A case study on readmitted students: the impact of social and academic involvement on degree completion

(USC Thesis Other)

A case study on readmitted students: the impact of social and academic involvement on degree completion

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content Running head: IMPACT OF SOCIAL AND ACADEMIC INVOLVEMENT 1 A CASE STUDY ON READMITTED STUDENTS: THE IMPACT OF SOCIAL AND ACADEMIC INVOLVEMENT ON DEGREE COMPLETION by Marcedes S. Butler A Dissertation Presented to the FACULTY OF THE USC ROSSIER SCHOOL OF EDUCATION UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree DOCTOR OF EDUCATION August 2016 Copyright 2016 Marcedes Butler IMPACT OF SOCIAL AND ACADEMIC INVOLVEMENT 2 Dedication I dedicate this dissertation to my mother, father, and my twin brothers! I did it for our legacy! Thank you for the love and support. I made it! To the participants of this study and any student who experienced academic difficulty but overcame it, I dedicate this dissertation to your persistence to graduation. IMPACT OF SOCIAL AND ACADEMIC INVOLVEMENT 3 Acknowledgements I would first like to thank my dissertation committee. My chair, Dr. Pedro Garcia, for his kindness and support. From the time I took your Diversity class in Fall 2013, I wanted to be one of the dissertation success stories. When I wanted to give up, you kept me accountable. Dr. Casteria, I learned so much about leadership from your actions. Dr. Wu, you have been more than flexible, supportive and helpful to me. I am forever grateful for all the time you dedicated to helping me persisting to degree completion. Doctoral Support Center (DSC) - Linda, I recall meeting you randomly in 2010 at a conference. You encouraged me to apply to the program and promised you would help me graduate. Thanks for keeping your promise. Evelyn, you made sure I completed my degree. I will never be able to say thank you enough! We are bonded for life! DofA - thanks for the sisterhood and accountability. Ariese, we ran this race together and I am blessed to have met you along this life changing journey. Khalisha, you put in work and I watched you manage multiple realities at the same time. Brenda, you came and conquered. The fact that we ended up in the same thematic group is a blessing. We are Long Beach Trojans! ARR -I would not have met my dissertation deadlines without the help and support of Stephanie, Nick, Alma, Eli and Lexi. Thank you all again for your help. Eli, thanks for your feedback and edits! Lexi, your assistance and dedication helped me finish. I would have not made it without the A-team! USC - Dr. Frank Chang, thank you for your support and engorgement! I appreciate the autonomy you allowed me so that I could finish my degree. My fellow Trojans, Vee, Janet, and Jim, and all the graduates of the Ed.D. program for imparting wisdom into me that allowed me to finish. Friends - Thanks to Tatiana, Mary, Lavona, Liz, Ashley, and Courtney for the motivation and positive talk over the last three years. IMPACT OF SOCIAL AND ACADEMIC INVOLVEMENT 4 Table of Contents Dedication 2 Acknowledgements 3 List of Tables 6 List of Figures 7 Abstract 8 Chapter One: Introduction to the Problem 10 Background of the Problem 11 Statement of the Problem 13 The Policy of Academic Probation, Academic Disqualification and Readmission 15 Purpose of the Study 16 Theoretical Framework 17 Significance of the Study 19 Assumptions 20 Limitations 20 Delimitations 20 Definitions of Terms 20 Organization of the Study 22 Chapter Two: Literature Review 23 Introduction to the Theories 24 Student Departure Theory 24 Theory of Involvement 26 Theoretical Framework: I-E-O Model 28 Inputs 29 Outputs 36 Summary 37 Chapter Three: Methodology 38 Research Design 39 Site Description 41 Readmission Process 42 Participants 42 Instrumentation 44 Quantitative Instrumentation 44 Qualitative Instrumentation 46 Data Collection 47 Quantitative Data Collection 47 Qualitative Data Collection 49 Credibility and Trustworthiness 49 Data Analysis 51 Quantitative Analysis 51 Qualitative Analysis 51 Summary 53 Chapter Four: Findings 54 Methodology 55 Demographic Data 56 Quantitative Demographic Data 57 IMPACT OF SOCIAL AND ACADEMIC INVOLVEMENT 5 Qualitative Demographic Data 60 Findings 61 Research Question 1 61 Research Question 2 67 Research Question 3 80 Chapter Five: Discussion 86 Summary of the Findings 87 Implications for practice 89 Limitations 91 Recommendation for Practice and Future Study 91 Conclusion 92 References 94 Appendix A: Student Involvement Questionnaire 105 Appendix B: Interview Protocol 127 Appendix C: Informed Consent 132 Appendix D: Emailed Invitation To Participate 135 Appendix E: Institutional Review Board Approval 136 IMPACT OF SOCIAL AND ACADEMIC INVOLVEMENT 6 List of Tables Table 1: Adapted from “ACT, Inc. National Collegiate Retention and Persistence to Degree Rates,” 1983-2015 12 Table 2: Demographics of Surveyed Participants 58 Table 3: Demographics of Interviewed Participants 59 Table 4: Interviewees’ Vignettes 60 Table 5: National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE) Pre- and Post-Results 70 IMPACT OF SOCIAL AND ACADEMIC INVOLVEMENT 7 List of Figures Figure 1: Astin’s I-E-O Model 19 Figure 2: Number of Hours Students Worked 64 Figure 3: Social Involvement Prior to Academic Disqualification 66 Figure 4: Academic Involvement Prior to Academic Disqualification 67 Figure 5: Paired Samples Test 69 Figure 6: Academic Involvement Post-Readmission 73 Figure 7: Social Involvement-Post Readmission 81 IMPACT OF SOCIAL AND ACADEMIC INVOLVEMENT 8 Abstract The purpose of this explanatory case study was to gain insight on the academic and social involvement factors indicated by readmitted students that contributed to persistence to graduation. This study sought to answer the following research questions: (a) To what did readmitted students attribute to their academic disqualification? (b)What academic involvement factors did readmitted students indicate contributed to their persistence to graduation after being readmitted? (c)What social involvement factors did readmitted students indicate contributed to their persistence to graduation after being readmitted? Astin’s (1984) definition of involvement was used in this study. Astin defines involvement as what a student does instead of what students think or feel. The key component of involvement is the investment of physical and psychological energy. An explanatory case study design was useful to learn about the academic and social involvement factors indicated by readmitted students who graduated between the years 2010 and 2015 at a private, selective urban research university. Data collection was conducted through a combination of survey data and interviews with the readmitted students who obtained their degree. The survey responses of 20 participants provided quantitative insight into the common academic and social factors that helped readmitted students complete their degree. The six interviews explored the main themes of the quantitative data. Data analysis was conducted though open coding of the survey and interview data. The theoretical model, I-E-O (Astin, 1991) is comprised of three components: incoming student characteristics (I), college environment (E), and student outcomes (O). The I-E-O model provided a compelling lens to understand the impact of involvement on degree completion for readmitted students. Descriptive information was created for both the survey and interview respondents and findings were identified. Data analysis revealed five common themes that emerged for the readmitted students’ experiences that had an impact on their degree completion. The themes that contributed to academic disqualification IMPACT OF SOCIAL AND ACADEMIC INVOLVEMENT 9 include absenteeism from classes due to social involvement and lack of transferability of study skills from high school to college. The academic involvement factors that had an impact on degree completion were fostering relationships with faculty, academic advisors and peers, and the social factors consisted of selectively participating in social clubs and events. Several conclusions were drawn from the study. First, to prevent academic disqualification, students must learn study skills and time management during the first semester in college. Second, developing quality relationships with faculty and academic advisors supports degree completion. Third, the types of social involvement readmitted students seek must have academic components. This study contributes to the body of work on at-risk student populations by examining the impact of academic and social involvement factors that contributed to degree completion directly from undergraduate students who were academically disqualified, subsequently readmitted, and persisted to graduation. IMPACT OF SOCIAL AND ACADEMIC INVOLVEMENT 10 CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION TO THE PROBLEM The majority of the researcher’s work experience as an academic counselor has been helping at-risk student populations such as those on academic probation and readmitted students return to good academic status. The inspiration for this study was to highlight the success of readmitted students’ persisting to graduation after experiencing academic disqualification. The common perception is that academically disqualified students do not return to school, and, even if they seek readmission, do not obtain degrees after their second attempt at degree completion. The goal of this study was to find out which academic and social involvement factors readmitted students felt contributed to their degree completion. This information will be helpful to at-risk student populations and to the staff tasked with helping them succeed because it allows at-risk students to hear directly from peers who overcame academic difficulty and completed their degrees after experiencing academic difficulty. The majority of the researcher’s individual appointments with readmitted students focused on these students’ campus involvement, academically and socially, that, ultimately, helped them overcome academic difficulty. The information gathered during those conversations inspired this study. The researcher often pondered the following questions: What caused readmitted students to be academically disqualified? What did readmitted students learn from being academically disqualified? What did readmitted students do differently during their second attempt at degree completion? What specifically did readmitted students indicate academically helped them persist to graduation? Were readmitted students involved socially on campus? The majority of retention and persistence literature focuses on traditional college populations, such as freshman or sophomore students; however, this information is useful to analyze the most researched academic and social factors. One of the aims of this study was to understand if those same academic and social factors contributed to readmitted students’ IMPACT OF SOCIAL AND ACADEMIC INVOLVEMENT 11 persistence to graduation. The iconic text, What Matters in College: Four Critical Years Revisited, written by Astin in 1993 outlines 192 college environmental measures that have an effect on students’ development and persistence in college. The college environmental factors that have been found to influence student persistence and graduation are peer and faculty interaction, living in dorms, participating in research and internship opportunities, and part-time on-campus employment. These factors are found in every college environment. One of Astin’s findings for future studies is how combining different forms of involvement facilitates learning and personal development. The feasibility of this study lies in that it seeks insight only from readmitted students on the common academic and social involvement that contributed to degree completion. Background of the Problem At-risk students are a concern for post-secondary administrators since they are populations that have a higher probability of withdrawing voluntarily (dropping out) or involuntarily (academic disqualification) from college (Tinto, 1975, 1987, 1988). Velez (2014) found that over 40% of full-time four-year college students drop out before earning a bachelor’s degree and many never complete their education. Tinto (1993) reported that only 16% of departures are due to academic disqualification. In order to provide resources that increase degree completion, post-secondary administrators must have a greater understanding of specific at-risk student groups, such as readmitted students, and how they spend their time on campus. In the last century, institutions of higher education have focused on how undergraduate students’ academic and social involvement influences their persistence to degree completion. Tinto (2004) explains, “increased attention is now being paid to enhancing student retention and graduation, making sure that students not only get in the door of higher education but are successful in staying there through the completion of a degree” (p. 3). This focus was developed in part due to the increase IMPACT OF SOCIAL AND ACADEMIC INVOLVEMENT 12 in attrition and decline of graduation rates. Recent figures show that only 54.4% of students who begin a bachelor’s degree program complete that degree within six years (Chronicle of Higher Education, 2006). Although it is assumed that private universities are better equipped to help their students graduate, data revealed that is not true. Table 1 shows that, in 30 years, there has not been much of an increase in 5-year graduation rates regardless of the type of institution. Table 1 Adapted from “ACT, Inc. National Collegiate Retention and Persistence to Degree Rates,” 1983- 2015 Institutional Type Highest % Lowest % Current % BA/BS Public 52.8 (‘86) 36.0 (‘13) 36.4 MA/MS Public 46.7 (‘86) 37.0 (‘00) 38.9 PhD Public 50.6 (‘89,’90) 45.0 (‘01) 49.5 BA/BS Private 58.5 (‘13) 53.3 (‘01) 57.2 MA/MS Private 58.4 (‘88) 53.5 (‘01) 54.1 PhD Private 68.8 (‘86) 62.4 (‘14) 62.5 While What Matters in College emphasized the differential effects of institutional types (public versus private) on persistence and graduation rates, the new study Four Critical Years Revisited showed that the effects of institution type on graduation rates are indirect; that is that they are mediated by faculty, peer group and involvement variables. Although the site of this study is a private, highly selective urban research university, these characteristics are not the highlight of this study. Perhaps most important to this study is the behavioral aspect of involvement. Astin’s (1984) definition of involvement is not so much what a student thinks or feels but what the student does and how he or she behaves. The key component of involvement is the investment of physical and psychological energy that tends to emerge under these different IMPACT OF SOCIAL AND ACADEMIC INVOLVEMENT 13 structures. In response, higher education institutions have focused on increasing graduation rates of at-risk populations by providing programs designed to keep students involved in the college experience. Statement of the Problem Literature that supports which type of academic and social factors help readmitted students is limited. One of the main reasons for the lack of research on academic disqualification and readmitted student populations is studies often group voluntary and involuntary dropouts together without segmenting the populations (Tinto, 1993). Most of the reentry research is based on student characteristics. For example, Hall and Wiley Gahn’s (1994) study, “Predictors of Success for Academically Dismissed Students Following Readmission” focused on predicting which readmitted students were successful based on a set of criteria or variables. The researchers investigated the validity of six predictors of academic success after dismissal and reentry: grade point average (GPA) at dismissal, GPA at another school in the interim, composite college entrance examination score, semesters between dismissal and readmission, credits earned elsewhere after dismissal, and instructional level at dismissal. GPA was the only significant factor. The primary difference between the focus of this study and the majority of research that has been done on student departure and degree completion is that the students in this study experienced academic difficulty but later returned to complete their degrees. While there are countless reasons cited in studies as to which social and academic factors have an impact on persistence to graduation for freshman and sophomore students, there is a gap in literature in terms of insight directly from readmitted students on the social and academic involvement that helped them persist to graduation. At-risk populations that show a high level of commitment to college either persist to graduation or are academically disqualified. Students with disparity and incongruence between IMPACT OF SOCIAL AND ACADEMIC INVOLVEMENT 14 themselves and the social or academic system may find their commitment to the institution or to the goal of obtaining a degree fades (Bean, 1990; Cabrera, Castaneda, Nora, & Hengstler, 1992). Particularly, Tinto (1975) believed that the academically disqualified student might divert most of his or her time toward social activities that eventually inhibit his or her academic success Before seeking to understand which academic and social factors helped readmitted students obtain their degrees, it is important to review the common reasons students experience academic difficulty that, if not corrected, can lead to academic disqualification. College students attribute academic difficulty to some of the following factors: difficulty with time management, lack of motivation, stress management, personal problems related to family obligations and financial concerns, challenging classes, attendance and instructor issues (Austin, Cherney, Crowner, & Hill, 1997; Coleman & Freedman, 1996; Isaak et al., 2006; Trombley, 2000). Specifically, disqualified college students who initially struggle academically rarely seek appropriate interventions such as faculty office hours, tutoring, and support resources available at their institutions (Astin, 1975; Bean, 1986; Terenzini & Pascarella, 1982; Tinto, 1975, 1987). Since readmitted students experienced academic probation and academic disqualification due to the factors listed above, they are the best population from which to seek insight on how involvement helps or hinders degree completion. Academic and social forms of involvement have been found to be important factors for at- risk students’ persistence and graduation. Tinto (1975) noted that certain institutional factors, such as faculty-student interaction, peer involvement, and participation in extracurricular activities, all helped influence a student’s ability to persist. Even among at-risk students, students who are more actively involved in learning, especially with others, learn more and show greater levels of intellectual development (Astin, 1975). Social and academic support services are critical for the success of readmitted students (Tinto, 1999). The availability of academic and social IMPACT OF SOCIAL AND ACADEMIC INVOLVEMENT 15 support, such as clubs, study groups, and academic support, is an important condition for universities to maintain in order for at-risk students to stay enrolled in college. Dole (1963) and others recommended additional research on the social and academic factors for students who experience academic difficulty so that institutions are better able to make informed decisions on how to prevent a student from withdrawing from college. If institutions readmit students after they experienced academic disqualification, the goal is for the student to persist to graduation. This study is important not only because it sought to understand which types of academic and social involvement factors have the greatest impact on degree completion, but also because more attention must be given to the how and why these factors are effective. The Policy of Academic Probation, Academic Disqualification and Readmission Although institutions differ in their addressing, defining, and handling of probationary students, most universities have an established academic status policy (Kelley, 1996). Generally, academic disqualification, also known as involuntary departure, results from a student’s failure to meet the institution’s minimum required GPA or other established academic performance standards (Cobble & Hohengarten, 1998). For the context of this study, students are placed on academic probation the term or semester after their cumulative GPA falls below a 2.0. The student continues to be on academic probation while they attempt to improve their cumulative GPA. If, after three semester attempts, the cumulative GPA is not returned to good academic status, then the student is academically disqualified. Although academically disqualified students negatively affect an institution’s retention and graduation rates, every academic year, some of these students gain readmission into the university (Cobble & Hohengarten, 1998). At the site of this study, disqualified students are required to submit a readmission petition to the Office of the Registrar after they have successfully earned a 3.0 cumulative GPA in 12 or more units at another institution. The petition also includes a student statement and endorsement from the chair and IMPACT OF SOCIAL AND ACADEMIC INVOLVEMENT 16 dean of the intended major. If approved, the petition includes a contract that outlines the GPA requirement students must earn to return back to good academic status, generally equal to or higher than 2.0. To help readmitted students persist to graduation, most institutions of higher education have designated staff tasked with helping at-risk populations by providing academic and social support that will, hopefully, lead to graduation. This task can be difficult for staff members to achieve if they are unaware of why they are recommending involvement in specific academic and social resources, such as encouraging students to interact with their faculty and academic advisor, and which extracurricular activities positively influence degree completion. This study allows staff members tasked with graduating at-risk students to hear directly from students who are readmitted after academic disqualification and subsequently persist to graduation on how academic and social involvement helped them complete their degree. Purpose of the Study The degree to which students are involved or integrated socially and academically in college influences students’ academic performance which, in turn, has an impact on their academic progress (Tinto, 1975, 1987). The purpose of this explanatory case study was threefold. First, this study aimed to compile the available literature on readmission and reentered students. Next, this study aimed to gain context surrounding what caused a specific group of students to get academically disqualified. Finally, the main purpose of the study was to gain insight into the academic and social involvement factors indicated by readmitted students that contributed to persistence to graduation. An explanatory sequential case study approach was accomplished by survey and interviews. A group of 20 readmitted students who graduated between the years 2010 and 2015 at a private, highly selective urban research university completed a survey and six readmitted students agreed to a semi-structured interview. IMPACT OF SOCIAL AND ACADEMIC INVOLVEMENT 17 Survey data provided numerical representation on the common academic and social factors that helped readmitted students complete their degree. The interviews explored the main themes of the quantitative data. The interview protocol focused on the how and why the academic and social involvement factors contributed to degree completion after students were readmitted. The descriptive information from this study will be of most use to the staff responsible for readmitted student populations. In addition, the findings are also meant to be shared with students applying to their university for reentry as motivation that they, too, can graduate after experiencing academic disqualification. This study will provide hope and insight directly from peers who persisted to graduation on the second attempt. This study is guided by an overarching research question aimed at understanding what readmitted students did differently in the college environment academically and socially that helped them complete their degrees. In particular, the following research questions guided the study: 1. To what did readmitted students attribute to their academic disqualification? 2. What academic involvement factors did readmitted students indicate contributed to their persistence to graduation after being readmitted? 3. What social involvement factors did readmitted students indicate contributed to their persistence to graduation after being readmitted? Theoretical Framework Astin’s Input-Environment-Outcome (I-E-O) model (1991) makes up the theoretical framework utilized to understand academically disqualified students’ involvement in the academic environment to persist to graduation after being readmitted. Astin’s theory is particularly relevant to students who have been disqualified, readmitted and persisted to graduation, since it asserts that the amount of student learning and personal development is IMPACT OF SOCIAL AND ACADEMIC INVOLVEMENT 18 directly proportional to the quality and quantity of student involvement. In addition, Astin’s theory of involvement (1984) states that development is closely related to students’ involvement with their friends, academicians and academic programs. The theory of involvement (Astin 1988, 1993a, 1993b), which posits that students’ development is related to the quantity and quality of their involvement in various academic and social activities was explored. Active involvement in academic activities, cocurricular activities and interactions with lecturers, friends and other staff members were found to positively influence students’ learning and development. Readmitted students who are involved expected to obtain maximum learning and development. Astin’s model, commonly referred to as I-E-O, provides a framework for assessment and evaluation activities. The components of the I-E-O model are presented in Figure 1. This model is comprised of three components: incoming student characteristics, college environment, and student outcomes (1991). The model is also composed of three elements. The first is the student’s inputs, such as their demographics, background, and any previous experiences they had before entering college. The second is the student’s environment, which accounts for all of the experiences a student will have during college. Lastly, there are outputs, which cover a student’s characteristics, knowledge, attitudes, beliefs, and values that exist after the student has graduated college. For this study, the I-E-O components are the input of readmitted status, the environment consisting of academic and social involvement, and the output of degree completion. Astin (1984) postulates that student development and learning are directly proportional to the degree to which a student is involved in the campus community with activities that increase involvement leading to increased persistence and success. In other words, students who become involved on the college campus are more likely to remain enrolled in their current college and students who do not become involved are more likely to drop out. The focus of this study was IMPACT OF SOCIAL AND ACADEMIC INVOLVEMENT 19 limited to the academic and social involvement (E) of students who graduated from a private, highly selective urban research university (O) after being readmitted (I). Figure 1. Astin’s I-E-O Model Significance of the Study Readmitted students have largely been excluded from previous studies and retention literature. This study will enrich the body of literature on academically disqualified students and students who persist to graduation after being readmitted. The majority of current research focuses on why students fail to persist as opposed to why they succeed. Therefore, the research reported in this study is significant because it gives a voice to undergraduate students readmitted after being academically disqualified in hope of highlighting the types of social and academic involvement that helped readmitted students persist to graduation. The results of this study will help the retention office at the institution of study with the development of policies, programs, and services to prevent academic disqualification and ensure that, when students are readmitted, they persist to graduation. This study will provide hope and motivation to students struggling academically by drawing information directly from students who have similar experiences by providing insight into the academic and social involvement that have an impact on academic IMPACT OF SOCIAL AND ACADEMIC INVOLVEMENT 20 success and degree completion. In addition, themes emerging from this study related to social and academic involvement may also be a consideration for further research. Assumptions There are two assumptions made in this study. First, the participants in this study have the academic ability to succeed based on being admitted to the highly selective private research institution in California. Second, the participants were committed to the institution. Limitations There were three limitations to this study. First, this study represents students from a single, large, urban, private research university in California. Second, the academic probation, disqualification and readmission policies may be unique to the institution. Lastly, the characteristics and demographics of readmitted students in this study may not be representative of those of students at other institutions. Delimitations The study was delimited in two areas. The population was limited to readmitted students that graduated from a university between the years of 2010-2015. Data from this study cannot be generalized to other populations within this university or other universities, however the I-E-O model is applicable to all universities studying persistence and involvement factors. Definitions of Terms Academic disqualification (Involuntary withdrawal): When a student is forced to leave the university due to a lack of academic progress. Academic Involvement: The amount of time and energy a student devotes to academic-related activities such as studying, visiting tutoring centers on campus, and participating in service learning projects. IMPACT OF SOCIAL AND ACADEMIC INVOLVEMENT 21 Academic Status: When a student’s cumulative (overall) GPA is 2.0 or better, that student is in good academic standing. If either the cumulative or current GPA falls below 2.0, the student is placed on academic probation. When the cumulative GPA is below 2.0 after having been on probation for two consecutive semesters, the student is academically disqualified from the university. Degree Attainment: Occurs when a student has met the requirements for his or her degree. Faculty Involvement: The amount of time and energy that a student devotes to interaction with faculty members in and out of the classroom. Involuntary Withdrawal: Occurs when a student is dismissed by a university, usually, for a lack of academic progress. Peer Involvement: The amount of time and energy a student devotes to interactions with fellow students, which may include interactions both in and out of the classroom. Persistence: Refers to a student’s remaining in college until the completion of his or her educational goal. Retention: Occurs when a student successfully completes the courses in which he or she is enrolled for a semester and registers for a subsequent term. Readmission: The process for which academically disqualified students attempt to meet the requirements for reinstatement into the university. Readmitted: The status attributed to an academically disqualified student who meets the requirements to return to the university to persist to graduation. Social Involvement: The amount of time and energy a student devotes to social activities sponsored by the institution, such as clubs, intramural sports, or cultural events. Staff Involvement: The amount of time and energy a student devotes to interaction with college staff members in and out of the classroom. IMPACT OF SOCIAL AND ACADEMIC INVOLVEMENT 22 Voluntary withdrawal: Occurs when a student leaves the university without being forced to do so. Quality points (grade points): The sum of GPA points, divided by the number of units attempted. Organization of the Study Chapter One introduced an overview of the research topic, background of the problem, purpose and research questions, significance of the study, definition of terms, and limitations. Chapter Two contains a review of literature to support this study. The methods used to collect the data in this study are covered in Chapter Three. Chapter Four presents statistical results and data analysis. Chapter Five summarizes the findings, draws conclusions, and makes recommendations for further research and practice. IMPACT OF SOCIAL AND ACADEMIC INVOLVEMENT 23 CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW The issue of students’ persistence to graduation has received a great deal of attention from the higher education community. However, reported studies are structured to determine the factors that led students to drop out while little attention has been given to students who were academically disqualified from an institution due to poor academic performance (Astin, 1975, 1977, 1984; Bean, 1980, 1982, 1985; Tinto, 1975, 1987, 1997). There is relatively little research on the actual experiences of undergraduates who graduated after experiencing academic disqualification. The majority of studies of predictors of academic success for at-risk populations have also been limited to freshman and students on academic probation. The purpose of this study was to gain insight directly from readmitted students who experienced academic disqualification but subsequently persisted to graduation on how and why academic and social involvement helped them complete their degree. The following sections explore the theories, conceptual framework and literature regarding undergraduate college students that experience academic disqualification and reentry. To establish a foundation for examining the guiding questions of this study, the literature review is organized into the following sections: Overview of Person-Environment theories: Tinto’s (1997) Student Departure Theory and Astin’s (1975, 1993) Student Involvement Theory. Next, the literature is examined through Astin’s I-E-O model in order to gain insight from readmitted students (I) on the academic and social involvement (E) that had an impact on their persistence to graduation (O). The I-E-O model is particularly relevant to explain the relationships between the college environments and readmitted students who persisted to graduation. IMPACT OF SOCIAL AND ACADEMIC INVOLVEMENT 24 Introduction to the Theories To better understand how students persist to graduation, it is critical to learn the reasons students withdraw from college. Tinto’s (1993) student departure theory provides a lens to two major sources of student departure: academic difficulties and the inability of individuals to resolve their educational and occupational goals. Tinto’s model highlighted the need to better understand the relationship between student involvement in learning and the influence that involvement had on student departure rates. One of the most prominent and researched student development theories in higher education on why some students leave college and others persist through graduation is Astin’s (1975) student involvement theory. Astin discovered that almost every significant effect on student persistence could be rationalized in terms of the involvement concept. In other words, students who became involved on the college campus were more likely to remain enrolled at their current college, and students who did not become involved were more likely to drop out. However, it must be noted that, where Astin emphasized involvement, Tinto (1993) emphasized integration. The following section discusses both Tinto’s student departure theory and Astin’s (1975, 1993) student involvement theory as they pertain to understanding the at-risk population of undergraduate students who have been readmitted to the university and persisted to graduation. Student Departure Theory Tinto’s model of student departure was developed in 1975 and modified in 1987 and 1993. Tinto’s model was influenced by the sociological models developed by Durkheim (1953), Van Gennep (1960) and Spady (1970). Durkheim’s theories of suicide and departure, Van Gennep’s rites of passage theory, and Spady’s work on community membership are the foundation to the six components of Tinto’s original model. Durkheim explained that individuals IMPACT OF SOCIAL AND ACADEMIC INVOLVEMENT 25 who withdraw from society and commit suicide lacked intellectual and social integration into society. Building on the sociological perspectives identified in Durkheim’s (1953) theory of suicide, Van Gennep’s theory (1960) outlined the use of ceremonies and rituals as critical components for integration into a new environment. Van Gennep posited that the movement of an individual from membership in one community to another was marked by feelings of weakness and isolation as they moved through phases of separation, transition, and incorporation. Also relying heavily on the work of Durkheim, Spady (1970), suggested that college students who are less socially and intellectually integrated into the college environment are more likely to withdraw from the institution, in comparison to those that do feel more integrated. Finally, Spady (1970) theorized that students withdraw from a social system due to the lack of shared values between student and institution and the lack of support received from university faculty and staff in relation to their goal of degree achievement. Tinto altered Spady’s model by identifying two essential aspects of student retention: academic and social integration. Tinto’s (1973) original theoretical framework included academic and social integration factors which included the following components: (a) pre-enrollment background such as prior education and family history, (b) student and institutional goals, (c) involvement at the institution, (d) academic and social integration, (e) student intentions and external commitments, and (f) departure decision, which included graduation, transfer, or dropout. Tinto (1975) noted that certain institutional factors, such as faculty-student interaction, peer involvement, and participation in extracurricular activities, all helped influence a student’s ability to persist. Therefore, academic and social integration formed the foundation for Tinto’s theory of student departure as he attempted to understand why behaviors occurred and what effects certain behaviors had on persistence. To further expand his original theoretical model, Tinto (1987) IMPACT OF SOCIAL AND ACADEMIC INVOLVEMENT 26 included additional ethnographic information such as background factors that allowed him to explore other criteria for assessing how academic and social integration fit into his model of student persistence. In addition to the original six factors, Tinto’s (1987) revision introduced five new categories of theoretical factors that influenced student persistence: psychological, societal, economic, organizational, and interaction factors. These adaptations also included more emphasis on student intentions, faculty and student interactions, and a distinction between formal and informal communication with faculty. Tinto (1975) postulated that students enter higher education with a set of pre-entry characteristics such as family background, skills and abilities, and prior educational experiences. Based upon these attributes, students develop initial levels of commitment toward goals and the institution (Tinto, 1987). These expectations and pre-college factors then interact with the formal academic and social systems of the institution, resulting in varying levels of academic and social integration in the college environment. Tinto believed that these complex interactions over time drive the student to choose to leave or remain in the educational institution. Theory of Involvement Student involvement is more about what a student does and less about what the student thinks (Astin, 1984). Student involvement as defined by Astin is “the amount of physical and psychological energy that the student devotes to the academic experience” (Astin, 1984, p. 134). In other words, a student’s physical interaction and mental engagements combine to form involvement. Thus, involvement can be measured both quantitatively (by documenting how many hours a student spends studying or working) and qualitatively by exploring the experience of one’s involvement in study groups. Astin (1999) further noted that involvement occurs along a continuum, varying in intensity, and differing among students. He postulated that student time is a limited resource, claiming that the degree of development a student accomplishes corresponds IMPACT OF SOCIAL AND ACADEMIC INVOLVEMENT 27 directly to the quality and quantity of time and effort committed to obtaining any goal (Astin, 1984). Therefore, a greater amount of student involvement tends to lead to greater progress toward learning and personal development. Since Astin’s (1984) theory is more behavioral in nature, he developed five main postulates that focus directly on the student behavior and the type of learning environment created by the institution. They include the following: 1. Involvement refers to the investment of physical and psychological energy on various objects. An object can be anything from the student experience as a whole to a specific activity such as an intramural volleyball game. 2. Regardless of the object, involvement occurs along a continuum. Some students will invest more energy than other students and any particular student will be more involved in certain activities than others. 3. Involvement has both quantitative and qualitative features. A quantitative aspect of involvement would be the amount of time devoted to an activity whereas a qualitative component would be the seriousness with which the object was approached and the attention given to it. 4. The amount of student learning and personal development associated with any educational program is directly proportional to the quality and quantity of student involvement in the program. Basically, the more students put into an activity, the more they will get out of it. 5. The effectiveness of any educational policy or practice is directly related to the capacity of that policy or practice to increase student involvement (pp. 135-136). These postulates require institutions and college personnel to look more closely at what the students do (the physical) and how they behave (the psychological) in the college IMPACT OF SOCIAL AND ACADEMIC INVOLVEMENT 28 environment. Astin (1975) explained that the student who is involved in the academic life of the institution is more likely to expend the effort to be successful academically than the uninvolved student is. His theory appropriately puts part of the responsibility on the student for his/her learning and part of the responsibility on the institution for creating a connecting learning environment throughout. Theoretical Framework: I-E-O Model Insight on the impact of academic and social involvement factors that contributed to degree completion among undergraduate students who were academically disqualified from a large urban private research institution, subsequently readmitted, and persisted to graduation is examined utilizing the I-E-O model. The premise of Astin’s (1988, 1993a, 1993b) Input- Environment-Output (I-E-O) model is that educational assessments are not complete unless the evaluation includes information on student inputs (I), the educational environment (E), and student outcomes (O) (Astin, 1993). This approach gave attention to the impact of involvement on students. According to Astin, the “I” stands for inputs and refers to the characteristics that describe the student at the point of entry. The “E” stands for environment and refers to the “various programs, polices, faculty, peers and educational experiences to which the student is exposed” (Astin, 1993, p. 7). Finally, the “O” stands for outcome and refers to the characteristics that describe the student after having been exposed to the college environment. Therefore, the student’s development while in college is assessed by comparing the characteristics that describe the student at the point of entry with the characteristics that describe the student after having been exposed to the college environment. Astin’s research found a number of factors that contribute positively to student retention, including residing on campus and the level of student involvement with faculty and peers. Each of these factors results in students having less time to become fully involved in the academic and social experiences of the college or university. Among the IMPACT OF SOCIAL AND ACADEMIC INVOLVEMENT 29 characteristics that most contribute to persistence, according to Astin (1993), is the extent to which the student is involved in the college experience. In other words, the more students are involved in the academic and social experiences of the college or university, the more likely they are to persist toward graduation. Examples of factors that contribute negatively to student retention are working full time, working a part-time job off campus, and commuting. The next section applies Astin’s I-E-O model to gain insight from readmitted students (I) on the academic and social involvement (E) that impacted their persistence to graduation (O). Inputs The academic status “readmitted” is the input characteristic for this study. Participants all gained readmission at the institution of study. Thus, their academic status was converted from academic disqualification to readmitted. Readmitted students. Students can return to college after they have been academically disqualified. Different institutions of higher education have different processes for allowing students to return after their readmission petition or appeal has been approved. Students who are readmitted return to college on probation and, thus, are lumped with probation students. Students who are on probation are commonly characterized as academically at risk. Dropout is another term used in the field that encompasses all students who leave the institution, which includes academically disqualified students (Tinto, 1993). Tinto (1993) found that less than 25% of all institutional departures, nationally, take the form of academic dismissal (p. 49). Tinto (1993) reported that academic difficulty (and, therefore, academic dismissal) typically reflects a situation in which the demands of the academic system prove too great (p. 117). At-risk students on probation lack effective study skills, experience trouble completing assignments, have low self- confidence regarding their academic abilities, and place great importance on work (Heisserer & Parrette, 2002). At-risk students were also described as ethnic minorities, academically IMPACT OF SOCIAL AND ACADEMIC INVOLVEMENT 30 disadvantaged, disabled, and of low socioeconomic status (Heisserer & Parrette, 2002). Probation students also report working more than students in good standing and report working full time at a higher rate (Trombley, 2001). Students’ inability to manage the characteristics that cause academic distress can lead to academic disqualification. Many students self-report their own reasons for being academically disqualified. According to Trombley (2001), more often than not, students reported personal problems as the reason for their disqualification. Trombley (2001) stated that other self-reported reasons for the causes of disqualification were not having enough time, difficult classes, lack of motivation, no interest, job-related issues, lack of financial resources, transportation conflicts, and inability to purchase books. Trombley (2001) further noted that students who listed personal problems were asked to give specific reasons and those reported were a death in the family, lack of childcare, and other types of family problems. In another report, college students identified most of their problems while enrolled as primarily motivational, organizational, emotional and stress-related (Isaak, Graves, & Mayers, 2006). While looking at reinstated students at the University of Nebraska, Himmelreich (1967) found that the measurements traditionally used to determine academic success could not be trusted when looking at reinstated students and that it was harder to predict outcomes for a reinstated student than it was to predict them for the typical student starting college. Himmelreich did find that student “attitudes toward school and study habits” are significantly correlated with the achievement of the readmitted student” (p. 108). In a qualitative study conducted by Robeson (1998), students who were readmitted after academic disqualification gave personal accounts. There were a few common characteristics among the students’ personal accounts, including desire to learn, searching for identity, experiencing emotional upheavals, changing perceptions of professors, and a strong family influence on motivation and decision making (Robeson, 1998). IMPACT OF SOCIAL AND ACADEMIC INVOLVEMENT 31 Austin’s (1992) made several observations about the difference in the beliefs of students who were successful in returning to good academic standing and those who were unsuccessful after being readmitted. Students who were successful believed that a college education had more meaning and more useful applications in their lives. Both groups of students talked about changing their academic behaviors, but successful students presented detailed action plans in their appeal statements and did more reflecting on the causes of their academic disqualification. Successful students presented a larger variety of motivations for returning to college, were more open to the idea that many factors were at play, and stated they received more support from their families. Successful students reported overcoming personal problems (like addiction or the loss of a close friend or family member) while unsuccessful students overcame family issues (such as divorce and family financial problem). Environment. Astin’s (1975, 1993) environment factors were first discovered in his initial research and have remained relatively unchanged. The environmental factors that have been found to influence student retention and graduation rates include academic and social involvement. These environment factors are found in every college environment and may be controlled, in part, by the institutional practices and policies an institution develops. The research surrounding each of these environmental factors is reviewed and discussed below. Academic involvement. Academic involvement encompasses both in-class and out-of- class activities that are directly related to coursework or learning. Activities such as studying, visiting the tutorial center, using the writing lab, and freshman seminar courses are examples of academic involvement. A number of scholars examined the relationship between student involvement, persistence and retention. It appears that any interaction with faculty, either in or outside the traditional learning environment, has a positive influence on student development and persistence. Over 50 years of research supports the critical role that faculty members play in IMPACT OF SOCIAL AND ACADEMIC INVOLVEMENT 32 student retention efforts (Astin, 1975, 1984, 1991, 1996, 1999; Bean & Metzner, 1985; Community College Survey of Student Engagement, 2006, 2008; Johnson, 2006; Pascarella & Terenzini, 2005; Tinto, 1987, 1993). Astin (1999) explains that instructors have the greatest ability to influence what students actually accomplish. Examining the connection between faculty’s educational practices and student engagement, Umbach and Wawrzynski (2005) concluded that the educational context developed by faculty influenced student learning considerably. In other words, students who were more involved in their learning environments performed better academically. This is an important consideration for readmitted students because, if they do not achieve the semester GPA mandated in their readmission contract, they risk a final disqualification from the university. Faculty interaction is one of the few opportunities for students to work directly with the individual who will assign their final grade. There are benefits to encouraging readmitted students to spend time with faculty outside of the traditional learning environment. Research indicates that informal student-faculty interaction, such as visiting a professor’s home, assisting with a research project, talking with faculty outside of class, and even serving on committees with faculty, demonstrate a positive correlation with student learning and retention (Astin, 1993; Kuh, 2003). Whether inside or outside of the traditional learning environment, the more faculty can discuss career plans, class assignments, and conduct research with their students, the more likely students will persist (Kuh, 2004). Pascarella and Terenzini (2005) noted both the nature and frequency of contact with faculty matter. Therefore, it is not simply contact with faculty that matters, but intentional contact, that has a purpose and is meaningful to students. In addition to involvement with faculty, research also indicates that students benefit from involvement with staff and academic advisors on campus (Kuh, 2003; Pascarella & Terenzini; 2005). Staff members are often responsible for creating social support systems that assist students with adjusting to college life and that assist IMPACT OF SOCIAL AND ACADEMIC INVOLVEMENT 33 with increasing student success (Kuh et al., 2005). Many of the services provided by staff had a positive impact on student retention and persistence rates (Kuh et al., 2006; Muraskin & Wilner, 2004; National Survey of Student Engagement [NSSE], 2005; Tinto, 2004; Upcraft, Gardner, & Barefoot, 2005). These services often include student orientation programs, learning communities, academic advising, financial aid, career advising and counseling. Hossler, Kuh, and Olsen (2001) demonstrated that at-risk students attending a large state university were more likely to use academic support services when these were located in the students’ residence halls. The at-risk students who took advantage of these academic support services were more likely to persist to the second year and earn higher grades (Hossler et al., 2001). Making these services convenient for students appears to play a large role in determining if students will take advantage of them. Another important aspect of academic involvement is academic advisement. An academic resource for students on most college campuses are academic advisors. Academic advisors are seen as those who can best assist students with their academic choices (Heisserer & Parrette, 2002). An integral part of students’ development while in college are academic advisors (Gillispie, 2003). Advising centers that refer students to campus resources have been shown to have an impact on retention rates (Schee, 2007). Some institutions utilize a combination of faculty members and professional academic advisors to assist students with the academic advisement process (Schee, 2007). Past research showed a relationship between the amount of time spent with an academic advisor and the student’s GPA (Schee, 2007). Academic advising is essential for first-generation, under-prepared, and readmitted students (Schee, 2007). One method to assist probationary students further is to require them to meet with academic advisors (Schee, 2007). Advisors are important in helping probationary students because they can identify what nonacademic factors contributed to their academic difficulty and set new goals (Schee, 2007). IMPACT OF SOCIAL AND ACADEMIC INVOLVEMENT 34 Advisors can use theoretical models to guide them in helping at-risk students, but the best manner in which to do so is still unproven (Kirk-Kuwaye & Nishida, 2001). Social involvement. Participation in activities sponsored by the college outside of the traditional learning environment has also been found to contribute positively to students’ development and persistence in college campuses nationwide. These are commonly referred to as extracurricular activities and often include activities such as student clubs, cultural events, and intramural sports. In his landmark book, What Matters in College? Four Critical Years Revisited, Astin (1993) examined the impact of involvement in extracurricular activities on students’ lives. He found that assuming a leadership position, communication skills, leadership attributes, and interpersonal skills had statistically significant correlations with the number of hours students spent each week in these activities. Astin’s findings reignited the interest of college officials in developing ways to get students involved in extracurricular activities. These findings provide useful information for college administrators in creating opportunities for involvement on campus. Astin noted that peers are “the single most potent source of influence on student learning and persistence” (p.398). Astin (1993) explains that peer involvement may include such activities as discussing course content with other students, developing study groups, tutoring other students, participating in intramural sports, and participating in club or social activities on campus. A number of studies confirmed the positive impact that peer involvement can have on student development and retention. Ullah and Wilson (2007) conducted a longitudinal study (2003-2005) to examine the influence of student involvement with peers on academic achievement at a Midwestern public university. Participants included 2,160 undergraduate students with a mean age of 20.9 years. All participants were asked to complete the NSSE and results showed that peer relationships affected female and male participants differently. Female- to-female involvement proved to have positive effects on academic achievement, but, for male- IMPACT OF SOCIAL AND ACADEMIC INVOLVEMENT 35 to-male interactions, the results proved to influence academic achievement negatively. Why this difference exists was not determined with this study, but it does draw attention to the need for further studies exploring the impact of involvement with peers on academic achievement. Astin (1984) concluded that student involvement has significant effects on students. Similarly, a review of literature concluded that student learning and intellectual development are shaped by involvement in cocurricular activities and interaction with peers (Astin, 1993; Kuh, Vesper, Connolly, & Pace, 1997; Pascarella & Terenzini, 1991). Specifically, research demonstrated that cocurricular student involvement has a positive impact on retention and academic persistence, personal development, cognitive development, and leadership development. As stated earlier, the theory of student involvement has its roots in the longitudinal study of college dropouts that sought to identify factors in the college environment that affected student’s persistence in college (Astin, 1975). Astin’s (1975) research concluded that involvement in college had a positive impact on students’ remaining in college. Specifically, Astin concluded that residential students, those who join social fraternities and sororities, or who participate in extracurricular activities of any type are less likely to drop out of college. Participation in sports, particularly intercollegiate sports, and involvement in ROTC also were found to have a positive effect on persistence. Spady (1970), Bean (1980), and Tinto found that peer relationships as well as extracurricular involvement enhance a student’s social integration and interpersonal bonds with the institution. This, in all likelihood, increases the student’s persistence at the institution and chances of completing a degree. Hanks and Eckland (1976) proposed that involvement in cocurricular activities influences persistence in two ways: (a) students are connected psychologically and socially to achievement oriented peers who reinforce a desire to graduate and (b) students acquire personal resources, skills, and competencies that make it more likely that they will achieve their goals. Further studies IMPACT OF SOCIAL AND ACADEMIC INVOLVEMENT 36 concluded that participation in cocurricular activities is positively related to persistence (Kuh, Douglas, Lund, & Ramin-Gyurnek, 1994). However, involved in too many different types of organizations and activities had a negative impact on student’s development. Outputs Graduation. There are many benefits to graduating with a college degree. As indicated earlier, outputs refer to the desired educational outcome of a learning experience. The output of this study is degree completion. All of the participants in this study persisted to graduation after being academically disqualified and gaining readmission back to the university. Through the years, research revealed that involvement continues to have a positive impact on a variety of outputs. Some of these include academic achievement, intellectual growth, student development, career development, psychological and social growth, retention, persistence, and degree attainment (Astin, 1975, 1993, 1999; Broschard, 2005; Graham & Gisi, 2000; Hossler et al., 2001; House, 2000; Johnson, 2006; Kuh, 2003; Kuh et al., 2006; Pascarella & Terenzini, 2005; Ullah & Wilson 2007; Upcraft, Gardner & Barefoot, 2007). There are many benefits to degree obtainment. The value of higher education has personal, economic and public social benefits. College graduates find better jobs, earn more money, and suffer less unemployment than high school graduates do. They also live more stable family lives, enjoy better health, and live longer. They commit fewer crimes and participate more in civic life. With all this going for them, it is hardly surprising that college graduates are significantly more likely than high school graduates to say they are “very happy.” A gain in lifetime earnings is the most easily observed benefit that accrues to individuals who invest in higher education. Students who do not earn their bachelor’s degree are more likely to earn a lesser salary than those who have an undergraduate degree (Shultz, Colton, & Colton, 2001). Grubb (2002a) conducted a review of 13 studies that used national data sets to examine the IMPACT OF SOCIAL AND ACADEMIC INVOLVEMENT 37 economic returns of higher education. The studies examined the effects of occupational certificates, associate degrees, bachelor’s degrees, and higher education attendance without earning a credential. The results indicated substantial and statistically significant economic returns for many types of higher education, especially for individuals who graduate, enroll in occupational areas, or find employment related to their program. Grubb (2002) reported small or no economic returns for individuals who did not complete a college degree. The economic returns summarized by Grubb (2002a) varied by level of credential. Male degree recipients at the bachelor’s level earned from 20% to 40% more than high school graduates while female recipients earned from 30% to 40% more than high school graduates. Public social benefits are those that accrue to society but are not directly related to economic aspects. Such public social benefits include reduced crime rate, social cohesion and appreciation of diversity, increase in the age of marriage, and improved health conditions. The United States’ higher education systems are generally regarded as the single most important instruments in the maintenance of a democratic system, as it produces a better, well-informed citizenry, enabling more sensitive and wider public participation and debate on national issues. Summary Chapter Three describes the design and methodology used in this study. It presents information concerning the site of the study and the population studied. The chapter defines the purpose of the study, study variables, research questions, and data collection techniques. The chapter concludes with a discussion of the statistical methods used in the study. IMPACT OF SOCIAL AND ACADEMIC INVOLVEMENT 38 CHAPTER THREE: METHODOLOGY As society continues to place high importance on gaining a college degree, there has been an increase in students who enter higher education institutions. However, not all students succeed, and some find themselves academically disqualified. Yet, there are students who are academically disqualified and still, eventually, succeed in their goal of earning a bachelor’s degree. The researcher utilized a case study approach to answer the research questions because it allowed the participants to describe and give meaning to their life experiences (Creswell, 2013; Johnson et al. 2007). Furthermore, case studies are particularly helpful in understanding complex units that consist of multiple variables of potential importance to understanding a specific phenomenon (Merriam, 2011). The purpose of this study was to seek insight and understanding as to the impact of academic and social involvement factors on degree completion among undergraduate students who were academically disqualified from a large urban private research institution, were subsequently readmitted, and persisted to graduation. These students’ experiences were examined utilizing Astin’s (1988, 1993a, 1993b) I-E-O model. The premise of the model is that educational assessments are not complete unless the evaluation includes information on student inputs, the educational environment, and student outcomes (Astin, 1993). For this study, the input (I) was the academic status (readmitted), the academic and social factors were the educational environment (E) and the student outcome (O) was graduation. The data collected was primarily focused on the academic and social involvement factors in the college environment (E). To help answer the research questions, both quantitative and qualitative data were collected for the study. By definition, mixed-methods are a procedure for collecting, analyzing, and or integrating, both quantitative and qualitative data at some stage of the research process within a single unit of analysis for the purpose of gaining a better understanding of the research problem IMPACT OF SOCIAL AND ACADEMIC INVOLVEMENT 39 (Creswell 2005; Tashakkori & Teddlie 2003). The qualitative data for this study was collected from interviews, and the quantitative data was collected from survey responses. The rationale for mixing both kinds of data within one study was grounded in the fact that neither quantitative nor qualitative methods were sufficient, by themselves, to capture the trends and details of a situation. Furthermore, case studies are particularly helpful in understanding complex units that consist of multiple variables of potential importance to understanding a specific phenomenon (Merriam, 2011). The purpose of the study was to provide insight on academic and social involvement factors that helped a group of readmitted students persist to graduation. This information will be helpful to staff tasked with helping academic probation and reentry students while providing recommendations for the types of academic and social involvement that positively impact persistence to degree completion. This chapter describes the methodology used to address the research questions of this study: 1. To what did readmitted students attribute to their academic disqualification? 2. What academic involvement factors did readmitted students indicate contributed to their persistence to graduation after being readmitted? 3. What social involvement factors did readmitted students indicate contributed to their persistence to graduation after being readmitted? Research Design To learn more about the academic and social factors that have an impact on degree completion of students readmitted after being academically disqualified, this study employed an explanatory case study design to discover and understand a phenomenon. The perspectives and worldviews of readmitted students’ experiences was explored to better understand both the IMPACT OF SOCIAL AND ACADEMIC INVOLVEMENT 40 academic and social involvement activities that contribute to their degree completion after being academically disqualified (Merriam,1998). This study relied on constructivism, meaning the primary focus was to understand the meaning people construct about their experience by relying on participants’ views in order to make sense of the meaning they have about the experience (Creswell, 2007; Merriam, 2002). Research on reentry students is dominated by quantitative studies seeking to identify student characteristics and demographics that predict success. An example would be the study by Hall and Gahn (1994) on the predictors of success for academically dismissed students following readmission at a Midwestern university. The study lacked information about the college environment. However, this study lent significant insight and complexity into the academic and social factors in the college environment that help students persist to graduation after being readmitted. In this case study, an explanatory sequential design approach was utilized to provide explanations for how the qualitative data explains the quantitative results. First, 20 readmitted students completed a survey, then six semi-structured interviews followed to generate rich descriptive data on the academic and social experiences of undergraduate students that had an impact on their persistence to graduation. Specifically, the quantitative data was selected for two reasons: (1) to identify academic and social areas that warrant additional information during the interview and (2) to solicit interview participants. The interviews provided insight on the how and why the social and academic involvement helped readmitted students obtain their degrees. This information was not provided by the quantitative data. When used in combination, quantitative and qualitative methods complement each other and allow for a more robust analysis, taking advantage of the strengths of each (Green, Caracelli, Field & Graham 1989; Miles & Huberman 1994; Greene & Caracelli 1997; Tashakkori & Teddlie 1998). This chapter is arranged into IMPACT OF SOCIAL AND ACADEMIC INVOLVEMENT 41 sections detailing site selection and participants, instrumentation, data collection, and data analysis of the study. Site Description The large, urban, private research university (UU) used for this study is one of the top 25 colleges by U.S. News & World Report’s annual list of university rankings. UU has approximately 41,000 students, half of whom are undergraduates with a gender distribution of 49.5% male students and 50.5% female students. For the Fall 2015 cohort, 26% of admitted students were Asian, 12% Latino, 7% black and 2% Native American/Pacific Islander. Overall, 21% are from underrepresented minority populations (black, Latino or Native American). In addition, 13% of admitted students were the first in their family to attend college. UU enrolls more underrepresented minority undergraduates than most private research universities in the country. At this school, 33% of the students live in college-owned, operated, or affiliated housing and 67% of students live off campus. UU is a part of the NCAA I athletic conference and has a large enrollment of international students. The undergraduate tuition is approximately $45,000 per year and the institution has a 92% graduation rate. Students can participate in more than 700 on-campus organizations, ranging from religious groups to club sports. A thriving Greek life comprises more than 60 chapters representing more than 3,500 students. The student-faculty ratio at UU is 9:1, and the school has 57.1% of its classes with fewer than 20 students. The most popular majors include business, social sciences, performing arts, and engineering. The average freshman retention rate, an indicator of student satisfaction, is 96.8%. The number of freshman and transfer applications, including students seeking readmission, increases every year. As the student population grows, it is critical to consider the university’s graduation efforts and practices. Although every faculty and staff member is responsible for helping to retain UU’s students, this site has a retention office whose primary responsibility is to assist with the retention IMPACT OF SOCIAL AND ACADEMIC INVOLVEMENT 42 and graduation of at-risk populations, such as academic probation, disqualified and readmitted students. Readmission Process The following section provides an overview of the readmission process for the site selected for this study. The retention office is responsible for initiating the readmission petition for academically disqualified students. To file a readmission petition, students must first work with a retention counselor to approve their coursework at another institution. Students must take at least 12 units at another intuition and earn a 3.0 GPA in all transferable coursework. Although required for readmission, coursework completed at another institution will in no way reduce a student’s grade point deficit or affect his or her UU cumulative GPA. Other documents, like a student personal statement and approval from the major department is required before a readmission petition can be submitted for approval. Committees of appointed staff and faculty review the readmission documents before making a decision regarding whether or not the student is readmitted for a second opportunity to persist to graduation. Readmitted students are placed on a readmission contract. The terms of this agreement must be met each and every semester of enrollment until the cumulative GPA reaches 2.0 or higher (good academic standing). Students are only allowed one readmission petition at UU. Participants The participants for this study were students who were at one time academically disqualified, subsequently readmitted, and eventually persisted to graduation at UU. A purposive sampling technique was used to determine the participants. According to Patton (2002), participants are “purposefully” selected when there is the potential to highlight specific insight from these sources (p. 40). This strategy was implemented by identifying two common criteria that link the study participants. The first criterion was that participants must have been IMPACT OF SOCIAL AND ACADEMIC INVOLVEMENT 43 academically disqualified from the instruction of study. The second criterion was that participants must have persisted to graduation after being readmitted to the institution of study. The purpose of selecting a homogeneous group was to study similar cases, thus allowing an in-depth evaluation of the phenomenon being studied (Gall et al., 2007). In order to learn which types of involvement helped readmitted students persist to graduation, it was crucial that this information come directly from participants who experienced academic disqualification and readmission at UU. The university registrar sent an Excel spreadsheet of potential participants who met the study criteria. Of the list provided by the registrar, only the students who graduated between 2010 and 2015 were selected for the study. Students were removed from the sample population for two reasons. First, if any student information was missing or omitted from the spreadsheet, students were removed. Second, a student was removed from the list if he or she was reinstated by campus leadership instead of going through the readmission process. The sample selected for the study was 63 participants. The demographics of the sample population consisted of 17 females (26.98%) and 46 males (73.02%). Forty-three students (68.25%) of the students matriculated to UU directly from high school while 20 (31.75%) transferred from another college. Nine participants indicated they there were international students. Thirty-six (57.14%) received some sort of financial aid to help with the cost of gaining a college education. The class standing at the time of academic disqualification consisted of six (9.53%) freshmen, 22 (34.92%) sophomores, 26 (41.27%) juniors and nine (14.29%) seniors. The GPA deficit (grade points needed to increase cumulative GPA to 2.0) ranged from -.4 to 54.9 but the mean deficit was -18.85. The mean cumulative GPA to graduation was 2.293 from a range of 2.0 to 3.19. The university registrar sent the 63 participants who met the selection criteria an email with the study description and the link to the survey (Appendix D). During November 2015 to January 2016, 20 participants IMPACT OF SOCIAL AND ACADEMIC INVOLVEMENT 44 completed the survey. At the end of the survey, participants were asked for their approval and availability to be interviewed for additional information. Six students indicated their willingness to be interviewed during the month of January 2016. The number of responses based on the number of respondents was deemed sufficient to meet the data needs for the current study. Instrumentation A web-based survey was used to identify the social and academic factors that may have contributed to degree completion among readmitted students who experienced academic disqualification at UU. The semi-structured list of interview questions sought to explain how certain factors significantly affected the participants’ persistence to graduation. The following section will describe both the quantitative and qualitative instruments. Quantitative Instrumentation As shown in Appendix A, the survey was adapted from the NSSE. The survey questions were divided into sections and uploaded onto Qualtrics, a fully functional, web-based survey instrument. There were four sections of questions in this survey that were used to learn more about how readmitted students’ academic and social involvement as undergraduate students hindered or supported their path to academic probation, disqualification, readmission and ultimately persistence to graduation. The survey sections were: Section One: Academic Probation and Disqualification: what readmitted students attributed socially and academically to being placed on academic probation and, ultimately, academically disqualified. Section Two: Readmission: the readmission experience and process. Section Three: Graduation: Questions regarding academic and social involvement after being readmitted that contributed to persistence to graduation. IMPACT OF SOCIAL AND ACADEMIC INVOLVEMENT 45 Section Four: Demographic Information: characteristics such as age, education, race, and gender were collected at the end of the survey. Due to limited research on readmitted students, this survey sought to gain information about the students’ complete academic cycle from academic probation to academic disqualification to the readmission process to being readmitted to finally, graduation. Time and limited resources prevented all of the information that was collected on the survey to be used for the study. Also, the additional data not used in this study is discussed in Chapter Five in the recommendation for future studies section. This study will focus on the questions in sections 1 (pre-disqualification), 3 (post-disqualification) and 4 (demographics) to answer the research questions. Section 1 (academic probation to disqualification) and section 3 (reentry to graduation) of the survey focused on the academic and social programs, services, and skills offered by the institution of study and highlighted in the research as indicators of persistence to graduation. To gain insight into readmitted students’ academic involvement in and outside the classroom, 23 items from the NSSE were used. The NSSE annually collects information from hundreds of four- year colleges and universities about first-year and senior students’ participation in programs and activities that institutions provide for their students’ learning and personal development. The results provide an estimate of how undergraduates spend their time and what they gain from attending college. Student-engagement theory served as the construct for the NSSE. This theory has its origin in the work of Pace (1980, 1984), Astin (1984), and Kuh (2003). Although the authors used different terminology (e.g., quality of effort, involvement, and engagement) to describe their concepts, their views were based on the premise that students learn from what they do (Kuh, 2003; 2004). As mentioned, this study used to term involvement to measure the qualitative and quantitative behaviors of students. The 21 items were selected based on the following constructs: collaborative learning, reflective and integrative learning, student-faculty IMPACT OF SOCIAL AND ACADEMIC INVOLVEMENT 46 interaction, and learning strategies. Section 1 (question 1) of the survey asked students to reflect on being on academic probation when answering the NSSE questions and Section 3 (question 41) asked students to reflect on being readmitted and persisting to graduation when answering the NSSE questions. Asking the students to complete the questions during different periods of time allowed for a comparison of results. Questions1 and 41 listed 23 items from the NSSE that used a 4-point Likert-type rating scale (1 = very often to 4 = never) that measures the following variables: collaborative learning, reflective and integrative learning, student-faculty interaction, and learning strategies. The remaining questions on the survey asked participants to rank or select from a list of academic and social programs, services and skills from the institution of study and the amount of time they are involved in these. The social involvement questions focused on the event, program and services outside the classroom. The goal of those questions was to quantify the extracurricular activities and how much participants were involved both inside and outside the classroom at UU in order to better understand how these factors affected their academic disqualification and persistence to graduation after being readmitted. Also, six open-ended questions were included in the survey to allow for participants to give meaning or elaborate on their experiences. Lastly, the quantitative data was used to guide the semi-structured interviewers. Qualitative Instrumentation The qualitative data was collected through semi-structured interviews. In a qualitative case study, the researcher is the data collection instrument. As such, the instrument could be adapted to the situation, the individual’s style, the content of the interview, and the context of the data. The researcher could react to verbal and nonverbal communication with the interviewee. He or she could make immediate shifts in focus based on the information received. Interviews also provided the opportunity to explore unforeseen topics that evolved during the interview process IMPACT OF SOCIAL AND ACADEMIC INVOLVEMENT 47 (Guba & Lincoln, as cited in in Merriam, 1988). Merriam (1988) also commented on the flexibility of a semi-structured interview format: “This format allows the researcher to respond to the situation at hand, to the emerging worldview of the respondent, and to new ideas on the topic” (p. 74). The interview questions were also drawn from issues raised by the literature, Astin’s I-E- O model with primary focus on the environment (E), and the results of the NSSE questions. The researcher did make use of an interview guide (Appendix B) as a reference to make sure all aspects of academic and social involvement were discovered. However, the intent was to let the participant describe the experiences in their own voice. The interview protocol was organized in chronological order based on the four sections of the survey: (1) pronation to disqualification, (2) readmission, (3) readmittance to graduation, and (4) demographic information. In addition, the questions aligned with the research questions and were designed to give readmitted students an opportunity to address the academic and social involvement factors that contributed to degree competition. Data Collection Before starting the data collection process, approval to conduct the research involving human subjects was approved by the institutional review board at UU. Quantitative data was collected through an online survey tool provided to select participants. The qualitative data collected came from recorded and transcribed interviews. All subjects participated voluntarily. All information presented in the findings of this study was made unidentifiable with the use of pseudonyms. This section outlines the steps taken to collect both the quantitative and qualitative data required to answer the research questions. Quantitative Data Collection The registrar sent an email with a brief description of the survey, a link to the survey, and a notice on confidentiality to the 63 participants of the study. Twenty out of the 63 potential IMPACT OF SOCIAL AND ACADEMIC INVOLVEMENT 48 participants completed the survey. The survey was conducted on Qualtrics, an online survey software. All participants who agreed to complete the survey were provided with an informed consent form notifying them of the purpose of the study, procedures for completion, potential risks and benefits, confidentiality, and rights as participants (Appendix C). To ensure participants’ confidentiality, the students’ names and student identification numbers were omitted to ensure that no identifying information existed in the data collection or analysis process. The survey remained active from October 2015 through January 2016. In addition, the university registrar provided the following descriptive information for the population under study: (a) gender, (b) birth date, (c) term admitted (d) true freshman or transfer at the time of admission, (e) international student status, if applicable, (f) satisfactory academic progress (SAP) status, (g) final cumulative GPA, (h) UU Degree (BA/BS and others), (i) term student graduated (j) semester readmitted, (k) units earned prior to disqualification, (l) term disqualified, (m) GPA deficit at the time of disqualification, (n) class standing at the time of disqualification, (o) UU major post-disqualification, if student changed majors, (p) school (s) attended prior to readmission, (q) semester units completed for readmission, (r) readmission cumulative GPA, (s) cumulative GPA at time of graduation. The descriptive data was reviewed prior to the interviews to help gain an understanding of the participants. During the actual interviews, statistical information pertaining to the individual participant and the actual transcript was made available to the participants by logging into their UU student portal to utilize as a point of reference and clarification. This was often needed to assist in recalling the actual timeline of events and transitions. IMPACT OF SOCIAL AND ACADEMIC INVOLVEMENT 49 Qualitative Data Collection The majority of the qualitative data collected came from semi-structured interviews; however, six open-ended questions were included on the survey instrument to allow for participants to provide meaning or clarification to their responses. At the end of the survey, participants were asked for their approval and availability to be interviewed for additional information. Participants that indicated their willingness to be interviewed received a confirmation email with the interview date, time, and location. Since only six participants responded, there was no need to send letters telling anyone that they were not selected for an interview. Before the semi-structured interviews were conducted to gain in-depth information on the participant’s involvement in various academic and social activities, programs and services, he or she was asked to complete the consent form to participate in the study and to have the interview tape-recorded. Interviews were conducted in a location deemed private by the interviewee and on average lasted approximately one hour. The answers to interview questions were collected on a notepad and tape recorder. After each interview, the recordings were transcribed verbatim by Rev.com, a professional transcription company (Creswell, 2014; McEwan &McEwan, 2006). The use of transcribed data helped engage the researcher in the process of deep listening, analysis, and interpretation (Hesse-Biber & Leavy, 2011). To maintain the privacy of the participants, the data was safely stored. Credibility and Trustworthiness The researcher strived only to document the experiences of the participants. Conclusions were based on the responses of the participants. When there were questions about a participant’s response, the researcher performed a member check to ascertain meaning. The researcher’s goal was to interpret the experiences based on how they were perceived by the participants (Merriam, 2001). Essentially, the goal of the research was to understand the academic and social IMPACT OF SOCIAL AND ACADEMIC INVOLVEMENT 50 involvement that hindered or helped the participant’s academic success and persistence to graduation. Grounding research in a variety of credible strategies leads to trustworthiness. In this study, the researcher ensured and enhanced the trustworthiness of the findings through the following approaches: a reflective journal and peer debriefing. The researcher used a reflective journal to record thoughts and procedures throughout all phases of the study, including the development of the study protocol, the interview, data review, and the writing process for reporting themes. One goal of the reflective journal was to record aspects of the interview that cannot be observed or deciphered from a digital recording or transcription, such as body language, facial expressions, and the general environment during the interviews. The reflective journal was also used to aid the researcher in documenting thoughts, ideas, questions, and possible codes or themes throughout the process. The journal provided a resource to help the researcher reflect, process, and interpret all the data. In addition, the journal served as a form of research data on how and why the methodological decisions for conducting this study were made. The goal of the peer-debriefing process was to verbally discuss the codes, themes, and overall findings of the study with the researcher’s fellow doctoral students and higher education professionals in order to solicit input and feedback on whether the findings appear to be reasonable and if any important themes have been overlooked. In addition to fellow doctoral students, the researcher discussed the interview protocol, data analysis, and findings with the program faculty and the dissertation committee members. In addition, using only one institution instead of multiple institutions helps to control for threats to internal validity. However, because this study was limited to a single highly selective urban private university in California, there could be a threat to external validity in attempting to generalize the results in regards to other institutions’ disqualified and readmitted students. IMPACT OF SOCIAL AND ACADEMIC INVOLVEMENT 51 Data Analysis The survey and interviews were analyzed to obtain a more detailed knowledge and understanding of how social and academic involvement helped undergraduate students persist to graduation after experiencing academic disqualification. First the survey data was analyzed to help provide context and meaning to the interview data. Quantitative Analysis All of the data collected for this study was not used. Future research will be conducted on other factors that impact persisting to graduation. The data was cleaned to ensure valid cases for analysis. The survey data was downloaded from Qualtrics, the web-based survey software that was used to administer the questionnaire to the participants. The quantitative data from Qualtrics was uploaded to SPSS statistical software package to compute basic descriptive statistics including frequency and percentage. Instructing the students to complete the question pre- and post-academic disqualification allowed for a comparison of results. Next, the Cronbach’s coefficient alpha was calculated to measure the reliability of the NSSE scales that measured the reliability (internal consistency) of the following variables: collaborative learning, reflective and integrative learning, student-faculty interaction, and learning strategies. This measure showed the benchmark scales to be reliable. In addition, t-tests were run on the pre and post-disqualification data. Descriptive statistical analysis was conducted on the pre- and post-academic disqualification data. The quantitative data analysis was used to as a guide during the interview analysis. Qualitative Analysis According to Creswell (2009), the process of analyzing data results in making sense out of both text and image data. The data analysis was completed through several key processes, including, digging in for deeper understanding of the data, making choices about how to IMPACT OF SOCIAL AND ACADEMIC INVOLVEMENT 52 represent the data, and ultimately, making interpretations of the larger meaning of the data (Creswell, 2009). In order to capture the essence of the social and academic experiences of the participants, the recorded interviews were transcribed verbatim by Rev.com, a professional transcription service. According to Creswell (2009), the next step after the interview transcription was to read through each interview transcription and listen to the digital recording several times. Once the interviews were transcribed, the researcher began to break the text into smaller chunks to assist in making meaning and establishing themes of the interviews as a whole. Based on Astin’s (1993; 1999) I-E-O, which served as the theoretical framework for this study, the academic and social involvement factors were used as the preliminary codes. Sub-codes within the types of involvement factors began to surface as the first few interviews were transcribed. The initial codes were used to develop similar kinds of ideas and recurring themes and phrases that arose from different participants). As additional interviews and transcripts were transcribed and analyzed, they were broken into chunks as well to see how they fit or matched the initial categories and themes. Once the primary coding was completed for over half of the participants, the data was recoded into the themes and sub-themes presented in Chapter Four. The codes and themes evolved from peer debriefing with staff that work directly with readmitted students and dissertation committee members. Through the discussions of current themes, codes that were overlapping, significant, or less significant to the population became more apparent. This recoding allowed for a more systematic coding structure that assisted in answering the study’s research questions with regard to academic and social involvement factors that readmitted students indicated contributed to their degree completion as they related to the theoretical framework. Where individual data did not align with those of other participants, it was IMPACT OF SOCIAL AND ACADEMIC INVOLVEMENT 53 noted and documented as part of the process of negative case analysis (Lincoln & Guba, 1985) to ensure that the data that conflicted with the established patterns was not overlooked. The next step in the process was to explore the themes that developed out of the analysis and explicate the themes with thick and rich description, including participant quotes to offer insight into the themes and meanings (Creswell, 2009). All the above steps led to the interpretation of the data. According to Lincoln and Guba (1985), the central aspect of the last step of the analysis is to step back to ask bigger questions of the lessons learned and to identify new questions or questions left unanswered with the research. The interpretations of the interviews and survey data were informed by the researcher’s professional experiences and knowledge of student development in higher education. Summary This chapter presented a restatement of the purpose of the study and research questions guiding this study. The research design is a case study with an explanatory methodical design approach that allows for interpretation of how the qualitative data explains quantitative results. Participants who were readmitted after experiencing academic disqualification and that, eventually, succeeded in their goal of earning a bachelor’s degree were both surveyed and interviewed. Additionally, this chapter provided a detailed account of the data collection protocols, and data analysis process. Chapter Four presents the results from the study. IMPACT OF SOCIAL AND ACADEMIC INVOLVEMENT 54 CHAPTER FOUR: FINDINGS This chapter presents results from data collected to gather insight on the academic and social involvement of readmitted students who persisted to graduation after experiencing academic disqualification. The purpose of this study was to help educators in higher education institutions, especially those who work directly with readmitted students, by providing insight directly from successful readmitted students on which types of on-campus academic and social involvement has a positive impact on degree completion. This information will be useful for professionals when explaining to readmitted students why certain academic and social factors can have an impact on academic success, such as returning to good academic standing and degree completion. In addition, this study may aid in the development of best practices, policies and programs that prevent probation students from getting to the point of academic disqualification. The findings in this study were obtained from a case study that included qualitative and quantitative responses. The quantitative data was gathered from 20 readmitted students via a survey on Qualtrics, while the qualitative data was compiled from six semi-structured interviews. This study addressed the following research questions: 1. To what did readmitted students attribute to their academic disqualification? 2. What academic involvement factors did readmitted students indicate contributed to their persistence to graduation after being readmitted? 3. What social involvement factors did readmitted students indicate contributed to their persistence to graduation after being readmitted? This chapter focuses on four sections. The first is an overview of the methodology, including participants’ selection criteria, the data collection and the analysis process. The second presents the descriptive characteristics of the survey and interview participants. The third is a IMPACT OF SOCIAL AND ACADEMIC INVOLVEMENT 55 presentation of the triangular findings organized by research question. The fourth presents the study’s discussion and conclusion Methodology The research questions were at the center of the research design and were used to inform every decision related to the methodology selected. The research design that was most useful to answer the research question was a case study because it had the distinct advantage to answer how and why questions (Yin, 2008). Also, Bromley (1986), as cited in Merriam (2013), states, “case studies tend to spread the net for evidence widely, whereas experiment and surveys usually have focus” (p. 46). This method allowed the participants to express their experiences, beliefs, and practices and resulted in a collection of information that informed the research (Maxwell, 2013; Merriam, 2011). While case studies are qualitative in nature, this method also allows for flexibility in selecting additional research strategies to collect data, such as surveys and document analysis. This case study utilized qualitative and quantitative data to create rich, descriptive information about the unit of analysis. For the purpose of this study, the unit of analysis was a group of students who experienced academic disqualification, successfully overcame setbacks by returning to college to obtain their degree. A homogenous sample was selected for this study because all the participants shared a set of characteristics (experienced academic disqualification and readmission) that were required to answer the research questions. The sequential explanatory research design is characterized by the collection and analysis of quantitative data followed by a collection and analysis of qualitative data in two consecutive phases within one study (Creswell 2005; Yin, 2008). The purpose of sequential explanatory research design is to use the qualitative results to assist in explaining and interpreting the findings of a quantitative study. The quantitative phase of the study focused primarily on identifying the most impactful academic and social involvement areas that help or hinder degree completion. IMPACT OF SOCIAL AND ACADEMIC INVOLVEMENT 56 Although this phase was robust, the data collection was limited to one source, a 60-item open- ended and closed-ended questionnaire. The qualitative data phase sought to provide meaning to the statistical results on the survey by exploring participants’ experience with academic disqualification, social and academic involvement more in-depth (Creswell 2003; Rossman & Wilson 1985; Tashakkori & Teddlie 1998). At the end of the anonymous survey, participants were asked their willingness to be interviewed. A survey protocol was created and administered to the six students who indicated their willingness be interviewed for the study. The survey was sent to 60 readmitted students, but only 20 surveys were successfully completed. One of the issues that prevented a higher response rate was invalid email addresses. The data collection process took place during the Fall 2015 semester. The data collection process took approximately 3 months to complete. After the data was collected, it was analyzed. The descriptive statistics such as median, frequency and mean were provided by SSPS. SPSS is the acronym of Statistical Package for the Social Science, a statistical program that can be used to perform data entry and analysis and to create tables and graphs. The raw data from each transcribed interview was coded and this information was analyzed and categorized into themes as outlined by Creswell (2008). Narrative reports, summarized analyses, literature and direct quotations from participants were used to provide the qualitative findings of this study. Demographic Data The next section provides the demographics for the participants who completed the survey and interview. The 20 survey respondents are outlined first and followed by the 6 participants who participated in an interview. The participants met the following criteria: 1. Participants were academically disqualified by the institution of study. 2. Participants were readmitted to the institution of study. 3. Participants graduated from the institution of study. IMPACT OF SOCIAL AND ACADEMIC INVOLVEMENT 57 Quantitative Demographic Data Table 2 highlights the demographics for each of the 20 participants who completed the survey. The following is a summary of the demographics list in Table 2. Seventy percent of the participants were male and 30% were female. Seventy percent of the participants were 21 to 24 years of age at the time of academic disqualification. Only 10% of the population indicated being international students. Of the 20 participants who completed the survey, 35% identified as Caucasian, 35% Hispanic/Latino, 30% Asian American/Pacific Islander, and 20% as other. The total ethnicity percentages do not total 100 because students selected more than one ethnicity on the survey. No responses were received from African American or Native American students. Sixty percent of the students were first-generation college students. The class standing at the time of academic disqualification was 50% juniors, 30% sophomores, 15% freshmen, and 5% seniors. The cumulative GPA at the time of disqualification was either between 1.99 and 1.77 (65%) or between 1.69 and 1.3 (35%). The top three schools that had the most students academically disqualified were those of business administration, engineering and arts and letters. IMPACT OF SOCIAL AND ACADEMIC INVOLVEMENT 58 Table 2 Demographics of Surveyed Participants Participant Gender Age at DQ Int’l Ethnicity First Gen. Standing at DQ Cumulative GPA at DQ Major at DQ 1 Male 21-24 No Asian American/ Pacific Islander No Junior (64- 95 units) 1.99-1.70 Engineering 2 Male 25-27 No Hispanic/ Latino(a) Yes Junior (64- 95 units) 1.69-1.3 Chemistry 3 Female 21-24 No Asian American/ Pacific Islander No Sophomore (32-63 units) 1.69-1.3 East Asian Lit & Culture 4 Female 21-24 No Hispanic/ Latino(a) Yes Sophomore (32-63 units) 1.69-1.3 Psychology 5 Male 21-24 No White American/ Caucasian No Junior (64- 95 units) 1.69-1.3 Engineering 6 Female 17-20 Yes, Hong Kong Other: Eurasian No Freshman (0-31 units) 1.99-1.70 Undecided/ Undeclared 7 Female 21-24 No Hispanic/ Latino(a) White/Ca ucasian No Junior (64- 95 units) 1.99-1.70 Engineering 8 Female 21-24 No Asian American/ Pacific Islander No Junior (64- 95 units) 1.99-1.70 Business Administrati on 9 Male 21-24 No Asian American/ Pacific Islander Yes Junior (64- 95 units) 1.99-1.70 Economics 10 Male 17-20 No Hispanic/ Latino(a) Yes Sophomore (32-63 units) 1.99-1.70 Biological Sciences 11 Male 21-24 No Hispanic/ Latino(a) Yes Junior (64- 95 units) 1.69-1.3 International Global Relations 12 Female 21-24 No White American/ Caucasian No Senior (96+ units) 1.99-1.70 Kinesiology 13 Male 21-24 No White / Caucasian Other: Russian Yes Senior (96+ units) 1.99-1.70 Architecture IMPACT OF SOCIAL AND ACADEMIC INVOLVEMENT 59 Table 2, continued 14 Male 21-24 No Hispanic/ Latino(a) White/Ca ucasian No Junior (64- 95 units) 1.99-1.70 Business Administrati on 15 Male 17-20 No White American/ Caucasian No Sophomore (32-63 units) 1.99-1.70 Business Administrati on 16 Male 17-20 No Asian American/ Pacific Islander Yes Sophomore (32-63 units) 1.69-1.3 Economics 17 Male 21-24 No Hispanic/ Latino(a) Yes Senior (96+ units) 1.99-1.70 Business Administrati on 18 Male 21-24 Yes, India Other: Asian No Junior (64- 95 units) 1.99-1.70 Engineering 19 Male 21-24 No Asian American/ Pacific Islander No Sophomore (32-63 units) 1.99-1.70 Engineering 20 Male 17-20 No White American/ Caucasian No Junior (64- 95 units) 1.69-1.3 Undecided/ Undeclared Table 3 Demographics of Interviewed Participants Name Gender Age at DQ Int’l Ethnicity First Gen. Standing at DQ Cumulative GPA at DQ Major at DQ Lynette Female 21- 24 No Asian/ Pacific Islander No Sophomor e (32-63 units) 1.69-1.3 East Asian Literature Mary Female 21- 24 No Hispanic/ Latino/ Latina Yes Sophomor e (32-63 units) 1.69-1.3 Psycholog y Tatiana Female 21- 24 No Hispanic/ Latino(a), White /Caucasian No Junior (64- 95 units) 1.99-1.70 Biomedica l Engineerin g John Male 17- 20 No Hispanic/ Latino(a) Yes Sophomor e (32-63 units) 1.99-1.70 Biological Sciences Kenny Male 21- 24 No Hispanic/ Latino(a) Yes Junior (64- 95 units) 1.69-1.3 Internation al Global Relations Dennis Male 21- 24 No Hispanic/ Latino(a), White/ Caucasian No Junior (64- 95 units) 1.99-1.70 Business Administr ation IMPACT OF SOCIAL AND ACADEMIC INVOLVEMENT 60 Qualitative Demographic Data The interview data was provided from a convenient sample of students who indicated interest in being interviewed. A total of 7 of the 20 students who completed the survey indicated their willingness to be interviewed. The researcher contacted each participant to set up an interview. Only 6 of the 7 students responded to the interview request. The interviews were conducted in a private location selected by the interviewee and lasted approximately 60 minutes. The qualitative demographic information provided below was retrieved from the 6 participants’ responses during the face-to-face semi-structured interviews. The demographic information for the interviewees is provided in Table 3. A brief vignette on each interviewee is depicted in Table 4. The information provided on the students indicates whether they identified as a first-generation college student and why they selected to attend UU. Table 4 Interviewees’ Vignettes Participant Vignette Lynette Lynette is Asian. She comes from a highly educated family. Several of her family members graduated from UU, including her brother. Lynette selected UU on a whim, but, in retrospect, believes she made a good decision at the time. Mary Mary is a Latina. She is a first-generation college student. She grew up near UU and even participated in UU’s pre-college program. UU is the only college Mary applied to for admission. Tatiana Tatiana identifies as Hispanic and White. Her parents are college educated. She fell in love with UU while attending a college tour with her older brother. UU was her only college choice. John John is a Hispanic first-generation college student. He was encouraged to apply to UU by his high school counselor. He was sold on UU after attending an explorer program sponsored by UU. IMPACT OF SOCIAL AND ACADEMIC INVOLVEMENT 61 Table 4, continued Kenny Kenny is a first generation Hispanic college student. Growing up, his family members were big UU sports fans. His mother encouraged him to attend UU. Dennis Dennis identifies as Hispanic and White. His parents are college graduate. He grew up in Latin America but applied to three colleges in the United States. Dennis selected UU because they offered the most financial aid. Findings Research Question 1 Research Question 1 asked, “To what did readmitted students attribute to their academic disqualification?” The purpose of this question was to provide contextual information on what participants were doing with their time prior to being academically disqualified. This information was obtained from surveys and semi-structured interviews. Section One of the survey and interview protocol had open and closed-ended questions that asked participants to reflect on what academic and social factors contributed to their being placed on academic probation and, ultimately, being academically disqualified. In addition, the interview protocol included probing questions on the common factors and themes that the survey found to be numerically prevalent to this research question. Lack of preparation, employment and participating in social activities were the common themes that participants stated contributed to their academic disqualification. The following section will outline each theme in detail. Lack of preparation. It could be assumed that students who attend private universities have a set of study skills and habits that will help them be academically successful in college just as they were in high school, but this may not always be true. All of the survey respondents listed study skills, such as lack of a study plan and time management as the reasons they were academically disqualified. The interview participants also agreed that the set of study skills they used in high school was not applicable to them in college. It was prevalent in the data and IMPACT OF SOCIAL AND ACADEMIC INVOLVEMENT 62 interviews that high school did not prepare participates with the tools to be academically successful in college. One survey respondent left the following anonymous comment to the open-ended question of the survey: I did not have to try hard in primary or secondary school to get good or decent grades. When I got to college, I did not have a good plan in place for studying or working hard academically. I got behind and found it difficult and overwhelming to catch up. John also agreed with the above statement: I never really learned proper study habits because I essentially skated through high school with decent grades without much effort. In addition to this, I became extremely depressed and concentrated most of my efforts in concealing how I felt instead of studying. Participants shared that they were embarrassed to ask for help when their study skills and habits did not help them earn satisfactory grades. Another key finding was that the amount of effort required to get good grades in high school was different for students than the effort needed when they matriculated to college. Students were able to meet the checklist of requirements to get admitted to institution of study but did not have the skill set to navigate the academic environment. Kenny stated, High school was pretty easy for me. I don’t think I ever really learned good study habits, so all my life, I was just like, “Oh, if you just sit in class and listen like, “I get it.” I would have enough understanding to get pretty decent grades. With college, it’s completely different, especially since there wasn’t as many homework assignments to offset a poor test grade. Tatiana described not knowing how to allocate the appropriate time to study as one of the main factors that contributed to her being placed on academic probation. She also mentioned that IMPACT OF SOCIAL AND ACADEMIC INVOLVEMENT 63 spending time participating in an off-campus church group and working took up time she could have used to study. Students entered college without proper time management skills to balance all the demands of college. Dennis elaborated on whether he sought out help from a professor or an academic advisor when he started to see a decline in his grades. he said, “I didn’t take advantage of any of those opportunities. At the time, I guess I just didn’t feel like I needed help.” Students on academic probation often feel they do not need help returning to good standing, while others do not understand that the consequence. Three interviews stated they were embarrassed in asking for help. If students do not return to good standing, they are at risk of academic disqualification. Since many students are entering college without the proper set of study skills that prepare them for the rigor of college, it is imperative that institutions of higher education provide more opportunities for students to learn effective study skills, such as time management and utilizing campus resources during their first semester in college. Employment. The number of hours students worked leading up to academic probation was another common theme among the participants. Twenty participants (55%) worked between 11 and 30 hours per week. The majority of the students worked part time (30 hours or fewer), as defined by the state of California. However, most of the literature on student employment recommends no more than 20 hours per week for optimal student success (Astin, 1999; Ott, 1988). As shown in Figure 2, 35% of the participants worked between 11 and 20 hours per week. All survey participants indicated they also were taking 12 to 18 semester units while working. Studies (Astin, 1993, 1996, 1999; Tinto, 1988) also found that students who work on campus are more likely to persist in their studies. Though working on campus 20 hours or fewer helped students become better acquainted with faculty, staff, and other students, this was not the case for students prior to being academically disqualified. Working while attending school was problematic for the participants. IMPACT OF SOCIAL AND ACADEMIC INVOLVEMENT 64 Figure 2. Number of Hours Students Worked Five interviewees worked from matriculation to academic disqualification. Kenny was the only student who did not work prior to disqualification because his parents advised him against getting a job. The other five participants had an on-campus work-study job prior to disqualification. In particular, Tatiana and Dennis both worked two part-time jobs. Dennis worked on campus, and the other worked off campus. When Tatiana was asked why she worked full time prior to academic disqualification, she stated, “No, I worked part time. Both jobs were part time. One was work-study on campus, and one was working retail at a mall, but it’s basically like nights and weekends.” During the interview, both students did not view two part-time jobs as having a full time job. The total hours worked at both part-time jobs (20+ hours each) equaled that of one full time job (40+ hours each). When made aware that they were working 40 hours or more, they did not realize how much time they actually spent working leading up to academic disqualification. Students were spending more time focused on work instead of focusing on their academics. Although Lynette did not start working until her second year, she also had two part- time jobs. Her main job was working at the front desk at her apartment complex, and her other 5% 35% 20% 10% 5% 25% 20% 10% 15% 5% 10% 40% 1‐10 hours 11‐20 hours 21‐30 hours 31‐40 hours 40+ hours Did Not Work HOURS OF WORK PER WEEK N=20 Academic Probation to Disqualification Readmission to Graduation IMPACT OF SOCIAL AND ACADEMIC INVOLVEMENT 65 job was in customer service at a yogurt shop. After struggling academically, Lynette quit the yogurt shop, but she kept working at her apartment complex 20 hours per week. Another interesting finding was that Dennis and John both worked for Campus Cruisers. This job requires students to be on call at all hours of the night to respond for requests for late night transportation from current students. John mentioned that he overslept and missed many classes from “being on the road all the time or always picking up phone calls.” When I told Dennis that another student interviewed for the study also worked at Campus Cruisers, he said “Really, I know someone else actually that got hired just before me. I didn’t know him real well, but he got disqualified before I did.” The implications of working while going to school were not made apparent to the students. All interviewees, besides Lynette, saw work as something they had to do because they received work-study as part of their financial aid package. When I asked the five interviewees why they worked while on academic probation, the consensus was they needed to make money. Lynette’s parents paid out of pocket, but other students relied on financial aid to help cover their college experiences. The students agreed that they needed to work to help cover the day-to-day expenses that their parents could not afford. They saw working as a part of their college experience, but, initially, it was not seen as a factor that led them to academic disqualification. The participants spent more time being good employees instead of being good students. It is imperative that students are informed of the responsibility of having a job while a full-time college student before they sign up for work-study jobs. Also, students struggling academically may need to be prevented from obtaining another job if they qualify for a work-study job. Involvement. Social involvement was another common theme participants agreed contributed to their academic disqualification. Students spent more time involved socially on and off campus, as shown in Figure 3. IMPACT OF SOCIAL AND ACADEMIC INVOLVEMENT 66 Figure 3. Social Involvement Prior to Academic Disqualification Instead of going to class, participants spent time with their friends and were too sleepy to attend class if they were involved in social events the prior night. The social events caused absenteeism among the participants. One of the survey respondents simply stated, “too much social activities with friends” is what caused their academic disqualification. John reflected that being free from his parents’ restrictions influenced his over-involvement in social events. He stated, I was young and caught up in the social aspects and partying at that time. I didn’t take class or studying seriously. I was just interested in having fun. I felt that I could skate through like I did in high school, without putting much effort into anything. I rarely attended classes and the only time I really read or studied was right before an exam. 10% 20% 15% 25% 20% 10% 0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% Daily Once a week 2‐4 times a week Once a month Two or less times a semester Never Social Involvement Prior to Academic Disqualification N=20 IMPACT OF SOCIAL AND ACADEMIC INVOLVEMENT 67 Figure 4. Academic Involvement Prior to Academic Disqualification As indicated in Figure 4, only 30% of the students participated in academic programs one to four times per week during the 16-week semester. Tatiana and Dennis were both very involved in off-campus church groups. They spent two or three days at services or with other members of the church. Dennis spoke in depth about spending more time commuting between church and work than going to class. Tatiana’s schedule was more hectic than was Dennis.’ Not only did Tatiana also work full time, she participated in an off-campus church group and was also a member of UU’s rowing team. They both agreed that spending too much time off campus contributed to their academic disqualification. The participants went from having high school administrators and their parents monitoring their behavior to having complete freedom. Their lack of preparation for college and employment were factors that caused the students to put more effort into social events instead of academics. It was difficult for students to manage their time between work, school and social events. Research Question 2 Research Question 2 asked, “What academic involvement factors did readmitted students indicate contributed to their persistence to graduation after being readmitted?” The purpose of this question was to gain insight on the academic factors that helped a group of readmitted 15% 15% 35% 35% Once a Week 2‐4 times a Week Once a Month Two or Less times a semester Academic Involvement Prior to Academic Disqualification N=20 IMPACT OF SOCIAL AND ACADEMIC INVOLVEMENT 68 students obtain their degree. Information from the survey, in particular, question items from the NSSE were used to answer this question. During the interviews, participants were asked their experience with the major themes from the survey data. The major academic themes that are discussed in the following section are the NSSE results, faculty-interaction, peer interaction and academic advisement. National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE). The NSSE measures the extent to which students engage in effective educational practices that are empirically linked with learning, personal development and other desired outcomes such as persistence, satisfaction and graduation (Kuh, 2001; 2009). The NSSE has 21 items that measure the following constructs: collaborative learning, reflective and integrative, learning, student faculty interaction and learning strategies. Using a 4-point Likert-type rating scale (1 = very often to 4 = never), Question 1 asked students to reflect on being on academic probation while providing answers to the 21 items, and Question 41 asked student to reflect on being readmitted and persisting to graduation while providing answers to the 21 items. The purpose of using questions from the NSSE was to measure what students were doing inside the classroom pre- and post-academic disqualification. The NSSE relies on self-reports, the validity and credibility of which have been examined extensively (Baird, 1976; Pace, 1985; Pike, 1995). In general, the psychometric properties of NSSE are very good, and individual items and the overall instrument have been tweaked based on data collected over the years from focus groups, cognitive testing, and various psychometric analyses. The NSSE items selected for this study had good internal consistency, with a Cronbach’s alpha reported for the following scales: collaborative learning (.856), reflective and integrative (.876) learning, student faculty interaction (.908), and learning strategies (.822). In addition, a paired-samples t-test was conducted to evaluate the pre and post disqualification NSEE scales, but the mean responses for the scales remained the same due to having a less than IMPACT OF SOCIAL AND ACADEMIC INVOLVEMENT 69 recommended sample size of 30 participants. The only scale that had an increase in the mean from 0.00 to -10.5000 was reflective and integrative learning, but there was no significant difference between the two scores (Figure 5). The data from that paired-samples t-test test was not helpful to the findings of this study. Figure 5. Paired Samples Test On the contrary, upon further analysis, there were major changes in specific question items within each scale that were useful to help understand the change in academic behavior of the participants after they were readmitted back to the university. Pascarella and Terenzini (2005) found that students’ academic involvement exerted a statistically significant influence on their intellectual development. A student’s level of involvement in academic-related tasks and activities positively influences knowledge acquisition and academic skill development (Kuh et al., 1997, 2008). The change in the participants’ academic involvement after being readmitted was consistent with the literature, as shown in Table 5. IMPACT OF SOCIAL AND ACADEMIC INVOLVEMENT 70 Table 5 National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE) Pre- and Post-Results NESSE Questions Pre-Disqualification NSSE Survey Items Post-Disqualification NSSE Survey Items NESSE Items Likert Scale Frequency N=20 Likert Scale Frequency N=20 Learning with Peers: Collaborative Learning Asked another student to help you understand course material very often often sometimes Never 2 3 10 5 very often often sometimes Never 5 7 7 1 Explained course material to one or more students very often often sometimes Never 2 4 9 5 very often often sometimes Never 7 9 4 0 Prepared for exams by discussing or working through course material with other students very often often sometimes Never 1 5 7 7 very often often sometimes Never 8 7 4 1 Worked with other students on course projects or assignments very often often sometimes Never 3 2 12 3 very often often sometimes Never 9 6 4 1 Academic Challenge: Reflective & Integrative Learning Combined ideas from different courses when completing assignments very often often sometimes Never 0 6 7 7 very often often sometimes Never 6 10 4 0 Connected your learning to societal problems or issues very often often sometimes Never 2 6 4 8 very often often sometimes Never 4 9 5 2 Included diverse perspectives (political, religious, racial/ethnic, gender, etc.) in course discussions or assignments very often often sometimes Never 0 4 8 8 very often often sometimes Never 3 8 5 4 IMPACT OF SOCIAL AND ACADEMIC INVOLVEMENT 71 Table 5, continued Tried to better understand someone else’s views by imagining how an issue looks from his or her perspective very often often sometimes Never 4 4 10 2 very often often sometimes Never 9 5 6 0 Learned something that changed the way you understood an issue or concept very often often sometimes Never 3 6 9 2 very often often sometimes Never 10 7 3 0 Connected ideas from your courses to your prior experiences and knowledge very often often sometimes Never 5 5 7 3 very often often sometimes Never 8 10 2 0 Experiences with Faculty: Student Faculty Interaction Talked about career plans with a faculty member very often often sometimes Never 1 1 7 11 very often often sometimes Never 5 9 5 1 Worked with a faculty member on activities other than coursework (committees, student groups, etc.) very often often sometimes Never 2 0 3 15 very often often sometimes Never 3 2 8 7 Discussed course topics, ideas, or concepts with a faculty member outside of class very often often sometimes Never 1 3 7 9 very often often sometimes Never 7 5 7 1 Discussed your academic performance with a faculty member very often often sometimes Never 1 1 9 9 very often often sometimes Never 5 8 6 1 Academic Challenge: Learning Strategies Identified key information from reading assignments very often often sometimes Never 5 5 7 3 very often often sometimes Never 10 7 3 0 Reviewed your notes after class very often often sometimes Never 3 5 10 2 very often often sometimes Never 7 13 1 0 Summarized what you learned in class or from course materials very often often sometimes Never 3 4 4 9 very often often sometimes Never 7 8 5 0 IMPACT OF SOCIAL AND ACADEMIC INVOLVEMENT 72 For example, for collaborative learning, 5 students indicated, while on academic probation, they very often or often asked another student to help them understand course material. Compared to post-disqualification, 12 students indicated that they very often or often did so. When comparing the pre- and post-disqualification responses to a question item in the reflective and integrative learning scale, prior to academic disqualification, ten students indicated they very often or often connected ideas from their prior experiences and knowledge, as compared to 18 students who responded, post-disqualification, they very often or often connected ideas from their prior experiences and knowledge. In regards to student-faculty interaction, 11 pre-disqualification students indicated they never talked about career plans with a faculty member, compared to ten students post-disqualification who selected they often spoke with faculty about career plans. When asked about learning strategies, one of the items in the scale asked students how often they reviewed their notes after class and pre-disqualification, 10 students selected sometimes, while, post-disqualification, 12 said they often reviewed their notes after class. The students’ academic behavior was low prior to academic disqualification but directly increased after being readmitted. Overall, the NSSE confirmed that readmitted students increased their academic involvement in and outside the classroom. In addition, participation in academic programs increased after students were readmitted. Figure 6 shows that 40% of the 20 participants were involved one to four times a week in university academic programs and services after readmission. In comparison, only 30% of the 20 students prior to academic disqualification participated in academic programs and services during the 16-week semester (Figure 4). The following sections discuss in detail how faculty interaction, academic advising and peer interaction helped a group of readmitted students persist to graduation after experiencing academic disqualification. IMPACT OF SOCIAL AND ACADEMIC INVOLVEMENT 73 Figure 6. Academic Involvement Post-Readmission Faculty-student interaction. Astin (1999) explains that instructors have the greatest ability to influence what students actually accomplish. All five of the participants indicated that interacting with their professors regularly contributed to their degree completion. Lynette, Mary and Dennis indicated that lack of communication with their professors was one of the main contributing factors that led to their disqualification, but, after being readmitted, that changed. They all learned during the readmission process how important it was to approach and develop a relationship with their faculty. Lynette revealed, [The readmission process] gave me a little bit more incentive, and a little bit more of a path that I knew I needed to follow. Seeking readmission gave me a lot of motivation. That’s where I learned that talking to professors is a great thing. She continued, “I came to class on time. I sat in the front. I did my homework right away.” Part of UU readmission application process requires academically disqualified students to take at least 12 units outside the university and earn a GPA of 3.0 or higher. Most of the local colleges require that non-admitted students seeking to take classes obtain professors’ signatures before they are allowed to enroll. When asked if they were honest with the professor on why they would like to add or crash their course, Dennis said, 10% 30% 30% 20% 10% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% Once a week 2‐4 times a week Once a month Two or less times a semester Never Academic Involvement‐Post Readmission N=20 IMPACT OF SOCIAL AND ACADEMIC INVOLVEMENT 74 Absolutely, one hundred percent. I told them! I told them this is my story this is what happened, but I’m not going to let anything get in the way of gaining readmission to UU. I’m sure they were skeptical. Gosh, who wouldn’t have been? Tatiana had a similar experience as Dennis: I wasn’t a verbal person in high school. I just showed up, did the work, didn’t try very hard. I never talked with my professors [pre-disqualification]. I never had a relationship with them in high school and even when I started college. This time around, I was like, “I need to get to know them.” If I’m going to succeed, they need to know a bit about me and my story. Four out of six participants disclosed to their professors why they were taking a course. The transparency with the professors helped to foster a relationship, but, most importantly, it kept the students accountable to attend every class and earn a high grade. Pascarella and Terenzini (2005) noted both the nature and frequency of contact with faculty matter. Therefore, it is not simply contact with faculty that matters but intentional contact that has a purpose and is meaningful to students. During the second attempt at completing their degree requirements, readmitted students took the initiative to interact with their professors in and outside the classroom. Dennis shared that he “absolutely attended every class, turned in all the assignments, studied, and went to office hours.” When describing the frequency of contact, he stated, “I kept in constant communication with all the professors. All of them!” Kenny also “made it a point to not necessarily answer every single question, but to be communicative in class. I got to know my professors.” Developing relationships outside the classroom was another main theme among the participants, Kenny elaborated on how he developed relationships with his professors outside the classroom: IMPACT OF SOCIAL AND ACADEMIC INVOLVEMENT 75 I really just enjoyed my upper division business classes and what I was learning at the time, so I scheduled appointments to meet with my teachers during office hours to talk about class concepts. But I also learn how I can apply them to real world situations directly from my professors. Upon being readmitted to UU, participants immediately reached out to their professors. Dennis, who only had one semester left to graduate, shared how faculty interaction helped ensure he would obtain his degree this time around: The end of the semester rolls around and coming up to final exams. I’m preparing while, once again, having these conversations with all my professors. I’m like, “Look, I graduate this semester. I’m doing really well in all my classes. I’m going to ace this exam so that I can keep my A, essentially.” All of them were like, “To be honest with you, knowing your background, I can see you were highly motivated, but I didn’t know if it was going to work out. And I’m actually really impressed with your academic performance this semester.” Dennis beamed with joy while reflecting, I actually had something to show for it this time. I actually was able to say, “Look, I knew that I could do it and I’m doing it.” I was taking advantage of every single resource that I possibly could. John also shared how he learned from his past academic mistakes by asking for help early in the semester. He shared, I was taking this geology class because it was required for me to graduate in my major. It was a little hard at first because it went back to some concepts I didn’t really understand. There were some geological concepts that I didn’t study before because some of the kids IMPACT OF SOCIAL AND ACADEMIC INVOLVEMENT 76 were geology students and knew about these things. I started off really rough, but, then, I kept going to the professor a lot. I’m even surprised I was able to pull off a B in that class. He continued by saying, “I did do a lot of studying, office hours with professors and the Teaching Assistants. Just being able to go in there to ask for help was the main factor that helped me graduate.” The students maintained consistent communication with their professors and teaching assistants until they obtained their degree. The group of readmitted students learned from experiencing academic disqualification how much their interactions with their professors affected their academic progress. When participants began college, they did not have the courage or skill set to initiate a conversation with their professors but learned how to accomplish that task while taking classes for readmission. The process of communicating with professors was immediately implemented upon readmission back to UU. As graduation rates remain stagnant, it is important that college students are told about the importance of interacting with professors and how those relationships help them obtain a college degree. Academic advisement. Empirical research on the effects of academic advising is clear and consistent: advising can have an impact on persistence and graduation (Pascarella & Terenzini, 2005). Prior to academic disqualification, 11 out of the 20 survey respondents indicated they participated in academic advising. That number increased to 14 out of 20 participants indicating they utilized academic advising after bring readmitted. After being readmitted, students were intentional about scheduling appointments with their academic advisor to discuss their degree requirement, graduate school, and career aspirations. Lynette shared her experience with academic advising pre and post academic disqualification: I would’ve probably invested a little bit more asking my advisor about the classes I was taking and also the professors teaching them. After I got disqualified, I got really good at that. Prior to disqualification, I was just like, “Oh, sure. I’ll take this class. There’s space. IMPACT OF SOCIAL AND ACADEMIC INVOLVEMENT 77 Whatever.” At the same time, I had never really encountered an advisor who really told me, “Oh, I would recommend this class because this professor’s more interesting, or this professor grades really, really hard.” Instead of going to academic advising prior to academic disqualification, some students relied on their friends for advisement. Like Lynette, students may not have felt comfortable seeking advice from their advisor or felt the advisor did not care about their academic progress. Having a caring advisor who followed up after appointments or periodically sent them an email checking on their program was also a common theme that helped readmitted students complete their degree. Dennis recalled his relationship with his advisor after being readmitted to the university: I visited advisor X, maybe if not more than once a month, at least once a month. I would stop by, even unannounced, just to check in. I think even him, to a certain extent, was probably surprised because I would tell him, “Hey, I’m actually at the top of the class in this class” or “I aced all of my mid-terms” or “I set the curve for the class.” That’s the pride or to a certain extent arrogance that I always had, belief that I could always do it, whether or not it was on my own was a completely different thing. John discussed the importance of not allowing your ego to get in the way of asking her academic advisor for help. He added, Get help! There is help here rather than just you going by yourself or you’re trying to do it yourself or asking friends to… because some of those friends are not in that position. There are some that can help you, but then in regards to this issue (academic probation), there are professionals on campus. Regardless of institutional type, solid academic advising has an important impact on student persistence (Heisserer & Parrerre, 2002). Students who are the happiest and academically IMPACT OF SOCIAL AND ACADEMIC INVOLVEMENT 78 the most successful have developed a solid relationship with an academic advisor, a faculty member, or an administrator who can help them navigate the academic and social aspects of the university campus (Pascarella & Terenzini, 2005). When students do not have a solid relationship with an academic advisor or, as John said, a professional on campus students will avoid seeking help. Lynette and Mary both had bad experiences with academic advising before getting disqualified, Mary pointed out, “If you don’t feel comfortable (with your academic advisor), you feel discouraged even more.” Lynette followed up with “I was floating from advisor to advisor, and so I didn’t really feel like a connection. I was going in because I had to for clearance to register for the upcoming semester.” Upon readmission to the university, they overcame their obstacles with academic advising after fostering a relationship with their newly assigned advisor. Mary met an advisor that she could go to for any matter. She felt confident that she had someone on campus that had her back. Lynette agreed with Mary by stating, “I feel like having one advisor stick through everything is ... I feel like it makes a big difference.” To help at-risk students like academic probation and reentry students obtain their bachelor’s degree, it is imperative that academic advisors are trained to assist these populations by taking an interest in each student to ascertain unique needs and concerns; provide information about majors, courses, and scheduling; review good study habits; discuss campus policy and procedures as it pertains to their academic status; and encourage post-college career (Patton et al., 2016; Shultz, Colton, & Colton, 2001). Peer interaction. Prior to academic disqualification, students interacted with their peers only in social settings. Upon reentry, students sought out their social network for academic support. Astin (1993) explains that peer involvement may include such activities as discussing course content with other students, developing study groups, tutoring other students, and participating in club or social activities on campus. A number of studies (Astin 1993, 1996) IMPACT OF SOCIAL AND ACADEMIC INVOLVEMENT 79 confirmed the positive impact that peer involvement can have on student development and retention. After being readmitted, Kenny shared he made connection with his peers, “Just when the semester starts, from the beginning and try to make a connection or relationship with the students in my classes earlier rather than later to form study groups.” The readmitted students became more actively involved inside the classroom and even outside of class. Students spent more time academically involved by forming study groups with their classmates. Connecting and integrating their experiences enabled students to learn and make friends at the same time, thereby bridging the divide between academic and social involvement. Kenny’s experience with peer tutoring supports the literature on peer interaction. He actively participated in peer touring based on the recommendation from his academic advisor. He was able to meet new friends and form study groups with other students attending the peer tutoring. John shared that, when he did not understand course material, he had peers that he could ask for help. Dennis shared how he influenced his peers to learn: I was a good student, so the ones that cared were like, “Oh, I want to be in a group with this guy.” I went from being the literal bottom of the class to being the absolute leader of the class. I tried really hard to be the best, and, in a lot of my classes, I was. Astin (1993) noted that peers are “the single most potent source of influence on student learning and persistence” (p. 398). By learning from his past academic mistakes, Dennis formed study groups that encouraged his peers to engage in the learning process. Tatiana shared another example of how her sorority sister helped her succeed academically: I ended up being in the group with the girl that was the president. I had social support in the class. People to keep me accountable. I can’t just not show up or I can’t do a nod to my work because we’re going to be talking about it or we’re going to be asking about it, working on group projects together.” She explained that after group meetings on IMPACT OF SOCIAL AND ACADEMIC INVOLVEMENT 80 Mondays, some of the girls would stay after and study. Tatiana was the first one to say “I’ll stay!” Although sororities have bad reputations for partying more than studying, Tatiana stated “academically, there were people in the sorority that were being good role models and I could join in.” When students spend more time learning, they learn more. Also, as they spend more time learning together, the quality of their learning is enhanced; by learning together, everyone’s understanding and knowledge is enriched (Tinto, 1997). Since peer interaction is highly related to student success, it is important that college campus implement voluntary and mandatory opportunities for students to learn together as a persistence tool that promotes degree completion. Research Question 3 Question 3, asked “What social involvement factors did readmitted students indicate contributed to their persistence to graduation after being readmitted?” The purpose of this question was to gain insight on the social factors that helped a group of readmitted students obtain their degree. Extracurricular activities have shown positive impact on student academic performance. Astin (1975) found that “greater degrees of involvement with the programs and activities of the campus influence student satisfaction with college, academic achievement, and persistence toward graduation” (p. 5). The participants were asked on the survey and during the interview to list the social activities, events and programs that they believe contribute to degree completion. In addition, the survey and interviews asked participants to explain why these types of activities or events helped them obtain their degree. The following section discusses the social themes most prevent in the data was that student either decided to not participant in any social events or if they did participants socially it was for a purpose. No involvement. Since students indicated that social events and programs were a main factor in contributing to academic disqualification, they limited their participation. Pre- IMPACT OF SOCIAL AND ACADEMIC INVOLVEMENT 81 disqualification, only 10% of the students indicated that they never participated in social events and programs (Figure 3) in comparison to 45% of students, post-disqualification, who indicated they never participated in social events and programs (Figure 6). Figure 7. Social Involvement-Post Readmission Readmitted students intentionally stayed away from people, situation and events that would distract them from persisting to graduation. Some of the readmitted students indicated participating socially only if there was a purpose. Three out of the six interviewees indicated they did not participate in social activities or events on campus. Mary and Lynette both feared they would get distracted and fall back into spending more time having fun rather than focusing on their academics. Instead, they spent the majority of their time focused on academics, working, internships and making new friends. Dennis was very active off campus leading up to academic disqualification. When asked to elaborate on his social involvement after he gained readmission, Dennis shared the following statement: From the social on campus perspective, I didn’t do anything. I became more of a UU fan, if you will. I would watch the games on TV. But, no, aside from the people I knew in class, and I knew a lot of them. I didn’t join a club. I previously had thought that maybe I would join a business student association, but I was a senior, and I was, at the time, 25 20% 5% 30% 45% Once a week 2‐4 time a week Two or less times a semester Never Social Involvement‐Post Readmission N=20 IMPACT OF SOCIAL AND ACADEMIC INVOLVEMENT 82 years old. I was like, “Nah, that time has passed.” I should’ve taken advantage of it before getting academically disqualified. Age came up several times during the interviews. Mary, Lynette and Dennis all thought they were too old to get involved in most social events with traditional-aged college students. However, the age barrier did not prevent them from making friends or studying with traditional- age students. Mary was adamant that she would work alone in her classes and limit all social involvement to eliminate any possibility for distractions, but that changed her first semester back at UU. Mary shared how she met a new friend when she was readmitted: She was brand new, and I was coming back. It was for research methods. It’s funny because I walked in. I sat next to her. For that class, you have to do a project. I was thinking, “Okay, I’m gonna do it by myself” because you have the option to do it by yourself. She turned around and she said, “Hey, do you mind if you’re my partner because I’m new” and she told me she was a transfer. I was like, “Great. I do not want to make friends.” It was funny because, for her, she always says this, “You’re my first friend.” I almost missed on the opportunity to make a friend. We are still friends to this day! Involvement with a purpose. While most readmitted students decided to focus on academics instead of getting involved that was not the case for all readmitted students. Tatiana, John and Kenny were all involved throughout the time they were readmitted and through to graduation. They all purposely selected social involvement that supported degree completion, their career goals and allowed them to stay connected to the campus. Tatiana was always anti- sorority prior to being academically disqualified, but, like Dennis, she thought she was too old to join when she was readmitted. Tatiana reflected on the experience by sharing, During the third week of classes my first semester back, I ran into a friend who was in the fraternity. I received a flyer for rush. I was 25 at this point. I was like, “Do you guys have IMPACT OF SOCIAL AND ACADEMIC INVOLVEMENT 83 an age limit?” She said “No. You should come.” She told somebody else who was a senior, and she texted me. I called on the way home, “I’m thinking about coming to your rush event. Is it weird? I’m old. Because you’re all freshmen.” She was like, “No.” I got so excited. “You should come. Come out tonight. We’re doing social stuff at Pinkberry like playing games. Just come out.” They reeled me in because it was a competition game, and I like winning. There was a girl who was there who also joined a little bit older. She was 25 [and] a few months older than me, but didn’t join a couple years prior. She’s like, “It’s fine. No worries. I’m 25, you’re 25. It’s all good. Three of my four classes had girls in them. I had social support in the class. People to keep me accountable. I can’t just not show up or I can’t do my work because we’re going to be talking about it or we’re going to be asking about it, working on group projects together. Tatiana would have missed out on a social opportunity that helped her academic success if she made a final decision not to join solely based on her age. Although Kenny and John both rushed fraternities their freshman year, they both continued their involvement when they gained reentry to the university. Like Tatiana, this time around, they utilized the fraternities’ resources and members to help them succeed academically. Kenny talked about limiting the number of events he attended. When deciding which social events to participate in, he mainly selected those that consisted of volunteerism instead of parties. John had experiences similar to those Kenny and Tatiana. He shared the following when asked how his fraternity helped him obtain his degree: They (fraternity) were there to support me through the academics. There’s always that social aspect of them, but there’s also academics, philanthropic … I liked doing community service and giving back. For the record, I don’t blame them for anything that happened to me. IMPACT OF SOCIAL AND ACADEMIC INVOLVEMENT 84 When asked to elaborate why he doesn’t blame them, he said, Because there are other guys. There are other members, too, that did really well despite all social activities… Their level of involvement, I would say some were even more involved than I was, and they still managed to do well academically. It really comes down to just me and how I stayed involved and just my personal motivation to keep studying. They in no way pressured me to do all these things or that led me down to this. I could have easily just said, “I’m not going to involved or help out with any of these things just so I can help myself out more.” Even throughout the process, they knew the whole time what I was going through. Some even offered support. It was just a matter of me wanting to do better. They in no way had a bad influence because, like I said, there were guys that did even better than me and did a lot more. While reflecting on what she learned about social involvement, Mary offered the following advice for academically struggling students: I think, if you are going to be involved, it has to be selective involvement because I know that, when I was rushing, that wasn’t for academic reasons. It was just for me to have fun, for me to meet people. It wasn’t because it was going to help me in the long run. It wasn’t like I networked the right way where I was like, “Okay, these people are gonna help me later on in life.” It wasn’t that. It was just the kind of partying, not really focusing on what I needed to do. It wasn’t like it was going to help me in the long run. If you are going to socialize and be part of different groups, be part of student government, be part of clubs that help the community. If I would go back, that’s what I would do. Readmitted students learned how to manage their time by learning how to say no to social involvement that could possibly hinder their academic program to degree competition. The experience of academic disqualification helped them make wiser decisions as readmitted IMPACT OF SOCIAL AND ACADEMIC INVOLVEMENT 85 students. The key take away from how social involvement contributes to degree completion is the quality of the peer interaction. Some participants joined clubs or groups while others made new friends, but all of the social experiences involved interacting with peers from the college environment. The degree of students’ interaction with peer groups, such as clubs or Greek life have potential for influencing nearly all phases of their educational and personal development (Astin,1996). IMPACT OF SOCIAL AND ACADEMIC INVOLVEMENT 86 CHAPTER FIVE: DISCUSSION The purpose of this explanatory case study was to gain insight on the academic and social involvement factors indicated by readmitted students as contributing to persistence to graduation. The main focus was to understand why these students succeeded when so many others do not return to complete their degree This study is important because it not only sought to understand which involvement factors have the greatest impact on degree completion, but attention was given to the how and academic and social involvement helped them be successful academically. Educators can speculate regarding the factors that lead to an increase in degree completion for at- risk populations, but, in order to really understand, it is imperative to ask students who overcame academic difficulty and persisted to graduation. The best way to gain depth and understanding was through a survey and semi-structured interviews with participants who successfully overcame the difficulties that initially led to them to academic disqualification. Basically, 20 participants completed a survey and six agreed to an interview wherein they were asked to reflect on their experience and give their interpretation on how academic and social involvement had an impact on their degree completion. Academic and social forms of involvement have been found to be important factors for at- risk students’ persistence and graduation. Tinto (1975) noted that certain institutional factors, such as faculty-student interaction, peer involvement, and participation in extracurricular activities, all helped influence a student’s ability to persist to gradation. As suggested by Merriam (1988), this study focused on “discovery, insight, and understanding from the perspectives of those being studied” (p. 3). It also contained the advantage of hindsight and maturity on the part of the participants. They were able to reflect on the problem, its origins, their actions, and the results. Merriam contended insights gained from interviews like those in this study “can be construed as tentative hypotheses that help structure future research” (1988, p. 32). These IMPACT OF SOCIAL AND ACADEMIC INVOLVEMENT 87 findings may be helpful to educators in higher education institutions, especially those who work directly with students who are on academic probation, disqualified, and seeking readmission to their university. This study sought to answer the following research questions: 1. To what did readmitted students attribute to their academic disqualification? 2. What academic involvement factors did readmitted students indicate contributed to their persistence to graduation after being readmitted? 3. What social involvement factors did readmitted students indicate contributed to their persistence to graduation after being readmitted? Chapter Five is divided into the following sections: summary of findings, implications for practice, and recommendations for further research. Summary of the Findings Several conclusions were drawn from the study. Before seeking to understand what academic and social factors helped readmitted students obtain their degree, it is critical to review what caused them to get to the point of academic disqualification. There are three factors that led students to academic disqualification: lack of preparation, employment and social events. Lack of preparation was apparent among students entering college. All of the students said high school did not prepare them for the responsibility of college. Students discussed how the study skills and habits required to be successful in high school were completely different from those necessary for the rigor of college. College was completely different from what they expected. Also, employment was another factor that caused academic disqualification. The majority of the students who completed the survey and interviews worked at least part time while being a full- time student. In addition to full time work and school, students were socializing on and off campus. The survey and interview participants both agreed they spent too much time socializing on and off campus instead of focusing on academics. Students spent time partying, locked in their IMPACT OF SOCIAL AND ACADEMIC INVOLVEMENT 88 dorms with friends, pledging Greek organizations, and attending clubs and events on and off campus. Mismanagement of time caused students to have excessive absences from class. Students were too tired to attend class, complete assignments or study due to work and socializing. The main purpose of the study was to seek out the academic and social involvement factors that contributed to readmitted students’ degree completion. The overview of findings for academics regards the importance of developing quality relationships with faculty, academic advisors and peers to supports degree completion. Socially, the type of social involvement, if any, had to be purposeful and included an academic component. Upon reentry to the university, readmitted students implemented the lessons learned from being academically disqualified. Readmitted students’ main focus was on their academics. From day one, students met with their professors and teaching assistants to discuss the syllabus and class assignments. Fostering relationships with their professors was extremely important in tracking their progress in the class. This time around, students became involved in the learning process inside and outside the classroom. Prior to academic disqualification, students did not visit their academic advisor or seek help from peers. They did not realize the important role that academic advising played in their persistence to graduation until after being academically disqualified. Readmitted students were intentional in meeting with their academic advisor regularly to ensure they were on track to graduate and to provide them with the updates. The importance of having peer academic support was made apparent to readmitted students. During the first few weeks of class, students formed study groups with peers that they met in their classes. Readmitted students indicated that increased academic involvement, interaction with faculty, academic advisors and peers contributed to their degree completion. Prior to academic disqualification students did not take an active part in their academic success but post- disqualification they utilized campus resources to help them obtain their degree. IMPACT OF SOCIAL AND ACADEMIC INVOLVEMENT 89 While the majority of participants indicated they did not get involved socially, there were several that sought out events and clubs on campus. Readmitted students decided to spend their time on academics, work and internships. They thought they would get too distracted from academics if they spent time involved socially. The consensus was students did not want to repeat the same behavior that contributed to academic disqualification, such as partying, socializing, and oversleeping. Those who sought out social involvement indicated it was purposeful and it helped with their academics. Half of the participants were members of a fraternity or sorority post- disqualification. They all indicated participating in the social aspects of Greek life; however, they did use the academic resources they were offered. Some of the readmitted students went to study sessions and asked for help on assignments from fellow Greek members. All events or clubs readmitted student decided to join were related to their major or career aspirations. Readmitted students indicated that purposeful involvement contributed to their degree completion. In sum, students decreased their social involvement and increased their academic involvement upon gaining readmission to UU. Implications for practice The findings of this study provide a step toward helping educators in higher education institutions, especially those professionals who work directly with at-risk students, with the academic and social factors that support degree completion. Universities need to remain dedicated to communicating with all students about the resources available to them from their first day on the campus until their graduation. The communication needs to help them understand at timely points in their academic careers that there are individuals (faculty and advisors) and resources (counseling, tutoring, clubs) that can provide assistance to support any students, no matter their situation. As one participant said, “I didn’t use any resources on campus prior to academic disqualification.” This study exemplified that, although some students did not use IMPACT OF SOCIAL AND ACADEMIC INVOLVEMENT 90 resources prior to being academically disqualified, most discovered, through their readmission journey, the value that assistance can provide to academic success and degree completion. When students disclose academic or personal struggles, faculty members and academic advisors could assist those individuals in exploring involvement factors outlined by Astin’s (1984) theory of involvement and I-E-O model by helping students understand the quantity and quality of different types of involvement so that individuals may better discover how to best utilize the resources needed to obtain their degree. However, before students can be concerned with involvement, they must identify what they believe to be the cause or trigger of their academic difficulties before it impedes on their persistence to degree completion. The results of this study also lead to a possible expansion of Astin’s (1983) I-E-O. The I- E-O model provided a compelling lens to understand the impact of involvement on degree completion for readmitted students. The I-E-O model allows student to see their academic journey holistically by outlining how their student characteristics (I), affects their experience in the college environment (E), and the outcomes and goals they set by attending college, such as graduating (O). The findings of this study make it clear that readmitted students learned from their previous setbacks by recognizing the importance of not only recognizing the resources on campus but the importance of utilizing them until graduation. There is much more that educators need to learn about students who are having academic difficulties. Future studies should include both qualitative and quantitative research to examine additional variables and types of situations that educators believe have an impact on a student’s academic success or lack thereof, such as personal problems, lack of clearly defined or realistic goals, poor study habits, illness, and irregular class attendance. Again, while this study expanded on the literature on academically successful reinstated students, it should be noted that it might not be representative of all reinstated students. IMPACT OF SOCIAL AND ACADEMIC INVOLVEMENT 91 Limitations The findings of the present study should be considered in light of its limitations. The fact that all participants attended the same institution limits the generalizability of the present findings. It could be that the academic and social factors at the institution where data were collected could not occur at other institutions. For this reason, it is particularly important for the findings to be replicated in a different setting before applying them too broadly. This present study was not experimental in nature in that it did not randomly assign students categories such as majors or ethnicity. Such is the nature with the kind of research where student choices cannot be randomly assigned. To improve on the present study, a quasi-experimental study could add further validity to research findings. Lastly, while this study expanded the literature on academically successful reinstated students, it should be noted that it might not be representative of all reinstated students. Recommendation for Practice and Future Study The following section will outline the recommendations for future practice and research. Institutions of higher education can enhance academic and social support programs for students identified by faculty or advisors as struggling with their academics through first-year seminars, extended orientation programs, and stronger advising and mentoring requirements to help prevent academic disqualification. The counseling centers or qualified counseling professionals can host coping strategy workshops for readmitted students to gain a better understanding of their vulnerabilities to avoid or mitigate the extent of future struggles. To prevent academic disqualification, institutions of higher education can prevent students from registering for future terms while on academic probation until students demonstrate they overcame the obstacles preventing them from being academically successful. In addition, institutions can conduct a study on readmitted students utilizing a more heterogeneous sample. This should provide richer data IMPACT OF SOCIAL AND ACADEMIC INVOLVEMENT 92 regarding students from broader cultural backgrounds, especially since many four-year colleges now enroll more diverse student populations who, collectively, may yield different findings. A similar qualitative study should focus on readmitted students who were originally native or transfers. This study included both groups. Separating the two populations might include different findings for each subpopulation. Lastly, an archival study can be conducted of readmitted students over an extended period of time to determine predictors of academic success as well as to provide statistics on the percentage of reinstated student who complete a graduate degree. Conclusion This research was inspired by the researcher’s experiences with students who overcame academic barriers. The inspiration for this study was to highlight the success of readmitted students persisting to graduation with the hope that this information can help others currently struggling academically. While students facing academic disqualification gained more attention recently, few peer-reviewed studies explored academic and social involvement factors from the perspectives of the students themselves. This in-depth perspective on six students who achieved academic success through graduation is a first step toward better understanding the impact of involvement. We now have more evidence of how academic and social involvement affects academic struggles and the factors to which students attribute their academic success. Through this work, professionals can help students understand how academic and social involvement can hinder or help persistence to graduation. This study supports the work of advisors and staff who interact with undergraduate students and may enhance or prompt the initiation of programs to assist struggling students. This study demonstrated that, although some students struggle academically to the point of disqualification, they are not incapable of obtaining their degrees and IMPACT OF SOCIAL AND ACADEMIC INVOLVEMENT 93 that interacting with faculty, academic advisors and peers can positively contribute to their academic success over time. IMPACT OF SOCIAL AND ACADEMIC INVOLVEMENT 94 References Astin, A. W. (1968). The college environment. Washington, DC: American Council on Education. Astin, A. (1975). Preventing students from dropping out. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Astin, A. (1984). Student involvement: a developmental theory for higher education. Journal of College Student Personnel, 25, 297-308. Astin, A. (1991). Assessment for excellence: The philosophy and practice of assessment and evaluation in higher education. Santa Barbara, CA: Oryx Press. Astin, A. (1993). What matters in college: Four critical years revisited. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Astin, A. (1996). Involvement in learning revisited: Lessons we have learned. Journal of College Student Development, 37, 123-134. Astin, A. (1999). Student involvement: A development theory for higher education. Journal of College Student Development, 40, 518-532. Astin, A.W. (1977). Four critical nm. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Astin, A. W.; Vogelgesang, L. J.; Ikeda, E. K.; and Yee, J. A., (2000). How Service Learning Affects Students. Los Angeles, CA: Higher Education Research Institute. Astin, A. W. (1988). The Implicit Criticism: What Are We Really Teaching Our Undergraduates?. Liberal Education, 74(1), 6-10. Austin, M, Cherney, E, Crowner, J, & Hill, A. (1997). The forum: Intrusive group advising for the probationary student. NACADA Journal, 17(2), 45-47. Baird, L. L. (1976). Using Self-Reports to Predict Student Performance. Research Monograph No. 7. New York, NY: EXXON Education Foundation. IMPACT OF SOCIAL AND ACADEMIC INVOLVEMENT 95 Bean, J. P., & Eaton, S. B. (2000). A psychological model of college student retention. Reworking the student departure puzzle, 1, 48-61. Bean, J. & Metzner, B. (1985). A conceptual model of nontraditional undergraduate student attrition. Review of Educational Research, 55(4), 485–540. Bean, J. & Metzner, B. (1985). A conceptual model of nontraditional undergraduate student attrition. Review of Educational Research, 55(4), 485–540. Bean, J. (1980). Dropouts and turnover: The synthesis and test of a casual model of student attrition. Journal of Research in Higher Education, 12(2), 155-187. Bean, J. P. (1990). Using retention research in enrollment management. In D. Hossler, J. P. Bean, & Associates (Eds.), The strategic management of college enrollments (pp. 170-175). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Bean, J. P. (1982). Conceptual models of student attrition: How theory can help the institutional researcher. New directions for Institutional Research, 1982(36), 17-33. Bean, J. P. (1986). Assessing and reducing attrition. New Directions for Higher Education. No. 53, 14(1), 47-61. Broschard, D. M. (2005). Quality of student involvement and college contribution toward development of traditional and nontraditional undergraduate students (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations Publishing. (3169451) Cabrera, A. F., Castañeda, M. B., Nora, A., & Hengstler, D. (1992). The convergence between two theories of college persistence. The Journal of Higher Education, 63(2), 143-164. Chronicle of Higher Education. (2006). Almanac Issue. Retrieved January 11, 2016, from http://chronicle.com/section/Almanac-of-Higher-Education/141 Cobble, K. & Hohengarten, F. (1998). The effectiveness of the automatic reinstatement policy at Eastern Illinois University. College and University, 73(4), 2-11. IMPACT OF SOCIAL AND ACADEMIC INVOLVEMENT 96 Cogan, M. (2010-2011). Predicting success of academically dismissed undergraduate students using quality point status. Journal of College Student Retention, 12(4), 387. Cogan, M. F. (2004). Undergraduate academic success during the semester of reinstatement following academic dismissal. Dissertation Abstracts International: Section A. Humanities and Social Sciences, 6602), 506 Coleman, H. L., & Freedman, A. M. (1996). Effects of a structured group intervention on the achievement of academically at-risk undergraduates. Journal of College Student Development, 37(6), 631-36. Community College Survey of Student Engagement. (2004). Engagement by design: 2004 findings. Austin, TX: Author. Community College Survey of Student Engagement (2006). Act on fact: Using data to improve student success. Austin, TX: Author. Community College Survey of Student Engagement (2008). Essential elements of engagement: High expectations and high support. Austin, TX: Author. Creswell, J.W. (2005). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE. Dole, A.A. (1963). Prediction of academic success upon readmission to college. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 10(2), 169-175. Durkheim, E. (1953). Sociology and philosophy. New York, NY: The Free Press. Durkheim, E. (1954). The elementary forms or religious life. New York, NY: The Free Press. Foubert, J. D., & Urbanski, L. A. (2006). Effects of involvement in clubs and organizations on the psychosocial development of first-year and senior college students. NASPA journal, 43(1), 166-182. IMPACT OF SOCIAL AND ACADEMIC INVOLVEMENT 97 Gall, M., Gall, J. and Borg, W. (2007). Educational research: An introduction (8th edition). New York: Longman. Graham, S. & Gisi, S. (2000). Adult undergraduate students: What role does college involvement play. NASPA Journal, 38, 99-121. Greene, J. C., & Caracelli, V. J. (1997). Defining and describing the paradigm issue in mixed ‐ method evaluation. New Directions for Evaluation, 1997(74), 5-17. Greene, J. C., Caracelli, V. J., & Graham, W. F. (1989). Toward a conceptual framework for mixed-method evaluation designs. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 11(3), 255-274. Grubb, W. N. (2002). Learning and earning in the middle, Part I: National Studies of Pre- Baccalaureate Education. Economics of Education Review, 21(4), 299-321. Guba, E.G. and Y.S. Lincoln 1994, “Competing paradigms in qualitative research” in Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (2000). Handbook of qualitative research (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE. Hall, K.M. & Gahn, S.W. (1994). Predictors of success for academically dismissed students following readmission. NACADA Journal, 14(1), 8-12. Hanks, M., & Eckland, B. (1976). Athletics and social participation in the educational attainment process. Sociology of Education, 49, 271-294. Hesse-Biber, S. N., & Leavy, P. (2006). Emergent methods in social research. Thousand Oaks: SAGE. Heisserer, D., & Parrette, P. (2002). Advising at-risk students achieve academic success. College Student Journal, 36(1), 69-83. IMPACT OF SOCIAL AND ACADEMIC INVOLVEMENT 98 Himmelreich, H. W. (1967). A study of the variables influencing the achievement of college students readmitted to the University of Nebraska following academic suspension. (Doctoral dissertation), University of Nebraska Lincoln, 1967. Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses. (UMI No. 6803786) Horn, L. J., & Carroll, C. D. (1996). Nontraditional undergraduates: Trends in enrollment from 1986 to 1992 and persistence and attainment among 1989-90 beginning postsecondary students. Postsecondary education descriptive analysis reports. Statistical analysis report. Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office Hossler, D., Kuh, G. D., & Olsen, D. (2001). Finding (more) fruit on the vines: Using higher education research and institutional research to guide institutional policies and strategies (Part II). Research in Higher Education, 42(2), 223-235. House, J. (2000). The effect of student involvement on the development of academic self- concept. Journal of Social Psychology, 140, 261-264. Isaak, M. I., Graves, K. M., & Mayers, B. O. (2006). Academic, motivational, and emotional problems identified by college students in academic jeopardy. Journal of College Student Retention: Research, Theory & Practice, 8(2), 171-183. King, J. (2002). Crucial choices: How students’ financial decisions affect their academic success. Washington, DC: American Council on Education. Kingston, P. W., Hubbard, R., Lapp, B., Schroeder, P., & Wilson, J. (2003). Why Education Matters. Sociology of Education, 76(1), 53-70. Kirk-Kuwaye, M., & Nishida, D. (2001). Effect of low and high advisor involvement on the academic performances of probation students. NACADA Journal, 21(1-2), 40-45. IMPACT OF SOCIAL AND ACADEMIC INVOLVEMENT 99 Kuh, G. D. (2001). The National Survey of Student Engagement: Conceptual framework and overview of psychometric properties. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Center for Postsecondary Research. Kuh, G. (2003). What we’re learning about student engagement from NSSE: Benchmarks for effective educational practices. Change, 35(2): 24-32. Kuh, G. D. (2004). The contributions of the research university to assessment and innovation in undergraduate education. In W. E. Becker & M. L. Andrews (Eds.), The scholarship of teaching and learning in higher education: Contributions of research universities (pp. 161-192). Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press. Kuh, G. D. (2009). The national survey of student engagement: Conceptual and empirical foundations. New Directions for Institutional Research, 2009(141), 5-20. Kuh, G., Gonyea, R. & Williams, J. (2005). What students expect from college and what they get. In T. Miller, B. Bender, J. Schuh and Associates (Eds.), Promoting reasonable expectations: Aligning student and institutional thinking about the college experience (pp. 34-64). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass/National Association of Student Personnel Administrators. Kuh, G., Kinzie, J., Buckley, J., Bridges, B. & Hayek, J. (2006). What matters to student success: A review of the literature. Washington, DC: National Postsecondary Education Cooperative. Kuh, G. D., Douglas, K. B., Lund, J. P., & Ramin-Gyurnek, J. (1994). Student learning outside the classroom: Transcending artificial boundaries (Vol. 8). Graduate School of Education and Human Development, the George Washington University. IMPACT OF SOCIAL AND ACADEMIC INVOLVEMENT 100 Kuh, G. D., Vesper, N., Connolly, M. R., & Pace, C. R. (1997). College Student Experiences Questionnaire: Revised norms for the third edition. Bloomington, IN: Center for Postsecondary Research and Planning, Indiana University. Lawrence, C. (2004). Higher education: Public good or private benefit? Melbourne, Australia: Melbourne University. (Chifley Memorial Lecture). Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry (Vol. 75). Sage. Lucas, J.A. (1991). Evaluation of new probation intervention program at Harper College. Palatine, IL: William Rainey Harper College. Retrieved from ERIC Document Reproduction Service. (ED 348 122) Maxwell, J. A. (2012). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach: An interactive approach. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE. McEwan, E. K. & McEwan, P. J. (2006). Making sense of research. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE. Muraskin, L. & Wilner, A. (2004). What we know about institutional influences on retention. Washington, DC: JBL Associates. Merriam, S.B. (1988). Case study research in education: A qualitative approach. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Merriam, S. B. (2011). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons. Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE. National Survey of Student Engagement (2005). NSSE annual report: Exploring different dimensions of student engagement. Bloomington, IN: Author. Olson, M.A. (1990). Characteristics of students on academic probation. Community /Junior College Quarterly of Research and Practice, 1(4), 331-336. IMPACT OF SOCIAL AND ACADEMIC INVOLVEMENT 101 Ott, M. D. (1988). An analysis of predictors of early academic dismissal. Research in Higher Education, 28(1), 34-48. Pace, R. (1979) Measuring outcomes of college: Fifty years of findings and recommendations for the future. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Pace, C. R. (1984). Measuring the Quality of College Student Experiences. An Account of the Development and Use of the College Student Experiences Questionnaire. Los Angeles, CA: Higher Education Research Institute. Pace, C. R. (1985). The credibility of student self-reports. Los Angeles, CA: Center for the Study of Evaluation, University of California Los Angeles. Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Patton, L. D., Renn, K. A., Guido, F. M., Quaye, S. J., Evans, N. J., & Forney, D. S. (2016). Student development in college: Theory, research, and practice. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons. Pascarella, E. & Terenzini, P. (1980). Predicting freshman persistence and voluntary dropout decisions from a theoretical model. Journal of Higher Education, 51(1), 60-75. Pascarella, E. & Terenzini, P. (1998). How college affects students: Findings and insights from twenty years of research. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Pascarella, E. & Terenzini, P. (2005). How college affects students: A third decade of research. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Pike, G. R. (1995). The relationship between self-reports of college experiences and achievement test scores. Research in Higher Education, 36(1), 1-21. Pike, G. R. (2006). The convergent and discriminant validity of NSSE scalelet scores. Journal of College Student Development, 47(5), 550-563. IMPACT OF SOCIAL AND ACADEMIC INVOLVEMENT 102 Robeson, J. R. (1998). College students on the rebound: Examining the life stories of seven male reinstated students (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations Publishing. (9834620) Rossman, G. B., & Wilson, B. L. (1985). Numbers and words combining quantitative and qualitative methods in a single large-scale evaluation study. Evaluation Review, 9(5), 627- 643. Sax, L. J. (1998). How undergraduates are affected by service participation. Journal of College Student Development, 39, 251-263. Vander Schee, B. A. (2007). Adding insight to intrusive advising and its effectiveness with students on probation. NACADA Journal, 27(2), 50-59. Schulenberg, J. K., & Lindhorst, M. J. (2008). Advising Is advising: Toward defining the practice and scholarship of academic advising. NACADA Journal, 28(1), 43-53. Schwebel, D. C., Walburn, N. C., Jacobsen, S. H., Jerrolds, K. L., & Klyce, K. (2008). Efficacy of intrusively advising first-year students via frequent reminders for advising appointments. NACADA Journal, 28(2), 28-32. Shultz, E. L., Colton, G. M., & Colton, C. (2001). The adventor program: Advisement and mentoring for students of color in higher education. Journal of Humanistic Counseling, Education and Development, 40(2), 208-18. Spady, W. (1970). Dropouts from higher education: An interdisciplinary review and synthesis. Interchange, 1, 64-85. Swail, W. S., Cabrera, A. F., & Lee, C. (2004). Latino youth and the pathway to college. Washington, DC: Pew Hispanic Center. IMPACT OF SOCIAL AND ACADEMIC INVOLVEMENT 103 Tashakkori, A., & Teddlie, C. (2003). Issues and dilemmas in teaching research methods courses in social and behavioural sciences: US perspective. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 6(1), 61-77. Tinto, V. (1993) . Leaving college: Rethinking the causes and cures of student attrition (2nd ed.). Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Tinto, V. (1973). Dropout in higher education: A review of recent research. Washington, D.C: U.S. Department of Education. Tinto, V. (1975). Dropout from higher education: A theoretical synthesis of recent research. Review of Educational Research, 45 {I), 89-125 Tinto, V. (1987). Leaving college: Rethinking the causes and cures of student attrition. Chicago, IL: Chicago University Press. Tinto, V. (1997). Classrooms as communities: Exploring the educational character of student persistence. The Journal of Higher Education, 68(6), 599-623. Tinto, V. (1982). Limits of theory and practice in student attrition. Journal of Higher Education, 53(6), 687-700. Tinto, V. (1988) “Stages of Student Departure: Reflection on the Longitudinal Character of Student Leaving” Journal of Higher Education, 59(4), 438-455. Tinto. V. (2004). Student retention and graduation: Facing the truth, living with the consequences. (Occasional Paper, 1). Washington, DC: Pell Institute for the Study of Opportunity in Higher Education. Tovar, E., & Simon, M. (2006). Academic probation as a dangerous opportunity: Factors influencing diverse college students’ success. Community College Journal of Research and Practice, 30(7), 547. IMPACT OF SOCIAL AND ACADEMIC INVOLVEMENT 104 Trombley, C.M. (2000-1). Evaluating students on probation and determining intervention strategies: A comparison of probation and good standing students. Journal of College Student Retention, 2(3), 239-251. Ullah, H. & Wilson, M. (2007). Students’ academic success and its association to student involvement with learning and relationships with faculty and peers. College Student Journal, 41, 1192-1202. Umbach, P. & Wawrzynski, M. (2005). Faculty do matter: The role of college faculty in student learning and engagement. Research in Higher Education, 46(2), 153-184. Upcraft, M., Gardner, J. & Barefoot, B. (2005). Challenging and supporting the first-year student: A handbook for improving the first year of college. San Francisco, CA: Jossey- Bass. Van Gennep, A. (1960). Rites of passage. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. Velez, E. D. (2014). America’s college drop-out epidemic: Understanding the college drop-out population. National Center for Analysis of Longitudinal Data in Education Research working paper. Washington, DC: American Institutes for Research. Yin, R. K. (2002). Case study research: Design and methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE. IMPACT OF SOCIAL AND ACADEMIC INVOLVEMENT 105 Appendix A Student Involvement Questionnaire WHAT THIS SURVEY IS ABOUT You are invited to answer a series of questions about your academic and social experiences that contributed to your degree completion after being readmitted. Information from this survey is used to fulfill the requirements of a dissertation and to inform higher education leaders about the academic and social resources, programs and services that increase the retention and graduation rates of readmitted students. After reading the information on this page, if you agree to take part in this survey, please click the “Proceed to the Survey” button below. SURVEY PARTICIPANTS Survey participants are students who were readmitted after being academically disqualified (also known as involuntary withdrawal) and successfully persisted to graduation. TAKING THE SURVEY The survey has questions regarding your college experience, how you spent your time academically and socially, including your interactions with peers, faculty, programs and services prior to being academically disqualified and after being readmitted. In addition, you will be asked about your experience with academic probation, disqualification, readmission and persisting to graduation. Filling out the questionnaire takes about 15-20 minutes. Your participation is completely voluntary. At the end of the survey, you will be asked to consider participating in a face-to-face, follow-up interview. If selected, follow-up interviews will last approximately 45-60 minutes and will be audio-taped. Declining participation or not completing the survey and/or interview will not result in any penalty. CONFIDENTIALITY Any information that is obtained in connection with this study will remain confidential and will be disclosed only with your permission or as required by law. All survey participants who volunteer for an interview will have the right to review and edit the digital recordings of the interview. FURTHER INFORMATION If you have any questions or concerns about the research, please feel free to contact Principal Investigator Marcedes Butler via email at marcedeb@usc.edu or phone at 562-774-2009. IMPACT OF SOCIAL AND ACADEMIC INVOLVEMENT 106 If you have questions or concerns about your rights as a research participant or the research in general, or if you want to speak to someone independent of the research team, please contact the University Park Institutional Review Board (UPIRB), 3720 South Flower Street #301, Los Angeles, CA 90089-0702, (213) 821-5272 or upirb@usc.edu. <Proceed to the Survey button> Submitting indicated that you are agreeing to the terms of this survey. <I decline to participant button> Declining to participate will end this survey. IMPACT OF SOCIAL AND ACADEMIC INVOLVEMENT 107 Student Involvement Questionnaire There are four sections of questions in this survey to learn more about how your academic and social involvement, as an undergraduate student hindered or supported your path to academic probation, disqualification, readmission and ultimately persistence to gradation. The survey sections are: 1. Academic probation and disqualification: what you attribute to being placed on academic probation and ultimately academic disqualification. 2. Readmission: the readmission experience. 3. Graduation: your academic and social involvement after being readmitted that contributed to your persistence to graduation. 4. Demographic information: characteristics such as your age, education, race, and gender, will be collected at the end of the survey. The benefits of this study depends on your thoughtful and honest responses to the questions on this survey. The information obtained from this survey will help guide services and programs to retain readmitted and at-risk student populations. Thank you again for your participation. Section One: Academic Probation and Disqualification DIRECTIONS: Think about your enrollment as an undergraduate student while on academic probation when answering the following questions. How often did you do the following? Indicate your response by selecting how often you participated in the following activities: Very Often Often Sometimes Never Asked questions or contributed to course discussions 4 3 2 1 Prepared two or more drafts of a paper or assignment before turning it in 4 3 2 1 Came to class without completing readings or assignments 4 3 2 1 IMPACT OF SOCIAL AND ACADEMIC INVOLVEMENT 108 Attended an art exhibit, play, or other arts performance 4 3 2 1 Asked another student to help you understand course material 4 3 2 1 Explained course material to one or more students 4 3 2 1 Prepared for exams by discussing or working through course material with other students 4 3 2 1 Worked with other students on course projects or assignments 4 3 2 1 Gave a course presentation 4 3 2 1 Combined ideas from different courses when completing assignments 4 3 2 1 Connected your learning to societal problems or issues 4 3 2 1 Included diverse perspectives (political, religious, racial/ethnic, gender, etc.) in course discussions or assignments 4 3 2 1 Examined the strengths and weaknesses of your own views on a topic or issue 4 3 2 1 Tried to better understand someone else’s views by imagining how an issue looks from his or her perspective 4 3 2 1 IMPACT OF SOCIAL AND ACADEMIC INVOLVEMENT 109 Learned something that changed the way you understood an issue or concept 4 3 2 1 Connected ideas from your courses to your prior experiences and knowledge 4 3 2 1 Talked about career plans with a faculty member 4 3 2 1 Worked with a faculty member on activities other than coursework (committees, student groups, etc.) 4 3 2 1 Discussed course topics, ideas, or concepts with a faculty member outside of class 4 3 2 1 Discussed your academic performance with a faculty member 4 3 2 1 Identified key information from reading assignments 4 3 2 1 Reviewed your notes after class 4 3 2 1 Summarized what you learned in class or from course materials 4 3 2 1 Rank the top three academic issues that contributed to you being placed on academic probation and subsequently being disqualified: □ Did not follow a study plan □ Did not meet with professor or TAs for help □ Did not use a designated study area □ Difficulty understanding textbook readings IMPACT OF SOCIAL AND ACADEMIC INVOLVEMENT 110 □ Inadequate test preparation □ Lack of general study skills □ Little or no class participation □ Little or no preparation before class □ Poor attitude toward class and/or professor □ Poor in-class note-taking skills □ Spent too much time on reading assignments □ Studied but could not pass tests □ Test taking or test anxiety issues □ Other ___________________________ Rank the top three areas you spent the most time while on academic probation: □ Attending Programs/Events on Campus □ Class Time □ Clubs/Activities □ Drugs and Alcohol □ Eating/Meals □ Electronic Entertainment (TV/Video Games/DVD/Web) □ Exercise □ Family Time □ Grooming □ Sleep □ Socializing Off Campus □ Study Time □ Time with Children □ Time with Significant Other/Partner/Boyfriend/Girlfriend/Wife/Husband □ Work □ Other:______________________ How involved were you in campus activities prior to being academically disqualified? □ I attended events/ activities □ I helped to plan events/activities □ I did not attend or participate in activities IMPACT OF SOCIAL AND ACADEMIC INVOLVEMENT 111 Club/Organization Involvement: Please select all that apply: □ Member of club/organization (fraternities and sororities) □ Member of club/organization (non-Greek life) □ Officer of club/organization (fraternities and sororities) □ Officer of club/organization (non-Greek life) □ Not involved in club/organization If you participated in a campus club or organization, do you think your involvement contributed to the following? Select all that apply. □ Academic probation Yes or No □ Disqualification Yes or No Please indicate your level of agreement with the following statement: Overall, I felt well informed about campus events and activities that could have helped me clear academic probation: Choices: □ strongly agree □ somewhat agree □ somewhat disagree □ strongly disagree Which social and academic programs and events did you participate in prior to academic disqualification? Select all that apply: Academic Involvement: □ Academic Advisor □ Academic Support Center □ Ambassador □ Career center □ Cultural Center □ Disability Services & Programs □ Hired personal tutor □ Honors Program □ Internship, field experience, student teaching, service leaning or clinical placement □ UU House □ UU Center for Learning and Creativity □ Learning Enrichment Workshops □ Library Services □ Math Center □ New Student Academic Intervention Program IMPACT OF SOCIAL AND ACADEMIC INVOLVEMENT 112 □ Occupational Therapy □ Office of International Students □ On Campus Tutoring □ Professional/academic groups for your major (SHPE,NSBE,etc.) □ Professor’s Office Hours □ Student Counseling Center □ Student Health Center Services □ Study abroad □ Summer Bridge □ Supplemental Instruction □ Support Centered Program □ TA Office Hours □ Thematic Option □ UU Studrent Success Program □ Writing Center □ Other: How often did you participate in academic sponsored programs and events prior to being academically disqualified? a) More than once a week b) Once a week b) Once a month c) Two or less times a semester d) Never Social Involvement: □ Student Governance and Programming □ UU Student Involvement Center □ Events at UU auditorium □ Fraternities and Sororities □ UU Performance Café □ Jumpstart □ UU Gym □ Marching band □ Peer Leadership □ Program Board □ Recreational sports □ Religious/Spiritual Services □ Student leadership □ Student Newspaper IMPACT OF SOCIAL AND ACADEMIC INVOLVEMENT 113 □ Student clubs □ Student radio station □ UU Vision □ UU Student Government (USG) □ UULEAD □ Veterans Resource Center □ Volunteer Center □ Other:____ How often did you participate in social university sponsored programs and events prior to being academically disqualified? e) More than once a week c) Once a week f) Once a month g) Two or less times a semester h) Never If you checked never above, please check the main two reasons for not participating? □ Family □ Financial Problems □ Internship □ Live Too Far Away □ Parking Problems □ Personal Relationship □ Programs/Events Offered Do Not Interest Me □ Scheduling Conflicts □ Work Obligations □ Other :_____________________ How many hours per week did you work (on/off campus jobs and internships) while on academic probation? □ 1-10 hours □ 11-20 hours □ 21-30 hours □ 31-40 hours □ More than 40 hours □ Did not work IMPACT OF SOCIAL AND ACADEMIC INVOLVEMENT 114 Which of the following best describes where you were living while at the time of academic disqualification? □ Dormitory or other campus housing (not fraternity or sorority house), □ Fraternity or sorority house, □ Residence (house, apartment, etc.) within walking distance to the institution, □ Residence (house, apartment, etc.) farther than walking distance to the institution, □ With your parents or relatives □ Other: What year where you in college when you got academically disqualified? □ Freshman (0-31 units units) □ Sophomore (32-63 units) □ Junior (64-95 units) □ Senior (96+ units) How many semesters did you attend prior to disqualification? □ 3 semesters □ 4-6 semesters □ 7-9 semesters □ 10-12 semesters □ 13+ semesters What was your age at time of academic disqualification? 1. 17-20 2. 21-24 3. 25 -27 4. 28-30 5. 31+ 6. 41+ 7. 51 + What was your cumulative GPA when you got academically disqualified:_____ What was your major at the time of academic disqualification? Please indicate your major: _______________________ Please use this space the elaborate on the experiences that contributed to academic disqualification? (Please limit your response to 250 words or less). IMPACT OF SOCIAL AND ACADEMIC INVOLVEMENT 115 Please use this space to elaborate on any questions in this section. (Please limit your response to 250 words or less). Section Two: Readmission DIRECTIONS: Think about your readmission experience when answering the following questions. How much time did you take off before you started taking the required coursework in transfer to submit a readmission application? 1. I started semester or quarter immediately after academic disqualification 2. I took one or two semesters/quarters off after academic disqualification 3. 2-4 years 4. 4-6 years 5. 7-19 years 6. 10+ years What was your place of residence during the readmission process? □ Dormitory or other campus housing (not fraternity or sorority house), □ Fraternity or sorority house, □ Residence (house, apartment, etc.) within walking distance to the institution, □ Residence (house, apartment, etc.) farther than walking distance to the institution, □ With your parents or relatives □ Other: How many hours per week did you work while taking classes required to submit a readmission application? □ 1-10 hours □ 11-20 hours □ 21-30 hours □ 31-40 hours □ More than 40 hours □ Did not work What was your enrollment status at the other college(s) you attended in order to submit a readmission application? □ Full-time (equivalent to 12+ semester units) □ Part-time (equivalent to 1-11 semester units) IMPACT OF SOCIAL AND ACADEMIC INVOLVEMENT 116 How many total units did you attempt (including classes you did not pass) towards readmissions? □ 1-12 units □ 13-16 units □ 17-20 units □ 21-30 units □ 31-40 units □ 41-50 units □ 50+ units What resources did you use at the other institution(s) you enrolled in to take classes required to submit a readmission application? Select all that apply: Academic Involvement: □ Academic Advisor □ Academic Support Center □ Ambassador □ Career center □ Cultural Center □ Disability Services & Programs □ Hired personal tutor □ Honors Program □ Internship, field experience, student teaching, service leaning or clinical placement □ UU House □ UU Center for Learning and Creativity □ Learning Enrichment Workshops □ Library Services □ Math Center □ New Student Academic Intervention Program □ Occupational Therapy □ Office of International Students □ On Campus Tutoring □ Professional/academic groups for your major (SHPE,NSBE,etc.) □ Professor’s Office Hours □ Student Counseling Center IMPACT OF SOCIAL AND ACADEMIC INVOLVEMENT 117 □ Student Health Center Services □ Study abroad □ Summer Bridge □ Supplemental Instruction □ Support Centered Program □ TA Office Hours □ Thematic Option □ UU Student Success Program □ Writing Center □ Other: How often did you participate in academic university sponsored programs and events prior to being academically disqualified? a) More than once a week b) Once a week c) Once a month d) Two or less times a semester e) Never Social Involvement: □ Center for Student Involvement □ Fraternities and Sororities □ Gym □ Recreational sports □ Religious/Spiritual Services □ Student leadership □ Student Newspaper □ Student organizations or clubs □ Student radio station □ Student Government □ Veterans Resource Center □ Volunteer Center □ Other:____ IMPACT OF SOCIAL AND ACADEMIC INVOLVEMENT 118 How often did you participate in social events and programs at the other college(s) you attended to take classes required to submit a readmission application? 1) Once a week 2) More than once a week 3) Once a month 4) Two or less times a semester 5) Never If you checked never above, please check the main two reasons for not participating? □ Live too far away □ Programs/events offered do not interest me □ Parking problems □ Financial problems □ Scheduling conflicts □ Work □ Internship □ Personal relationship □ Family □ Other :_____________________ Please use this space to elaborate on your readmission experiences, including if the experience helped you persist to graduation after being readmitted: (Please limit your response to 250 words or less). Please use this space to elaborate on your answers to any questions in this section. (Please limit your response to 250 words or less). Section Three: Readmitted and Graduation DIRECTIONS: Think about the timeframe from being readmitted to graduation when answering the following questions. How often did you do the following? Indicate your response by filling in one of the spaces to the right of each statement. Very Often Often Sometimes Never IMPACT OF SOCIAL AND ACADEMIC INVOLVEMENT 119 Asked questions or contributed to course discussions 4 3 2 1 Prepared two or more drafts of a paper or assignment before turning it in 4 3 2 1 Came to class without completing readings or assignments 4 3 2 1 Attended an art exhibit, play, or other arts performance 4 3 2 1 Asked another student to help you understand course material 4 3 2 1 Explained course material to one or more students 4 3 2 1 Prepared for exams by discussing or working through course material with other students 4 3 2 1 Worked with other students on course projects or assignments 4 3 2 1 Gave a course presentation 4 3 2 1 Combined ideas from different courses when completing assignments 4 3 2 1 Connected your learning to societal problems or issues 4 3 2 1 Included diverse perspectives (political, religious, racial/ethnic, 4 3 2 1 IMPACT OF SOCIAL AND ACADEMIC INVOLVEMENT 120 gender, etc.) in course discussions or assignments Examined the strengths and weaknesses of your own views on a topic or issue 4 3 2 1 Tried to better understand someone else’s views by imagining how an issue looks from his or her perspective 4 3 2 1 Learned something that changed the way you understood an issue or concept 4 3 2 1 Connected ideas from your courses to your prior experiences and knowledge 4 3 2 1 Talked about career plans with a faculty member 4 3 2 1 Worked with a faculty member on activities other than coursework (committees, student groups, etc.) 4 3 2 1 Discussed course topics, ideas, or concepts with a faculty member outside of class 4 3 2 1 Discussed your academic performance with a faculty member 4 3 2 1 Identified key information from reading assignments 4 3 2 1 Reviewed your notes after class 4 3 2 1 IMPACT OF SOCIAL AND ACADEMIC INVOLVEMENT 121 Summarized what you learned in class or from course materials 4 3 2 1 After bring readmitted, the largest amounts of my time in a week were spent on: (Check three) □ Attending Programs/Events on Campus □ Class Time □ Clubs/Activities □ Drugs and Alcohol □ Eating/Meals □ Electronic Entertainment (TV/Video Games/DVD/Web) □ Exercise □ Family Time □ Grooming □ Sleep □ Socializing Off Campus □ Study Time □ Time with Children □ Time with Significant Other/Partner/Boyfriend/Girlfriend/Wife/Husband □ Work □ Other:______________________ Please indicate your level of agreement with the following statement: Overall, I felt well informed about campus events and activities since being readmitted: Choices: □ strongly agree □ somewhat agree □ somewhat disagree □ strongly disagree How involved were you in campus activities after bring readmitted? □ I attended events/ activities □ I helped to plan events/activities □ I did not attend or participate in activities What resources did you use after being readmitted? Select all that apply: IMPACT OF SOCIAL AND ACADEMIC INVOLVEMENT 122 Academic Involvement: □ Academic Advisor □ Academic Support Center □ Ambassador □ Career center □ Cultural Center □ Disability Services & Programs □ Hired personal tutor □ Honors Program □ Internship, field experience, student teaching, service leaning or clinical placement □ UU House □ UU Center for Learning and Creativity □ Learning Enrichment Workshops □ Library Services □ Math Center □ New Student Academic Intervention Program □ Occupational Therapy □ Office of International Students □ On Campus Tutoring □ Professional/academic groups for your major (SHPE,NSBE,etc.) □ Professor’s Office Hours □ Student Counseling Center □ Student Health Center Services □ Study abroad □ Summer Bridge □ Supplemental Instruction □ Support Centered Program □ TA Office Hours □ Thematic Option □ UU Student Success Program □ Writing Center □ Other: How often did you participate in university-sponsored academic programs and events prior to being academically disqualified? a) More than once a week b) Once a week c) Once a month d) Two or less times a semester e) Never IMPACT OF SOCIAL AND ACADEMIC INVOLVEMENT 123 Social Involvement: □ Student Governance and Programming □ UU Student Involvement Center □ Events at UU auditorium □ Fraternities and Sororities □ UU Performance Café □ Jumpstart □ UU Gym □ Marching band □ Peer Leadership □ Program Board □ Recreational sports □ Religious/Spiritual Services □ Student leadership □ Student Newspaper □ Student clubs □ Student radio station □ UU Vision □ UU Student Government (USG) □ UULEAD □ Veterans Resource Center □ V olunteer Center □ Other:____ How often did you participate in university-sponsored social programs and events prior to being academically disqualified? f) More than once a week g) Once a week h) Once a month i) Two or less times a semester j) Never If you checked never above, please check the main two reason for not participating? □ Live too far away □ Programs/events offered do not interest me □ Parking problems □ Financial problems □ Scheduling conflicts □ Work IMPACT OF SOCIAL AND ACADEMIC INVOLVEMENT 124 □ Internship □ Personal relationship □ Family □ Other :_____________________ How many hours per week do you work (on/off campus jobs and internships) during the academic year after bring readmitted? □ 1-10 hours □ 11-20 hours □ 21-30 hours □ 31-40 hours □ More than 40 hours □ Did not work How old where you when you graduated with your bachelor’s degree? □ 17-20 □ 21-23 □ 24 -27 □ 28-30 □ 31+ □ 41+ □ 51+ □ Decline not to state During the readmission process or after being readmitted did you change your major? □ No □ Yes If you indicted yes, what is your new major: _____________ What was your cumulative GPA when you graduated: _________________ IMPACT OF SOCIAL AND ACADEMIC INVOLVEMENT 125 Please use this space to elaborate on how your involvement (or lack thereof) in academic and social programs and services helped you persist to graduation after being readmitted? (Please limit your response to 250 words or less). Please use this space to elaborate on any questions in this section. (Please limit your response to 250 words or less). Section Four: Demographics Please answer the following demographic information: Gender □ Male □ Female □ Other: Were you an international student? Response options: □ Yes □ No [If answered “yes”] What is/was your country of citizenship? __________________ Ethnicity Check all that apply: □ African American □ Native American □ Asian American/Pacific Islander □ Hispanic/Latino/Latina □ White American/Caucasian □ Non-U.S. Citizen or Permanent Resident □ Other □ Decline to state IMPACT OF SOCIAL AND ACADEMIC INVOLVEMENT 126 What is the highest level of education completed by either of your parents (or those who raised you)? □ Did not finish high school □ High school diploma or G.E.D. □ Attended college but did not complete degree □ Associate’s degree (A.A., A.S., etc.) □ Bachelor’s degree (B.A., B.S., etc.) □ Master’s degree (M.A., M.S., etc.) □ Doctoral or professional degree (Ph.D., J.D., M.D., etc.) Were you a student-athlete on a team sponsored by your institution’s athletics department? Response options: □ Yes □ If yes which sport:_______ □ No How did you pay for college? Please check all that apply: □ Academic Scholarship □ Athletic Scholarship □ Federal Direct Parent PLUS Loan (for parents) □ Federal Direct Subsidized Stafford Loan □ Federal Direct Unsubsidized Stafford Loan □ Federal Work Study □ Grants □ I did not receive any financial aid- I/my parents paid out of pocket □ Pell grant □ Perkins Loan □ Private Financing (personal bank) IMPACT OF SOCIAL AND ACADEMIC INVOLVEMENT 127 Appendix B Interview Protocol A CASE STUDY ON DISQUALIFIED STUDENTS: THE IMPACT OF SOCIAL AND ACADEMIC INVOLVEMENT Interview Protocol Time and Date of Interview: ____________________ Interviewee: _________________________________ Release form signed? ____ Research Questions: 1. What factors do readmitted undergraduate students contribute to their involuntarily withdrawal? 2. How did readmitted undergraduate students manage the experience of readmission in a way that helped them persist to graduation? 3. How have academic and social involvement contributed to readmitted undergraduate students persistence to graduation? Introduction: Thank you for agreeing to participate in an interview for my dissertation. The purpose for talking to you is to learn more about your thoughts, feelings, and experiences with disqualification (involuntarily withdrawal), readmission, including the academic and social involvement that helped you persist to graduation. Conformed Consent: This interview will last about an hour. Please share your true feelings; your perspective is very important to this study. I would like your permission to tape record this interview, so I can accurately transcribe the information for the study. The recordings will be kept private and destroyed after the completion of the class. You will not be identified through your participation in the study. If at any time during the interview you wish to stop the recorder or the interview, please let me know. Please sign the informed consent document. I will provide you with a copy. Do you have any questions before we begin? Interview Questions: 1. Can you tell me about how and why you choose to attend this institution? 2. What have you been up to since graduating? Disqualification (involuntarily withdrawal): Now let’s talk about academic disqualification. 1. What do you think contributed to your being academically disqualified? 2. Prior to being disqualified, what academic and social difficulties do you think contributed to your disqualification? IMPACT OF SOCIAL AND ACADEMIC INVOLVEMENT 128 3. To what extent, if any, did you utilize campus resources and assistance prior to your disqualification?  Why did you choose this specific campus assistance and/or resources?  Why did you not utilize any campus assistance or resources? 4. If you could go back in time what would you do different to prevent academic disqualification? Probing questions: Could you please tell me more about_________________? You mentioned….Could you tell me more about that? What stands out in your mind about that? Readmission: Now let’s talk about the readmission process and experience. 1. What motivated you to pursue readmission? 2. What was your experience taking classes towards readmission at another school 3. How much time did you take off from attending any schools? a. Why did you take so much time off? b. Why did you take so little or no time off? 4. What changes did you make while disqualified to become academically successful? a. What was the motivation or driving force for you to make these changes? 5. How did you feel when you were readmitted to the university? . Probing questions: Could you please tell me more about_________________? You mentioned….Could you tell me more about that? What stands out in your mind about that? Involvement: Next we will talk about how you’re academic and social involvement on campus. 1. Are there particular campus resources and assistance you used at the time of readmission you attribute to your persist to graduation. 2. Which academic and social resources do you feel were the most helpful? a. Could you please tell me more about_________________? b. You mentioned….Could you tell me more about that? 3. What skills, strategies, and experiences do you believe have contributed to your success as a student since being readmitted? 4. How does it feel to be a university graduate after experiencing disqualification and readmission? 5. If you were to be-able to share any words of wisdom with other academic probation and disqualified students, what would you tell them? IMPACT OF SOCIAL AND ACADEMIC INVOLVEMENT 129 Before we conclude this interview, is there anything else you would like to share regarding the disqualification, readmission or your and social involvement? If appropriate, ask for permission to follow up later. Say Thank you for your participation. Running head: IMPACT OF SOCIAL AND ACADEMIC INVOLVEMENT 130 Research and Interview Questions Table Research Question Interview Question What factors do readmitted undergraduate students contribute to their involuntarily withdrawal? 1. What do you think contributed to your being academically disqualified? 2. Prior to being disqualified, what academic and social difficulties do you think contributed to your disqualification? 3. To what extent, if any, did you utilize campus resources and assistance prior to your disqualification? a. Why did you choose this specific campus assistance and/or resources? b. Why did you not utilize any campus assistance or resources? 4. If you could go back in time what would you do different to prevent academic disqualification? How did readmitted undergraduate students manage the experience of readmission in a way that helped them persist to graduation? 1) What motivated you to pursue readmission? 2) What was your experience taking classes towards readmission at another school 3) How much time did you take off from attending any schools? a) Why did you take so much time off? b) Why did you take so little or no time off? 4) What changes did you make while disqualified to become academically successful? 5) What was the motivation or driving force for you to make these changes? 6) How did you feel when you were readmitted to the university? IMPACT OF SOCIAL AND ACADEMIC INVOLVEMENT 131 How have academic and social involvement contributed to readmitted undergraduate students persistence to graduation? 1) Are there particular campus resources and assistance you used at the time of readmission you attribute to your persist to graduation. 2) Which academic and social resources do you feel were the most helpful? a) Could you please tell me more about_________________? b) You mentioned….Could you tell me more about that? 3) What skills, strategies, and experiences do you believe have contributed to your success as a student since being readmitted? 4) How does it feel to be a university graduate after experiencing disqualification and readmission? 5) If you were to be-able to share any words of wisdom with other academic probation and disqualified students, what would you tell them? IMPACT OF SOCIAL AND ACADEMIC INVOLVEMENT 132 Appendix C Informed Consent University of Southern California Rossier School of Education Waite Phillip Hall 3470 Trousdale Parkway Los Angeles, CA 90089 INFORMED CONSENT - INTERVIEW A CASE STUDY ON DISQUALIFIED STUDENTS: THE IMPACT OF SOCIAL AND ACADEMIC INVOLVEMENT You are invited to participate in a research study conducted by Marcedes Butler under the supervision of Dr. Pedro Garcia at the University of Southern California because you were involuntarily withdrawn from a large urban private research institution, subsequently readmitted, and persisted to graduation. Your participation is voluntary. You should read the information below, and ask questions about anything you do not understand, before deciding whether to participate. Please take as much time as you need to read the consent form. If you decide to participate, you will be asked to sign this form. You will be given a copy of this form. PURPOSE OF THE STUDY The purpose of this case study is to examine the academic and social involvement factors that contributed to degree completion of undergraduate students readmitted after being involuntarily withdrawn. The frequency and quality of academic and social participation provide the foundation of this study. Additionally, this study will inform decision-makers with improving institutional policies to better assist students seeking readmission. STUDY PROCEDURES If you volunteer to participate in this study, you will be asked you will be asked to consent to the following things:  Participate in an hour long one-on-one interview with the researcher to discuss his/her the academic and social involvement factors that contributed to degree completion after being readmitted. An email will be sent to all eligible participants to set-up interview with researcher. o The interview will be conducted in area free from distractions and at times and locations that are most suitable for the participant. o All interviews will be digitally recorded and transcribed. o At any time participants may choose to not answer interview questions or stop the interview. IMPACT OF SOCIAL AND ACADEMIC INVOLVEMENT 133 POTENTIAL RISKS AND DISCOMFORTS There are minimal to no potential negative effects from participating in this study. However, although students have overcome their academic difficulties reliving the experiences through the interview may cause the students to bring forth unresolved emotions. This could result in psychological or emotional discomfort on the part of the participant. • Referrals to a counseling center will be given in the instances that participants are experiencing a highly emotional experience during the interview. The interview will conclude and not resume unless participant feels comfortable and emotionally stable enough to continue. The participants have the option to not answer questions and/or the ability to stop the interview at any time. POTENTIAL BENEFITS TO PARTICIPANTS AND/OR TO SOCIETY Your participation in this study will add and extend a growing body of literature on how to better assist students who are involuntarily withdrawn, readmitted and achieved their baccalaureate degree. It is possible findings from this study will inform the programs, services, and policies that affect students who are academically struggling. The findings will be disseminate at higher education conferences, reports, manuscripts, and publications. PAYMENT/COMPENSATION FOR PARTICIPATION No compensation will be provided for participation in the study; however parking will be provided as needed. CONFIDENTIALITY Any information that is obtained in connection with this study will remain confidential and will be disclosed only with your permission or as required by law. All participants will have the right to review/edit the digital recordings of the interview. Audio recordings will be deleted once they are transcribed. The members of the research team and the University of Southern California’s Human Subjects Protection Program (HSPP) may access the data. The HSPP reviews and monitors research studies to protect the rights and welfare of research subjects. The anonymous data will be stored in the researcher’s office in a locked file cabinet and password protected computer for at least three years after the study has been completed and may be retained for future research studies. When the results of the research are published or discussed in conferences, no identifiable information will be used. PARTICIPATION AND WITHDRAWAL Your participation is voluntary. Your refusal to participate will involve no penalty or loss of benefits to which you are otherwise entitled. You may withdraw your consent at any time and discontinue participation without penalty. You are not waiving any legal claims, rights or remedies because of your participation in this research study. INVESTIGATOR CONTACT INFORMATION IMPACT OF SOCIAL AND ACADEMIC INVOLVEMENT 134 If you have any questions or concerns about the research, please feel free to contact Principal Investigator Marcedes Butler via email at <INSERT EMAIL ADDRESS> or Faculty Sponsor Dr. Pedro Garcia at <INSERT EMAIL ADDRESS>. IRB CONTACT INFORMATION If you have questions, concerns, or complaints about your rights as a research participant or the research in general and are unable to contact the research team, or if you want to talk to someone independent of the research team, please contact the University Park Institutional Review Board (UPIRB), 3720 South Flower Street #301, Los Angeles, CA 90089-0702, (213) 821-5272 or upirb@usc.edu. SIGNATURE OF RESEARCH PARTICIPANT I have read the information provided above and hereby consent to the audio recordings of the interview taken by the principal investigator for the purposes of collecting data for the above study. I have been advised that all data collected shall be confidential and used solely for the purposes of this study. I authorize the transcription of this interview from the audio recording for use by the principal investigator for preparation of the study. Any quotes and or description of answers will be anonymous. I agree to participate in this study. I have been given a copy of this form. Name of Participant Signature of Participant Date IMPACT OF SOCIAL AND ACADEMIC INVOLVEMENT 135 Appendix D Emailed Invitation To Participate Dear < participants name>, This survey is being sent on behalf of a doctoral candidate in the Rossier School of Education at the University of Southern California. The research study is part of her dissertation, which examines the academic and social involvement factors that contributed to degree completion of undergraduate students readmitted after being involuntarily withdrawn. You are invited to participate in the study. Your identity and data as a participant is anonymous. The survey is anticipated to take no more than 20 minutes to complete. Participation in this study is voluntary. At the end of the survey, you will be asked for your willingness to be considered for a confidential follow-up interview. If you are willing to be interviewed please sign up here: <INSERT LINK TO SURVEY>. Follow this link to the Survey: <INSERT LINK TO SURVEY>. Please note: You may stop and start the survey but only with the same device and browser. If you need the survey to be resent, please send an email request to <INSERT EMAIL ADDRESS>. If you have questions, please contact me at: <INSERT EMAIL ADDRESS> or the principal investigator Marcedes Butler at <INSERT EMAIL ADDRESS>. Thank you in advance for your consideration and participation, Dr. Frank Chang, Registrar IMPACT OF SOCIAL AND ACADEMIC INVOLVEMENT 136 Appendix E Institutional Review Board Approval University of Southern California Rossier School of Education Waite Phillip Hall 3470 Trousdale Parkway Los Angeles, CA 90089 INFORMATION/FACTS SHEET FOR EXEMPT NON-MEDICAL RESEARCH A CASE STUDY ON DISQUALIFIED STUDENTS: THE IMPACT OF SOCIAL AND ACADEMIC INVOLVEMENT You are invited to participate in a research study conducted by Marcedes Butler under the supervision of Dr. Pedro Garcia at the University of Southern California because you were involuntarily withdrawn from a large urban private research institution, subsequently readmitted, and persisted to graduation. Your participation is voluntary. You should read the information below, and ask questions about anything you do not understand, before deciding whether to participate. Please take as much time as you need to read the consent form. If you decide to participate, you will be asked to sign this form. You will be given a copy of this form. PURPOSE OF THE STUDY The purpose of this case study is to examine the academic and social involvement factors that contributed to degree completion of undergraduate students readmitted after being involuntarily withdrawn. The frequency and quality of academic and social participation the foundation of this study. Additionally, this study will inform decision-makers with improving institutional policies to better assist students seeking readmission. STUDY PROCEDURES If you volunteer to participate in this study, you will be asked you will be asked to consent to the following things:  Participants will be asked to complete an online survey which is anticipated to take about 15 minutes. You do not have to answer any questions you don’t want to, click “next” or “N/A” in the survey to move to the next question.  If available, participate in an hour long one-on-one interview with the researcher to discuss the academic and social involvement factors that contributed to degree completion after being readmitted. An email will be sent to all eligible participants to set-up interview with researcher. o The interview will be conducted in areas free from distractions and at times and locations that are most suitable for the participants. o All interviews will be digitally recorded and transcribed. o At any time participants may choose to not answer interview questions or stop the interview. PAYMENT/COMPENSATION FOR PARTICIPATION IMPACT OF SOCIAL AND ACADEMIC INVOLVEMENT 137 No compensation will be provided for participation in the study; however, if needed parking will be provided for you. ALTERNATIVES TO PARTICIPATION Your alternative is to not participate. CONFIDENTIALITY Any information that is obtained in connection with this study will remain confidential and will be disclosed only with your permission or as required by law. All participants will have the right to review/edit the digital recordings of the interview. Audio recordings will be deleted once they are transcribed. The anonymous data will be stored on a password protected computer in the researcher’s office for at least three years after the study has been completed and may be retained for future research studies. When the results of the research are published or discussed in conferences, no identifiable information will be used. The members of the research team and the University of Southern California’s Human Subjects Protection Program (HSPP) may access the data. The HSPP reviews and monitors research studies to protect the rights and welfare of research subjects. INVESTIGATOR CONTACT INFORMATION If you have any questions or concerns about the research, please feel free to contact Principal Investigator Marcedes Butler via email at marcedeb@usc.edu or phone at 562-XXX-XXXX. IRB CONTACT INFORMATION If you have questions, concerns, or complaints about your rights as a research participant or the research in general and are unable to contact the research team, or if you want to talk to someone independent of the research team, please contact the University Park Institutional Review Board (UPIRB), 3720 South Flower Street #301, Los Angeles, CA 90089-0702, (213) 821-5272 or upirb@usc.edu.

Abstract (if available)

Abstract The purpose of this explanatory case study was to gain insight on the academic and social involvement factors indicated by readmitted students that contributed to persistence to graduation. This study sought to answer the following research questions: (a) To what did readmitted students attribute to their academic disqualification? (b) What academic involvement factors did readmitted students indicate contributed to their persistence to graduation after being readmitted? (c) What social involvement factors did readmitted students indicate contributed to their persistence to graduation after being readmitted? Astin’s (1984) definition of involvement was used in this study. Astin defines involvement as what a student does instead of what students think or feel. The key component of involvement is the investment of physical and psychological energy. An explanatory case study design was useful to learn about the academic and social involvement factors indicated by readmitted students who graduated between the years 2010 and 2015 at a private, selective urban research university. Data collection was conducted through a combination of survey data and interviews with the readmitted students who obtained their degree. The survey responses of 20 participants provided quantitative insight into the common academic and social factors that helped readmitted students complete their degree. The six interviews explored the main themes of the quantitative data. Data analysis was conducted though open coding of the survey and interview data. The theoretical model, I-E-O (Astin, 1991) is comprised of three components: incoming student characteristics (I), college environment (E), and student outcomes (O). The I-E-O model provided a compelling lens to understand the impact of involvement on degree completion for readmitted students. Descriptive information was created for both the survey and interview respondents and findings were identified. Data analysis revealed five common themes that emerged for the readmitted students’ experiences that had an impact on their degree completion. The themes that contributed to academic disqualification include absenteeism from classes due to social involvement and lack of transferability of study skills from high school to college. The academic involvement factors that had an impact on degree completion were fostering relationships with faculty, academic advisors and peers, and the social factors consisted of selectively participating in social clubs and events. Several conclusions were drawn from the study. First, to prevent academic disqualification, students must learn study skills and time management during the first semester in college. Second, developing quality relationships with faculty and academic advisors supports degree completion. Third, the types of social involvement readmitted students seek must have academic components. This study contributes to the body of work on at-risk student populations by examining the impact of academic and social involvement factors that contributed to degree completion directly from undergraduate students who were academically disqualified, subsequently readmitted, and persisted to graduation.

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

Impact of academic scholarships on persistence of first-generation low-income students

PDF

The impact of parental involvement on student achievement

PDF

Ready or not? Unprepared for community college mathematics: an exploration into the impact remedial mathematics has on preparation, persistence and educational goal attainment for first-time Cali...

PDF

The impact of academic support services on Division I student-athletes' college degree completion

PDF

An investigation of the relationship between educational attainment goals and motivation theory: a mixed-methods study of past and present graduate students in the United States

PDF

Developing a sense of belonging and persistence through mentoring for first-generation students

PDF

The impact of student-faculty interaction on undergraduate international students' academic outcome

PDF

Exploring the relationship between academic achievement and classroom behavior of Asian American elementary school students

PDF

Factors influencing the academic persistence of college students with ADHD

PDF

The perceived importance coaches have on student-athletes' academic performance

PDF

Leadership strategies employed by K-12 urban superintendents to improve the academic achievement of English language learners

PDF

The impact of learning communities on the retention and academic integration of Latino students at a highly selective private four-year institution

PDF

Mathematics Engineering Science Achievement and persistence in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics majors: the influence of MESA on the retention of first generation females in STEM...

PDF

Unprepared for college mathematics: an investigation into the attainment of best practices to increase preparation and persistence for first-time California community college freshmen in remedial...

PDF

A pathway to success: experiences of first-generation minority students in academic jeopardy

PDF

A case study of promising leadership practices employed by principals of Knowledge Is Power Program Los Angeles (KIPP LA) charter school to improve student achievement

PDF

An examination of teachers’ perceived value and knowledge of mathematical development in early childhood settings

PDF

Leadership characteristics, practices and board perceptions that support superintendent longevity in suburban school districts: a case study

PDF

Building mentoring relationships: the experiences of first-generation Latinx scholars

PDF

Examining the relationship between doctoral attrition and a redefined fatherhood: a gap analysis

Asset Metadata

Creator Butler, Marcedes S. (author)

Core Title A case study on readmitted students: the impact of social and academic involvement on degree completion

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Education (Leadership)

Publication Date 07/11/2016

Defense Date 04/25/2016

Publisher University of Southern California (original), University of Southern California. Libraries (digital)

Tag academic probation,Graduation,involvement,OAI-PMH Harvest,persistence,readmission

Format application/pdf (imt)

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Garcia, Pedro E. (committee chair), Castruita, Rudy (committee member), Wu, Maryann (committee member)

Creator Email marcedeb@usc.edu,Marcedes562@gmail.com

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c40-266515

Unique identifier UC11281312

Identifier etd-ButlerMarc-4539.pdf (filename),usctheses-c40-266515 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier etd-ButlerMarc-4539.pdf

Dmrecord 266515

Document Type Dissertation

Format application/pdf (imt)

Rights Butler, Marcedes S.

Type texts

Source University of Southern California (contributing entity), University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses (collection)

Access Conditions The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the a...

Repository Name University of Southern California Digital Library

Repository Location USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus MC 2810, 3434 South Grand Avenue, 2nd Floor, Los Angeles, California 90089-2810, USA