Close
About
FAQ
Home
Collections
Login
USC Login
Register
0
Selected
Invert selection
Deselect all
Deselect all
Click here to refresh results
Click here to refresh results
USC
/
Digital Library
/
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
/
First-year persistence of rural high school graduates at four-year, urban colleges and universities
(USC Thesis Other)
First-year persistence of rural high school graduates at four-year, urban colleges and universities
PDF
Download
Share
Open document
Flip pages
Contact Us
Contact Us
Copy asset link
Request this asset
Transcript (if available)
Content
Running head: RURAL STUDENT PERSISTENCE
FIRST-YEAR PERSISTENCE OF RURAL HIGH SCHOOL GRADUATES AT FOUR-YEAR,
URBAN COLLEGES AND UNIVERSITIES
by
Jason I. Hale
A Dissertation Presented to the
FACULTY OF THE ROSSIER SCHOOL OF EDUCATION
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
In Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree
DOCTOR OF EDUCATION
December 2017
Copyright 2017 Jason I. Hale
RURAL STUDENT PERSISTENCE
2
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Without the unwavering support of so many individuals, this simply would not have been
possible. Thank you to my dissertation chair, Tracy Tambascia. You have been a consistent
source of leadership and encouragement despite the various speeds and levels of dedication at
which I have been operating throughout this dissertation. To my USC classmates, especially
those on Team Higher Ed, I thank you for always keeping me laughing in stressful times. To my
friends, many of which are fellow Trojans themselves, I thank you for the positive
encouragement throughout this long haul. Your guidance and understanding have been
invaluable. To my family, thank you for being so emotionally supportive. Even if you didn’t
quite know or understand the details of the program, you understood the significance of coming
from rural Ohio and the achievement that this meant to our family.
Finally, I would like to thank my best friend, and the love of my life, Breanna Bremer
(soon to be Hale). You inspire and push me everyday, and without your support and drive, the
final leg of this dissertation may never have come about. Thank you for helping me turn the
rainy dissertation cloud that hung over my head into an achievement upon which our new family
can build.
RURAL STUDENT PERSISTENCE
3
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Acknowledgements………………………………………………………………………………..2
Abstract…………………………………………………………………………………………....6
CHAPTER ONE: OVERVIEW OF THE STUDY
Introduction………………………………………………………………………………..7
Statement of the Problem………………………………………………………………….9
Purpose of the Study………………………………………………………………………9
Research Questions………………………………………………………………...…….10
Importance of the Study……………………………………………………………….....11
Limitations and Delimitations…………………………………………………..………..11
Definition of Terms…………………………………………………………...………….12
Conclusion……………………………………………………………………...………..14
CHAPTER TWO: REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE
Introduction……………………………………………………………...……………….15
The Completion Agenda…………………………………………………………………15
Defining Rural America………………………………………………………………….20
Theoretical Framework and Relevant Theories………………………………………….32
First-Year Retention and College Persistence Among Rural Youth…………………….45
Summary…………………………………………………………………………………51
CHAPTER THREE: METHODOLOGY
Introduction………………………………………………………………………………53
Population and Sample…………………………………………………………………..55
Instrumentation…………………………………………………………………………..58
RURAL STUDENT PERSISTENCE
4
Data Collection…………………………………………………………………………..59
Data Analysis…………………………………………………………………………….60
Validity…………………………………………………………………………………..61
Role of the Researcher…………………………………………………………………...61
CHAPTER FOUR: FINDINGS
Introduction………………………………………………………………………...…….63
Participant Profile…………………………………...……………………………...……63
Themes that Influence Persistence………………………………………………….……64
The Role of Family and Community Support………………………………………...….65
Affordability………...………………………………………………………………...…67
Academic Preparedness and Ability to Adapt to Rigor…….…………………...……….69
Development of Key Relationships………………………………...……………………76
Involvement……………………………………………………………………..……….80
Willingness to Interact with New Cultures, Peoples, and Beliefs……………….………84
Overcoming Homesickness……………………………………………………...………87
HMU as a New Home……………………………………………………………………91
CHAPTER FIVE: ANALYSIS
Introduction………….……………………………………………………………...……95
Discussion and Implications for Practice…………………………………………...……97
Revisiting Bronfenbrenner’s Developmental Ecological Model……………………...…99
Summary of Findings: Microsystems and Rural Student Persistence...…………..……101
Summary of Findings: Mesosystems and Rural Student Persistence...……..…….……104
Recommendations…………………………………………………..……………..……105
RURAL STUDENT PERSISTENCE
5
Future Research……..…………………………………………………………….……108
Conclusion…..…………………………………………………………………….……110
References………………………………………………………………………………………111
APPENDICES
Appendix A: Sample Email Solicitation…………………………………………..……126
Appendix B: Online Participant Recruitment Survey……………………………..……127
Appendix C: Student Participant Interview Protocol…………………………………...128
Appendix D: Informed Consent for Non-Medical Research……………………...……130
Appendix E: Study Information Sheet………………………………………………….133
RURAL STUDENT PERSISTENCE
6
ABSTRACT
This dissertation assesses the kinds of first-year experiences that affect persistence for
rural students at an urban, four-year institution, as understood through the guiding theoretical
framework of Urie Bronfenbrenner’s developmental ecological model. Despite the growing
number of rural high school students matriculating to postsecondary institutions, this student
population has received little research attention. Not much is known about the background
characteristics, precollege experiences, and postsecondary educational experiences of these
students and how these factors may shape their college completion. Using data collected from
semi-structured interviews with twelve rural high school graduates attending an urban, four-year
institution in the Southeastern United States, findings suggest a student’s formation of
relationships and networks in their microsystems and mesosystems had a positive effect on
persistence. This study recommends that: (1) urban institutions should identify prospective and
admitted rural high school students to encourage participation in living and learning communities
on campus, (2) urban institutions should implement an elective mentoring program for rural first-
year students that would pair them with upperclassmen from a rural background, (3) urban
institutions should implement and require a first-year diversity course for all students, (4) urban
institutions should actively promote student success programs and resources on-campus, such as
tutoring services, and study skills development, and (5) urban institutions must be mindful of
how tuition costs affect those in rural areas.
RURAL STUDENT PERSISTENCE
7
CHAPTER ONE: OVERVIEW OF THE STUDY
Introduction
Higher education degree attainment is an educational issue with economic consequences
for the United States (Collins, 2003). By 2018, the United States is projected to be at least three
million college-educated workers short of projected demand (Carnevale, Smith, & Strohl, 2010).
The College Board’s Commission on Access, Admissions and Success in Higher Education
published a report in 2008 highlighting current and disheartening trends in education, including
significant drops in college and high school completion rankings and disparities for low-income
and minority students (Lee & Rawls, 2010). In response to this report, former President Barack
Obama encouraged educational reform and progress via a national college completion agenda.
Many prominent organizations and foundations, including the Lumina Foundation and the Bill &
Melinda Gates Foundation, came together, along with the United States Department of
Education, to raise awareness of the need for a better-educated population and to find ways to
increase college completion (Hughes, 2012).
To increase college completion rates in the United States, researchers set out to better
understand various student populations and postsecondary degree attainment issues. Prior
research has mainly focused on samples of college students without considering potential
differences in background characteristics. More recent research is focusing on the importance of
geographic, racial/ethnic, socioeconomic, and religious diversity, among others, in the United
States, as potential characteristics that may influence postsecondary attendance and degree
attainment. Byun, Irvin, and Meece (2012a) found that rural adolescents who attended a four-
year institution were more likely to be first-generation college students and to come from lower-
income families than their urban and suburban peers. In addition, rural students were more
RURAL STUDENT PERSISTENCE
8
likely to enter college with a less rigorous academic curricular background than urban or
suburban students. Several studies have examined characteristics such as lower socioeconomic
status (SES) or minority status; however, few qualitative studies have explored college
persistence among rural youth (Byun, Irvin, & Meece, 2012a).
Beyond precollege obstacles, the transition from high school to college is considered as
one of the most difficult developmental challenges confronting adolescents (Lapan, Tucker, Kim,
Kosciulek, 2003). Astin’s (1984) theory of student involvement notes that the greater a student’s
involvement in college, the greater the amount of student learning and personal development
(Astin, 1984). Building upon Astin (1984), Schlossberg (1989) found that involvement creates
connections between students, faculty, and staff that help individuals believe in their personal
worth. In his work on student persistence, Tinto (1993) found that a student’s decision to
continue at an institution is due to personal characteristics, academic background, and integration
into the academic and social life of the campus.
Rural populations in the United States, while decreasing in size, are too substantial to
ignore. Approximately nine million students attend public schools in rural areas, representing
nineteen percent of the public school population in the United States (Byun, Irvin, & Meece,
2012a). Traditional occupations for rural youth in the service, labor, extraction, and agriculture
sectors, are disappearing (Albrecht, Albrecht, & Albrecht, 2000; Crockett, Shanahan, & Jackson
Newsom, 2000; Elder & Conger, 2000; Friedman & Lichter, 1998; Gibbs, Kusmin, & Cromartie,
2005). Rural high school graduates are increasingly attending four-year colleges and universities
(Snyder & Dillow, 2010) and the rise in educational aspirations of rural youth may indicate that
these students recognize education as a means to economic mobility. As more and more rural
high school graduates enter four-year colleges and universities, it is imperative to consider the
RURAL STUDENT PERSISTENCE
9
distinctive needs of this college-going population and how specific institutional settings may
play a role in the persistence of these students.
Statement of the Problem
Despite the growing number of rural high school students matriculating to postsecondary
institutions, this student population has received little research attention. Not much is known
about the background characteristics, precollege experiences, and postsecondary educational
experiences of these students and how these factors may shape their college completion (Byun,
Irvin, & Meece, 2012a; Gibbs, 1998; Schonert, Elliott, & Bills, 1991). For those electing to
continue on to postsecondary education, institutional settings present rural students with a host of
new challenges that may impact persistence and degree attainment. While it is important to
consider the characteristics of incoming students, institutions influence the college experience,
academic performance and retention of these students (Purdie & Rosser, 2011).
To date, minimal research has been conducted on rural student populations attending
urban postsecondary institutions. To increase higher education degree attainment, it is essential
to better understand the issues that rural students encounter on urban college campuses during
this crucial postsecondary transition period. Prior research on rural college student populations
is minimal and often dated.
Purpose of the Study
This qualitative research study utilized rich, descriptive data collected from rural high
school graduates in the Southeastern United States on their first-year experiences at an urban,
four-year postsecondary institution. Participants were sophomores, juniors, or seniors currently
attending a four-year university located in an urban area of 180,000 people or more. The data
gathered via semi-structured interviews provides researchers and practitioners with a better
RURAL STUDENT PERSISTENCE
10
understanding of how these individuals construct their worlds. Using Bronfenbrenner’s
developmental ecological model (1974, 1977, 1979, 1989, 1993, 2005; Bronfenbrenner &
Morris, 2006), this study will explore how microsystem, mesosystem, exosystem, and
macrosystem contexts may influence the first-year persistence of rural students at urban four-
year institutions. The knowledge and beliefs that rural students develop throughout childhood
and adolescence shape them in ways that may affect their approach to the college environment.
Prior experiences with family, schooling, and community life, have prepared these individuals
for a variety of interactions in college. With a better grasp of how urban institutional settings
may influence the first-year persistence of rural undergraduates, higher education professionals
working in urban postsecondary settings will be able to better serve this unique student
population. While this study draws heavily upon Bronfenbrenner’s work (1974, 1977, 1979,
1989, 1993, 2005; Bronfenbrenner & Morris, 2006), several key theoretical concepts related to
persistence will be explored.
Research Questions
The following research questions guide this study:
Main Research Question:
1. What kinds of first-year experiences affect persistence for rural students, at an urban, four-
year institution?
a. How do microsystems and mesosystems influence rural students’ decisions to persist
beyond the first-year at an urban, four-year college or university?
RURAL STUDENT PERSISTENCE
11
Importance of the Study
This study adds to the limited and dated body of research on rural college-going
populations. It provides valuable insight into the first-year experiences of rural students
attending college in an educational setting that is atypical for this population. This qualitative
study provided an opportunity for rural students to voice their experiences and perceptions. The
data collected may be utilized by a host of audiences to improve practice.
Senior-level urban higher education administrators can use this data to better understand
this often overlooked student population. The insight gained from this study will help
administrators ensure that university policies do not hinder rural student persistence. Urban
postsecondary practitioners will benefit by learning about the diversity that exits within rural
populations. This study will aid practitioners in their preparation to meet rural student needs on
urban college campuses. Rural high school guidance and college counselors may reflect upon
how to better prepare rural adolescents for urban higher education contexts.
This study is significant to the advancement of rural student literature. It contributes to
the essential body of theoretical work used to help guide higher education decision-making and
practice, such as involvement, persistence, mattering and marginality, and developmental
ecology. This study provides researchers with a multitude of opportunities to expand upon or
create new rural research endeavors and emphasize the need for specificity in research.
Limitations and Delimitations
As a researcher, it is necessary to note that limitations exist in this study. Some
limitations may have a direct impact on validity. It is important to recognize that all participants
in this study attended the same four-year, urban institution; therefore, this study only provides
data that speaks to experiences at this singular urban institution. This limitation serves as a
RURAL STUDENT PERSISTENCE
12
reminder that while rural characteristic and value similarities may exist among rural regions, this
particular study is not intended to be generalizable. This study is also limited in that interviews
were conducted via Skype. To prevent misinterpretations that could potentially arise due to the
data collection medium, strategies such as member checking were employed to ensure reliability.
While a number of avenues exist for research and data collection, this study did not
restrict participants based upon characteristics such as gender, race/ethnicity, socioeconomic
background, or parent(s) educational attainment. While these attributes may prove beneficial to
the advancement of literature regarding rural college-going populations, this study explored the
first-year urban college experience from a broader rural student spectrum in an effort to gain a
better understanding of the phenomenon.
Definition of Terms
The following definitions are used in this study:
College Completion Agenda: A call to increase the proportion of America’s young adults
– those ages 25 to 35 – who hold a two- or four-year college degree to 55 percent by
2025 (Hughes, 2012).
Engagement: Student participation in educationally purposeful programs and activities
that lead to student success. This includes the amount of effort and time students put into
their studies and out-of-the-classroom activities (Kuh, Kinzie, Schuh, Whitt, &
Associates, 2005).
Graduation Rate: The rate of student degree completion six years after matriculation
(Tinto, 2012).
Involvement: The amount of physical and psychological energy that a student devotes to
the academic experience. “A highly involved student is one who, for example, devotes
RURAL STUDENT PERSISTENCE
13
considerable energy to studying, spends much time on campus, participates actively in
student organizations, and interacts frequently with faculty members and other students”
(Astin, 1984, p. 518).
Persistence: Continued enrollment and satisfactory course completion in college from
year to year, culminating in the completion of a bachelor’s degree (Tinto, 2012).
First-Year Retention: The rate at which an institution maintains students who first enter
the institution as freshman at a given point in time (Tinto, 2012).
Rural: All population, housing, and territory not included within an urban area (United
States Census Bureau, 2014b).
Transition: “Any event, or non-event, that results in changed relationships, routines,
assumptions, and roles” (Goodman, Schlossberg, & Anderson, 2006, p. 33).
Urban or Urbanized Areas (UA): An area consisting of 50,000 or more people (United
States Census Bureau, 2014a).
Urban Cluster (UC): An area with a population of at least 2,500 people, but less than
50,000 (United States Census Bureau, 2014a).
Urban Institution: A four-year, regionally accredited postsecondary institution located in
an urban area with a population of 50,000 or larger.
RURAL STUDENT PERSISTENCE
14
Conclusion
The economic consequences of a projected educational shortfall in the United States have
resulted in a greater national emphasis on college completion. To increase college persistence
and degree completion, research must focus on gaining a better understanding of various
populations and issues pertaining to postsecondary educational attainment. While the number of
rural high school students matriculating to postsecondary institutions continues to increase, there
is minimal research on this student population. The diverse characteristics of rural students are
significant; however, institutions influence both the academic performance and retention of their
students via the college experience. This qualitative study sought to learn more about the first-
year persistence of rural students at four-year urban colleges and universities. The data collected
provides valuable insight into the first-year experiences of rural students attending college in an
educational setting that is atypical for this population. In addition to contributing to the larger
body of retention literature, this study progresses rural college student research and provide
urban college administrators and practitioners with current data on the experiences of this unique
student population on urban college campuses. In the next chapter, I will describe the American
rural student experience and landscape. I will elaborate on key theories and rural student data
that will shape this study.
RURAL STUDENT PERSISTENCE
15
CHAPTER TWO: REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE
Introduction
This literature review focuses on rural students attending four-year, urban colleges and
universities. Given the charge put forth by political and educational leaders to increase higher
education degree attainment, it is essential to have an understanding of the recent history of
rurality, the economic transitions, poverty, and segregation that exist in rural America, and the
rural identity and values that often are at the core of this unique population. This study sought to
learn more about the first-year experiences of rural students at urban, four-year institutions and
how these experiences may affect persistence. The concepts of microsystems and mesosystems
were explored as influences for a rural student’s decision to persist beyond the first-year at an
urban four-year institution. The literature review explores published research on the rural
student experience, examining precollege challenges that rural students often face, and using the
work of key theorists, explains the importance of first-year persistence and the issues that rural
students encounter on campus during this crucial postsecondary transition period.
The Completion Agenda
Within the next decade, the most educated generation in the United States of America
will retire (Collins, 2003; Lee & Rawls, 2010). Among 55- to 64-year-olds, the United States
ranks 4th internationally for higher education attainment. Projections suggest that 25- to 34-
year-olds, a generation smaller in size, will fail to meet or exceed the educational levels of their
parents (Collins, 2003; Lee & Rawls, 2010). This projected educational shortfall poses a
significant problem for the United States. In the current knowledge-based economy, nearly
thirty-one million American jobs are occupied by individuals with bachelor’s degrees
RURAL STUDENT PERSISTENCE
16
(Carnavale, 2011). Facing these statistical realities, postsecondary attainment is an educational
issue with economic consequences to the United States (Collins, 2003).
In a speech at the University of Texas, at Austin, former President Barack Obama
asserted that education is indeed an economic issue, noting that eight out of ten new jobs in
America will require a postsecondary degree or workforce training (Obama, 2010).
Additionally, individuals who do not attain a postsecondary education will be twice as likely to
be unemployed (Obama, 2010). To counter the issues related to educational attainment gaps and
the American economy, former President Obama proposed a national call to action and brought
forth a College Completion Agenda.
In 2008, the College Board’s Commission on Access, Admissions and Success in Higher
Education published a report entitled, Coming to Our Senses: Education and the American
Future. This report highlighted recent and disheartening trends in education, including
significant drops in college and high school completion rankings and disparities for low-income
and minority students. The report also found that the proportion of adults with postsecondary
credentials in the United States was not keeping pace with growth in other industrialized nations
(Lee & Rawls, 2010). According to Carnevale, Smith, and Strohl (2010), the United States is
currently projected to be, by 2018, at least three million college-educated workers short of
meeting projected demand (as cited in Humphreys, 2012). Based upon the Commission’s report,
a college completion goal was recommended to increase the proportion of 25- to 34-year-olds
who hold an associate degree or higher to 55 percent by the year 2025 (Lee & Rawls, 2010).
In his inaugural 2009 State of the Union address, former President Barack Obama
proclaimed: “By 2020, America will once again have the highest proportion of college graduates
in the world.” The former president further remarked that, “in a global economy where the most
RURAL STUDENT PERSISTENCE
17
valuable skill you can sell is your knowledge, a good education is no longer just a pathway to
opportunity—it is a prerequisite” and that “every American will need to get more than a high
school diploma” (Obama, 2009). In 2011, the United States Department of Education (DoED)
projected that in order to reach this goal, the U.S. would need to increase the number of college
graduates by fifty percent nationwide. This means that nearly eight million individuals, between
the ages of 25-34, would need to earn associate and bachelor degrees by the year 2020 (United
States Department of Education, 2011). While not mandated, the college completion agenda is a
national agenda; many prominent organizations and foundations, including the Lumina
Foundation and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, have come together, along with the United
States Department of Education, to raise awareness of the need for a better-educated population
and to find ways to increase college completion (Hughes, 2012).
According to the United States Department of Education (2011), the higher education
system in this country must commence reform policies to increase college access, readiness, and
quality in order to accelerate college completion. American higher education systems in every
state have been tasked with finding ways to reach ambitious completion goals. Thus far,
nineteen states have set attainment goals (United States Department of Education, 2011). In
order to alleviate economic hardships, the Obama-Biden administration put forth a plan of
initiatives to complement former President’s Obama’s existing agenda (Obama, 2009b). These
initiatives included the expansion of Pell grant funding, college tax credits, and the Perkins Loan
Program. The initiative called for a simplification of the student aid application, help for
unemployed workers to gain new skills, and research into programs that could improve upon the
ways families might save for college (Obama, 2009b).
RURAL STUDENT PERSISTENCE
18
The educational landscape has changed dramatically since the commission first convened
in 2008. These changes have directly impacted the goal of the commission and each of the
proposed recommendations. In the fall of 2008, the nation began to experience the effects of
what was to become one of the worst recession periods in United States history. During the
hardship of the recession, unemployment rates increased dramatically, as did the number of
home foreclosures. Simultaneously, budgets for federal and state governments declined (Lee &
Rawls, 2010).
While some data may demonstrate improvement in degree attainment, college graduation
rates are increasing slowly, if at all. For instance, the three-year graduation rate for students in
two-year colleges was 29.9 percent in 2010, up slightly from the previous two years (Hughes,
2012). Recent data (Hughes, 2012) demonstrates three-year graduation rates for students in two-
year colleges remaining at about 20 percent. In contrast, the average six-year graduation rate for
students seeking bachelor’s degrees at four-year institutions was 58.8 percent in 2010, just one-
half a percent point above the previous year. This data is not disaggregated by ethnicity or
socioeconomic status.
Though these percentages may not show significant growth, other reports on college
completion provide a more positive story (Hughes, 2012). For example, in 2010, the United
States earned 257,772 more degrees than in 2008. It is important to note that degree attainment
rates may have seen increases based on advancements in student tracking, particularly when
examining transfer students who start at one campus and transfer/complete at another. The
absence of monitoring transfer student academic achievement contributes to decreased degree
attainment rates. There is an optimistic trend in the number of associate degrees awarded
RURAL STUDENT PERSISTENCE
19
annually; for example, from 2010 to 2011, the number of associate degrees awarded in the U.S.
increased by approximately 100,000.
Even though metrics represented earlier focus on two- and four-year U.S. degree
attainment, one significant factor influencing the national agenda on American college
completion is global competition. Previous international rankings on degree attainment showed
the U.S. placing 12th in 2008, and 16th in 2009, respectively. The 2012 international rankings
showed a slight improvement in terms of the percentage of individuals between the ages of 25 to
34 who have an associates degree or higher. Out of 36 developing countries, the United States
moved into 14th place with an overall degree completion rate of 42.3 percent. When isolating
the attainment of bachelor’s degrees and above for this age group, the United States ranked 11th
in 2012.
According to United States Census Bureau data from 2011, 43.1 percent of Americans
ages 25 to 34 hold a two- or four-year college degree, an increase of two percentage points from
2009. The Pew Research Center for Social and Demographic Trends announced in 2012 that
record shares of Americans ages 25 to 29 have a high school credential (including GEDs) and at
least a bachelor’s degree (Hughes, 2012). Ninety percent of those in that age range have
completed high school, up from 86 percent in 2006, and one-third have bachelor’s degrees or
higher. The Pew Center points out that these increases have occurred despite demographic
changes in our country that predicted a decline in education attainment. In addition, bachelor’s
degree attainment for males, Blacks, and Hispanics, while lower than the overall national
average, is rising. Despite these advances, the United States still has much ground to cover to
align the many aspects of our education system toward increased postsecondary attainment,
particularly for groups historically underrepresented in higher education, including those from
RURAL STUDENT PERSISTENCE
20
rural backgrounds. The United States is still emerging from a serious economic recession that,
while encouraging many to pursue higher education, has depressed incomes for many of those
trying to afford it (Hughes, 2012).
The Completion Agenda continues to march on; however, little research has been done
on rural populations and the targeted initiatives that may be needed to increase this populations’
educational attainment. According to Johnson and Strange (2009), approximately nine million
students attend public schools in rural areas, representing nineteen percent of the public school
population in the United States (as cited in Byun, Irvin, & Meece, 2012a). College enrollment
rates for rural students have historically been lower than their suburban and urban counterparts
(Provasnik, Kewal Ramani, Coleman, Gilbertson, Herring, & Xie, 2007). What can educational
leaders learn about rural populations to increase rural student college matriculation and college
completion rates? The following section provides a contextual reference point in understanding
rural America and how this unique population fits within the Completion Agenda.
Defining Rural America
There are various definitions of “rural” and “rural areas,” many of which have been set
by federal agencies as the United States continues to redefine what constitutes as “urban.” The
United States Census Bureau, a principal agency of the U.S. Federal Statistical System that is
responsible for producing data about the American people and economy, has been dividing
statistics into urban and rural categories for over a century. The Census Bureau’s definition of
"urban" has changed over time in response to changes in settlement patterns, data use needs, and
technology available for use in defining urban areas (United States Census Bureau, 2014a).
Key Census definition changes during the last 65 years have helped to shape our current
understanding of rural and urban definitions today. In 1950, the Census Bureau revised the
RURAL STUDENT PERSISTENCE
21
urban definition to adopt what was to be termed, the “urbanized area concept.” According to the
Bureau, an urbanized area (UA) consists of densely developed territory that contains 50,000 or
more people. The Census Bureau began delineating UAs to provide a better separation of urban
and rural territory, population, and housing in the vicinity of large places (United States Census
Bureau, 2014c). The Census Bureau also officially defined “unincorporated places,” located
outside urbanized areas for the first time in 1950, and designated as urban any that contained at
least 2,500 people within its boundaries. In 1960, the Census Bureau adopted a population
density threshold of at least 1,000 people per square mile for urbanized areas (United States
Census Bureau, 2014a).
For Census 2000, the Bureau adopted the “urban cluster concept,” which now defines
relatively small, densely settled clusters of population (United States Census Bureau, 2014a). As
it exits today, the United States Census Bureau identifies two types of urban areas: Urbanized
Areas (UAs), which consist of 50,000 or more people, and Urban Clusters (UCs), which have a
population of at least 2,500 and less than 50,000. The definition of what is rural continues to be
defined in comparison, as “rural” encompasses all population, housing, and territory not included
within an urban area (United States Census Bureau, 2014b). Similarly, the United States
Department of Agriculture (2013a) defines the terms “rural” and “rural area” to mean any area
other than a city or town that has a population of greater than 50,000 inhabitants. Any urbanized
area contiguous and adjacent to a city or town does not constitute “rural,” nor is it considered a
“rural area.” The lack of a consistent and universal definition of the term “rural” presents a
problem in the literature.
The National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) established “locale codes” in the
1980’s to describe a school’s location ranging from “large city” to “rural.” The codes are based
RURAL STUDENT PERSISTENCE
22
on the physical location represented by an address that is matched against a geographic database
maintained by the Census Bureau. In 2005 and 2006, NCES supported work by the Census
Bureau and redesigned the original locale codes in light of changes in the U.S. population and
the definition of key geographic concepts (NCES, 2014). The new coding system is currently in
use and is referred to as the urban-centric system.
According to the NCES, a Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA) has a population of
1,000,000 or more, and the components of which are large urbanized counties or a cluster of
such counties. A principal city is defined as the primary population and economic center of an
MSA. In conjunction with the NCES definitions, for reference, the Ohio Department of
Education (ODE) observes the urban-centric locale coding system.
• City, Large: Territory inside an urbanized area and inside a principal city with
population of 250,000 or more.
• City, Midsize: Territory inside an urbanized area and inside a principal city with
population less than 250,000 and greater than or equal to 100,000.
• City, Small: Territory inside an urbanized area and inside a principal city with
population less than 100,000.
• Suburb, Large: Territory outside a principal city and inside an urbanized area with
population of 250,000 or more.
• Suburb, Midsize: Territory outside a principal city and inside an urbanized area
with a population less than 250,000 and greater than or equal to 100,000.
• Suburb, Small: Territory outside a principal city and inside an urbanized area with
a population less than 100,000.
RURAL STUDENT PERSISTENCE
23
• Town, Fringe: Territory inside an urban cluster that is less than or equal to 10
miles from an urbanized area.
• Town, Distant: Territory inside an urban cluster that is more than 10 miles and
less than or equal to 35 miles from an urbanized area.
• Town, Remote: Territory inside an urban cluster that is more than 35 miles from
an urbanized area.
• Rural, Fringe: Census-defined rural territory that is less than or equal to 5 miles
from an urbanized area, as well as rural territory that is less than or equal to 2.5
miles from an urban cluster.
• Rural, Distant: Census-defined rural territory that is more than 5 miles but less
than or equal to 25 miles from an urbanized area, as well as rural territory that is
more than 2.5 miles but less than or equal to 10 miles from an urban cluster.
• Rural, Remote: Census-defined rural territory that is more than 25 miles from an
urbanized area and is also more than 10 miles from an urban cluster.
Economic Transitions
As the definitions change, so have the economic landscapes throughout rural America.
At one time in American history, it was commonplace for high school graduates from rural
communities to leave home to attend college and later return to their communities to farm, or to
work as professionals in nearby towns (Lyson, 1979). Since World War II, technological
advances have accounted for reductions in the numbers of farms and farmers in the United States
(Albrecht, 1998; Dorner, 1983). With the consolidation of family farms into large commercial
enterprises, fewer economic opportunities exist in rural America for rural high school graduates
(Hoppe, MacDonald, & Banker, 2006). Previous occupations for rural youth in the service,
RURAL STUDENT PERSISTENCE
24
labor, extraction, and agriculture sectors, which have been the foundation of rural communities
for generations, are disappearing (Albrecht, Albrecht, & Albrecht, 2000; Crockett, Shanahan, &
Jackson Newsom, 2000; Elder & Conger, 2000; Friedman & Lichter, 1998; Gibbs, Kusmin, &
Cromartie, 2005).
The economic recession that occurred during the 1980s and 1990s accelerated a
burgeoning economic transformation in rural areas (Elder & Conger, 2000). The United States
shifted economic value from agriculture to industry, and later from service to knowledge. Rural
youth born into families that have traditionally made a living through hard labor and the land are
increasingly seeking access to educational opportunities that will prepare them for the
knowledge-based economy (McGrath, Swisher, Elder, & Conger, 2001). In 2003, 35 percent of
rural high school graduates attended a four-year college, whereas 42 percent did so in 2007,
representing a seven-percentage point increase (Snyder & Dillow, 2010).
Poverty in Rural America
The agricultural decline of family farming in the United States has undoubtedly turned
rural youth toward college (McGrath, Swisher, Elder, & Conger, 2001); however, a number of
issues impact rural youth and their ability to continue their education. Perhaps the most
significant barrier is that 26.7 percent of rural children in the United States live in poverty
(United States Department of Agriculture, 2013b). Nationally, the rural poverty rate (based on
pre-tax income of less than $23,492 for an average family of four) reached 17.7 percent in 2012,
reaching its highest rate since 1986. To better understand the importance of the developing issue
of rural poverty in the United States, the Department of Agriculture (2013b) has disaggregated
rural poverty data by ethnicity. Rural non-Hispanic Blacks had the highest occurrence of
poverty in 2012 at 40.6 percent. This rate is three times the 13.5 percent for rural non-Hispanic
RURAL STUDENT PERSISTENCE
25
Whites. The 2012 poverty rate for rural Hispanics was 29.2 percent. This high rate of poverty
for Hispanics is particularly concerning as the Hispanic share of the rural population has
increased faster than other racial/ethnic groups over the last two decades, from less than 3
percent in 1990 to 8.1 percent in 2012.
The United States Department of Agriculture also paints a geographic portrait of
clustered rural poverty. Of the 703 high-poverty counties in the United States from 2007-11, 571
were rural, mostly in the South and Southwest. Many of these high-poverty counties were in or
near Native American reservations or in areas with high concentrations of Blacks or Hispanics.
Predominantly White counties with high poverty rates were in Appalachia (United States
Department of Agriculture, 2013b). Lichter and Johnson (2007) and Provasnik, Kewal-Ramani,
and Coleman (2007) noted in their studies that poverty in these rural areas is long lasting and
intergenerational.
The rural population as a whole is declining nationally (McGranahan, & Beale, 2002;
United States Department of Agriculture, 2013c). A downward shift has occurred without
precedent that marks a historic rural population loss. McGranahan, Cromartie, and Wojan
(2010) studied rural outmigration and found that poverty and a lack of economic opportunity are
important factors in outmigration; however, geographic isolation was also a motivating factor.
The United States Department of Agriculture (2013c) noted that the current rural population loss
presents a growing demographic challenge that faces much of rural and small-town America:
population growth from natural change (births minus deaths) is no longer sufficient to counter
net migration losses when they occur. At the community level, such population loss typically
reduces the demand for jobs, diminishes the quality of the workforce, and raises per capita costs
of providing services.
RURAL STUDENT PERSISTENCE
26
As noted, the thinning of rural populations in many areas can place significant strains on
a rural community. The school context is not impervious to such strain. As a result of reduced
enrollment, schools receive less funding and find it difficult to offer courses and services with
fewer resources (Howley, Rhodes & Beall, 2009). Rural communities often suffer additionally
in states where local property taxes contribute heavily to school funding (Dayton, 1998). The
Rural Policy Institute (2006) noted that Congressional budgets continually disadvantage rural
school districts in comparison to urban and suburban districts.
Low levels of funding contribute to rural districts’ difficulty in attracting and retaining
qualified teachers (National Center for Education Statistics, 2007). Studies have shown that
rural districts have a difficult time finding teachers in high-need fields such as mathematics,
science, and special education (Hammer, Hughes, McClure, Reeves, & Salgado, 2005; Paul,
2005; Rosenkoetter, Irwin, & Saceda, 2004). This results in rural district teachers that are less
experienced and less educated than teachers in urban and suburban districts (Monk, 2007).
Graham (2009) and Provasnik et al. (2007) noted that inequity extends beyond the teaching
force, as rural students, especially in low-income communities, have limited access to career
counseling, college preparatory courses, career academics, and school-to-work programs when
compared with students from other areas.
With declining rural populations that result in a number of rural school issues, pressures
to close or consolidate schools become emotionally charged issues in rural communities. States
enact policies that require school closure under certain conditions or provide incentives for
increasing school size (Colangelo, Assouline, & New, 1999; Lawrence, 2001). While
consolidation may be viewed as efficient, rural citizens contemplate consolidation as it relates to
the survival of their communities (Peshkin, 1982; Post & Stambach, 1999).
RURAL STUDENT PERSISTENCE
27
Segregation in Rural America
It is important to recognize that rural and small town communities vary on dimensions of
racial makeup, religion, socioeconomic status, values, and opportunities of local employment
(Burney & Cross, 2006). Similar to America’s largest cities, race has historically played a
significant role in shaping settlement patterns in rural geographic regions (Lichter, Parisi, Grice
& Taquino, 2007). Over 90 percent of rural Blacks are concentrated in the South, a pattern that
has historical roots in the old plantation economy and slavery (Lichter et al., 2007). Many rural
Blacks populate what is known as the “Black Belt,” an area named for its black fertile land that
spans across eleven states. Lichter et al. (2007) notes that the settlement patterns of Native
Americans have some parallels to the apartheid-like patterns of spatial segregation found
historically among the nation’s southern rural Blacks. In 2000, 1.4 million Native Americans
lived in rural areas; this accounted for nearly one-third of the Native American population.
These individuals were primarily located on Native American reservation lands throughout the
country (Iceland, Weinberg & Steinmetz, 2002).
In contrast, the majority of Mexican Americans and new Hispanic immigrants have
largely been concentrated in four border states: California, Arizona, New Mexico, and Texas
(Lichter et al., 2007). However, according to Durand, Massay, & Capoferro (2005), the passage
of the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 coincided with the spatial spread of
Mexican and other Hispanic immigrant groups to interior states (as cited in Lichter et al., 2007,
p. 565), and more recently, to rural communities in the Midwest and South (Waters & Jimenez,
2005; Zuniga & Hernandez-Leon, 2005). As noted, Hispanics are the fastest growing segment of
the U.S. rural population. This Hispanic rural growth rate has been particularly high in states
processing meat and poultry. According to Gouveia and Saenz (2000), these industries have
RURAL STUDENT PERSISTENCE
28
recruited heavily among new and potential immigrants from Mexico and Central America.
Today, an established immigrant network in these areas allows potential immigrants to skip
gateway cities such as Los Angeles and travel directly to small rural communities for economic
opportunities (Gouveia, 2005).
Emerging settlement patterns and the growth of rural ethnic enclaves suggest accelerated
residential segregation in rural America (Lichter et al., 2007). Citing long histories of racial and
economic oppression, Whites’ intolerance of racial minorities in rural America is still beset by
“invisible” barriers in local housing markets. Lichter et al. (2007) argues that rural America is
highly segregated by race, and that the political and economic processes that maintain racial
segregation often parallel those found in inner-city neighborhoods (Johnson, Parnell, Joyner,
Christman, & Marsh, 2004). This study provides insight into how students from homogeneous
rural communities adapt to more diverse urban postsecondary settings.
Rural Identity and Values
In commenting on traditional values of rural places, Howley (1998) described the
importance of family and community, a strong work ethic, deep ties to the land, and stewardship
as the ultimate test of accountability. Rural students experience a tension caused by the lack of
economic opportunity in rural areas and the pressures of family cohesiveness (Howley, 2006;
Hendrickson, 2012). These rural students place a high importance on community and family
relationships and the focus of the student is on the well-being of the family group, rather than on
individual achievement. Despite the lack of economic opportunity in rural areas, the pressure to
choose family cohesiveness, and remain in the area, rather than attend college, is a persistent
conflict for rural students (Corbett, 2007; Howley, 2006). Schooling often encourages students
RURAL STUDENT PERSISTENCE
29
to seek high-status employment that requires breaking the bonds to family and place (Howley,
1998).
Higher education has historically served as an instrument of upper economic mobility for
socioeconomically disadvantaged students (Trow, 1992). While feeling obligated to maintain
family cohesiveness and abide parents’ wishes, rural students hear mixed messages regarding
education as a tool for economic mobility. While schools in rural areas promote education as a
means to economic success, many rural families have not witnessed tangible successes related to
schooling; therefore, school may not be seen as a way to escape poverty or promote upward
mobility. Schools preach broadening horizons while rural families emphasize local values and
local knowledge (Corbett, 2007). In a qualitative study of student schooling resistance in
Appalachian Ohio, Hendrickson (2012) found that schools typically advocated college
attendance, moving away from home, and gaining experience in the world; whereas, students
reported that their families encouraged them to go into the family business, usually a vocational
trade, and did not find college to be necessary. Provasnik et al., (2007) found that approximately
20 percent of rural parents expect their children to obtain two or more years of college, and 37
percent expect their children to complete a bachelor’s degree.
The rise in educational aspirations of rural youth may indicate that these students, despite
the pressures to conform to traditional rural values, recognize education as a means to economic
mobility. There is an abundance of research from the 1980s and early 1990s that suggest that
educational and career aspirations of rural youth are lower than non-rural students (Cobb,
McIntire, & Pratt, 1989; Haller & Vikler, 1993; Kanapel & DeYoung, 1999; MacBrayne, 1987;
Quaglia, 1989; Rojewski, 1999); however, more recent studies show an increase in aspirations of
rural youth that rival their urban counterparts (Crockett & Bingham 2000; Meece & Farmer
RURAL STUDENT PERSISTENCE
30
2009). Some gender, race, and SES differences in educational aspirations have been found, but
findings are mixed (Witherspoon & Ennett, 2011). In a study of rural migration patterns from
1989-2004, educational attainment was the most important predictor of the odds of outmigration
for rural students (Domina, 2006). McGranahan, Cromartie, and Wojan (2010) studied rural
outmigration in rural communities and found that many young adults leave after high school to
further their education or join the Armed Forces. As Elder (1998) noted, if rural youth value
education, aspire, and expect to go on to college, they may face a new transition to a new place
with new people and encounter a potential “turning point” at entry to college. This study
provides evidence that economic mobility can be a motivating factor for rural students to persist
within urban postsecondary contexts.
Precollege Challenges Facing Rural Youth
Despite the growing number of rural high school students matriculating to postsecondary
institutions, this student population has received little research attention; therefore, not much is
known about the background characteristics, precollege experiences, and postsecondary
educational experiences of these students and how these factors may shape their college
completion (Byun, Irvin, & Meece, 2012a; Gibbs, 1998; Schonert, Elliott, & Bills, 1991). In a
recent study, Byun et al. (2012a) examined similarities and differences in precollege
characteristics and college experiences between rural, suburban, and urban students at a four-
year institution. Drawing on a sample of 4,880 students (28% rural, 42% suburban, and 30%
urban), the study revealed that rural students who attended a four-year institution were
disproportionately more likely to be first-generation college students and to come from lower-
income families than their urban and suburban peers. In addition, rural students were more
likely to enter college with a less rigorous academic curricular background than urban or
RURAL STUDENT PERSISTENCE
31
suburban students. It should be noted that due to limited sample sizes, this study did not account
for American Indian/Alaska Native and multiracial students.
Rural socioeconomic limitations also have implications for standardized college entrance
examinations and college admission practice. While some students from rural areas may
perform as well as their urban peers in reading, mathematics, science, and social studies (Fan &
Chen 1999), they have limited opportunities to prove such knowledge via college entrance
exams. Largely due to socioeconomic differences, college applicants living in urban areas were
more likely to retake standardized test entrance examinations compared to rural students (Vigdor
& Clotfelter, 2003). The ability to retake these examinations provides the opportunity for
students to increase their test scores, expanding college attendance options and postsecondary
funding opportunities. In one particular study, due to score deficits on the ACT and SAT, a large
majority of students from rural agriculturally-intensive counties in North Carolina who wished to
pursue higher education in agricultural fields were not competitive for admission to the state’s
land grant institutions, which offered such degree programs. The study found that as a result of
such practice, many traditional agricultural degree programs began downsizing or closing due to
limited undergraduate populations (Herman, Huffman, Anderson, & Golden, 2013). Crosnoe,
Mistry, and Elder (2002) found that the challenges rural youth face when trying to enroll in
postsecondary education correspond to an apparent obstacle to social mobility.
Transitioning to Postsecondary Institutions
The transition beyond high school is considered as one of the most difficult
developmental challenges confronting young adults (Lapan, Tucker, Kim, Kosciulek, 2003). For
those electing to continue to postsecondary education, institutional settings present rural students
with a host of new challenges that may impact persistence and degree attainment. Gibbs (1998)
RURAL STUDENT PERSISTENCE
32
and Byun et al. (2012a) found that rural youth were more likely than urban youth to attend public
and nonselective colleges. Gibbs (1998) attributed this to four factors. First, public colleges in
rural areas are more numerous and have larger enrollments than private colleges. Second, rural
students are less able to afford higher tuition private colleges. Third, public colleges are less
likely to require advanced course work, which is often lacking in rural schools. Fourth, selective
colleges are mostly located in urban and suburban areas. Based upon Gibbs’ (1998) findings, it
would seem like a natural transition for rural students to attend postsecondary institutions in
rural-like settings. Rural schools and communities offer social resources for rural students,
especially socioeconomically disadvantaged students, to complete college (Byun, Irvin, &
Meece, 2012a). Rural schools are diverse but share several characteristics, including small size,
strong community-school connections, and supportive teacher-student relations, all of which
have positive benefits for youth (Byun, Meece, & Irvin, 2012b; Crockett, Shanahan, & Jackson-
Newsom, 2000; Demi, Coleman-Jensen, & Snyder, 2010; Elder & Conger, 2000; Hardre,
Sullivan, & Crowson, 2009). What is interesting to note however is that between 2003 and 2007,
four-year college attendance rates of rural high school graduates increased by approximately 4
percent (from 32.5 percent to 36.1 percent) in city areas and by approximately 1 percent (from
40.3 percent to 41.2 percent in suburban areas (Snyder & Dillow, 2010).
Theoretical Framework and Relevant Theories
Urie Bronfenbrenner’s developmental ecological model (Bronfenbrenner, 1974, 1977,
1979, 1989, 1993, 2005; Bronfenbrenner & Morris, 2006) serves as the guiding theoretical
framework for this study; however, the study also draws upon Renn and Arnold’s (2003)
research on college student peer culture using Bronfenbrenner’s model. The knowledge and
beliefs that rural students accumulate while growing up shape them in ways that may affect their
RURAL STUDENT PERSISTENCE
33
approach to the college environment. Prior experiences with family, schooling, and community
life have prepared these individuals for a variety of interactions in college. In the
Bronfenbrenner model, the rural student remains the focus, with the surrounding context serving
as a critical location for interactions between the individual and the environment (Evans, Forney,
Guido, Patton, & Renn, 2010). This study demonstrates how Bronfenbrenner’s microsystem and
mesosystem contexts may influence the first-year persistence of rural students at urban, four-year
institutions.
As a developmental psychologist, Bronfenbrenner began studying interactions between
individuals and their developmental contexts from a psychological perspective, rather than an
anthropological approach. Bronfenbrenner pioneered an early ecological systems theory (1979)
that sought to explain growth and development in early childhood; the model evolved and was
refined periodically until Bronfenbrenner’s death in 2005 (Bronfenbrenner, 1979, 1989, 1993,
2005). Bronfenbrenner’s developmental ecology model offers a way to look inside the
interactions between individuals and their environments to see how and why outcomes may
occur as they do. There are four main components of the developmental ecology theory:
process, person, context, and time. These elements, referred to as PPCT, interact in ways that
promote or hinder development. Throughout Bronfenbrenner’s career, the components were
defined similarly; however, Bronfenbrenner regularly adjusted his assessment of how the
interactions influenced development or the importance of various subcomponents in the
developmental process (Evans et al., 2010).
Process, at the core of the model, consists of particular forms of interaction between the
individual and environment, called proximal processes. These proximal processes occur over
time, and according to Bronfenbrenner and Morris (2006), are the primary mechanisms
RURAL STUDENT PERSISTENCE
34
producing human development. In order for development, proximal processes should become
progressively more complex and supported appropriately so as not to overwhelm the developing
individual. These functions can often be recognized in Astin’s (1984) theory of involvement,
which will be elaborated upon later in this chapter.
The second component, person, in conjunction with the process component, provides a
greater understanding on what is occurring in the how and what of the person-environment
interaction. Bronfenbrenner (1993) noted, “The attributes of the person most likely to shape the
course of development, for better or for worse, are those that induce or inhibit dynamic
dispositions toward the immediate environment” (p. 11). Bronfenbrenner identified four types of
attributes, which he called developmentally instigative characteristics. Renn and Arnold (2003)
summarized these attributes and cited examples for college students. First there are those that act
to invite or inhibit responses from the environment; different students elicit different responses
from administrators, peers, and faculty. Second are those of selective responsivity, which
describe how rural students would explore and react to surroundings, including such activities as
joining student clubs or preferring solitary activities. Structuring proclivities are the third type,
and these relate to how rural students engage or persist in the increasingly complex activities that
are keys to development. For example, rural students who would consciously seek more difficult
courses, leadership positions, and so forth, would exhibit stronger structuring proclivities than
those who limit new challenges. Directive beliefs, the fourth type, indicate how rural students
assign responsibility for successes and failures in relation to environments. Together,
developmentally instigative characteristics influence how an individual will experience an
environment and how the environment will respond to that individual. Renn and Arnold (2003)
propose that these characteristics may help explain differential outcomes among students whose
RURAL STUDENT PERSISTENCE
35
demographics and entering academic profiles would predict similar learning and developmental
outcomes. This is particularly significant as it relates to differing outcomes for rural students
from similar social and academic communities.
The context element of the ecology model is a significant part of this study. As noted
earlier, while the rural student remains the focus, the surrounding context is understood as a
critical location for interactions (the process) between the student and the environment (Evans et
al., 2010). Bronfenbrenner proposed a nested series of contexts, in which the person is in the
center, with four levels of context surrounding her or him: the microsystem, mesosystem,
exosystem, and macrosystem. These systems are where the work of development would occur as
a rural student’s developmentally instigative characteristics inhibit or provoke reactions from the
environment in the course of proximal processes. Renn and Arnold (2003) depicted the context
component of the PPCT model in the following form.
Figure 1: Bronfenbrenner’s Model as Applied to Postsecondary Environment
RURAL STUDENT PERSISTENCE
36
According to Bronfenbrenner (1993), a microsystem is a pattern of activities, roles, and
interpersonal relationships experienced by the developing rural individual in a face-to-face
setting with particular physical, social, and symbolic features that invite, permit, or inhibit
engagement in sustained, progressively more complex interaction with, and activity in, the
immediate environment. It is important to note that Bronfenbrenner did not include computer-
mediated contexts in which college students now experience activities, roles, and interpersonal
relationships; however, while these are not face-to-face settings, according to the definition of
microsystems, they are important sites where social, physical, and symbolic features may
provoke or hinder engagement with the environment (Evans et al., 2010). Roommates,
friendship groups, work settings, athletic teams, families, and faculty relationships represent
potential microsystems for rural students (Renn & Arnold, 2003). Evans et al. (2010) noted that
Astin’s (1984) involvement theory tends to focus on interactions between specific microsystems
and individual students and their engagement, development, and learning. This approach is often
analyzed as though microsystem interactions are additive, or that the effects of interactions in
one microsystem, such as student-faculty interaction, can be added to or subtracted from the
effects of interactions in other microsystems (friendship groups, work, athletics) to calculate the
total effects of college on students. These additive analyses of microsystems leave out the
important interactions between and among microsystems. These interactions have been
accounted for in Bronfenbrenner’s mesosyetem (Evans et al., 2010).
The mesosystem consists of linkages and processes taking place between two or more
microsystem settings containing the developing rural individual (Bronfenbrenner, 1993).
According to Renn (2003), it is the synergy across microsystems and webs of mesosystems that
creates additional possibilities for proximal processes that promote development. Mesosystems
RURAL STUDENT PERSISTENCE
37
may be consonant, reinforcing developmental effects, or dissonant, sending competing messages
or creating inconsistent influences that may provoke or inhibit development. The mesosystem is
at the center of campus peer culture, where students’ multiple microsystems interact to create a
web of developmental possibilities (Renn & Arnold, 2003). For example, interactions between
the roommate relationship and student organization create a mesosystem; another mesosystem
may be created by the friendship group and classroom microsystems. Renn and Arnold (2003)
highlight the parallels between evolutionary biology and developmental ecology, noting that
environmental niches favor some characteristics over others. If developing rural students, for
example, cannot adapt to or change the environment, they will not survive, or persist. Rural
students however, do not exist in micro- and mesosystems entirely of their own creation, as they
are affected by circumstances beyond their control. These activities occur in Bronfenbrenner’s
exosystem.
According to Bronfenbrenner (1993), exosystems do not contain the developing
individual but exert an influence on his or her environment through interactions with the
microsystems. Exosystems that may affect rural students include federal financial aid and
immigration policies, parents’ or partners’ workplaces, faculty curriculum committees, and
institutional decision makers who issue tuition and aid policies (Renn & Arnold, 2003). The
inclusion of exosystems helps account for factors beyond the control of the individual and
illustrates the diversity of student experiences.
The broadest level of context in the developmental ecology model is the macrosystem,
which Bronfenbrenner (1993) states as “the overarching pattern of micro- meso- and exosystems
characteristic of a given culture, subculture, or other extended social structure, with particular
reference to the developmentally instigative belief systems, resources, hazards, lifestyles,
RURAL STUDENT PERSISTENCE
38
opportunity structures, life course options and patterns of social interchange that are embedded in
such overarching systems” (p. 25). As Evans et al. (2010) noted, the macrosystem can be
thought of as, if not universal, at least encompassing higher education institutions and their
inhabitants.
The micro-, meso-, exo-, and macrosystems are inextricable, interactive, and complexly
related. What happens in one context affects the others, as well as the developing individual
(Bronfenbrenner & Morris, 2006). The contexts provide stressors and buffers, creating
opportunities for increasingly complex activities in which the student can participate, while
supporting and rewarding sustained commitment to those increasingly complex endeavors
(Evans et al., 2010). The student is constantly exerting forces on the micro- and mesosystems,
just as they are exerting forces back on him or her.
The component of time, while it has made appearances throughout the ecological models,
is a clear presence in the last published version of the model (Bronfenbrenner & Morris, 2006).
In this version, time is described at three levels. Microtime refers to continuity versus
discontinuity in ongoing episodes of proximal processes. Mesotime is the periodicity of these
episodes across broader time intervals, such as days and weeks. Macrotime focuses on the
changing expectations and events in the larger society, both within and across generations, as
they affect and are affected by, processes and outcomes of human development over the life
course (Bronfenbrenner & Morris, 2006). Time interacts with process, person, and context to
affect the developmental influence of proximal processes. Renn and Arnold (2003) point to the
timing of family events (birth of a sibling, parents’ divorce, family move) in a young person’s
life and the timing of college attendance (for example, immediately after high school, returning
after working for a time) as instances of time playing a role in development. It is important to
RURAL STUDENT PERSISTENCE
39
note that Bronfenbrenner (1995) calls time the chronosystem, putting it in a parallel status with
the micro-, exo-, and macrosystems of the context.
Bronfenbrenner’s evolved PPCT developmental ecology model is important in
identifying interactions and specific contexts that may promote or hinder development, and
ultimately persistence, among rural students at four-year urban postsecondary institutions. This
study will provide insight into how rural students make linkages with microsystem settings and
how these microsystems may influence persistence. This study will also help provide a better
understanding of the forces that urban higher educational mesosystems may exert upon rural
first-year students. Are rural students able to scale down the complexity of their new urban
learning environment by successfully creating microsystems and mesosystems that help them
adapt? Do rural students participating in multiple, interacting microsystems over time (via the
chronosystem) form a mesosystem that supports first-year persistence at urban institutions?
Although Bronfenbrenner’s work will serve as the theoretical framework, it is pertinent to
recognize the importance of several key theories relevant to the first-year persistence of rural
students at urban, four-year institutions. The following theories and constructs aid this study in
the interpretation of how microsystems and mesosystems impact rural student persistence on
urban college campuses.
Involvement
Astin’s (1984) student development theory based on student involvement continues to
serve as a driving force behind many postsecondary institutional retention efforts. Astin defined
student involvement as the amount of physical and psychological energy that a student devotes to
the academic experience. While similar to the construct of motivation, the term involvement was
selected because it implies more than just a psychological state. Astin (1984) noted that
RURAL STUDENT PERSISTENCE
40
involvement is more inclined to direct observation and measurement than the abstract construct
of motivation. According to the theory, the greater the student’s involvement in college, the
greater will be the amount of student learning and personal development (Astin, 1984). The five
components of involvement theory are as follows. First, involvement refers to the investment of
physical and psychological energy in various objects. The objects may be highly generalized or
highly specific. Second, regardless of its object, involvement occurs along a continuum. Third,
involvement has both quantitative and qualitative features. Fourth, 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 that program. Lastly, the
effectiveness of any educational policy of practice is directly related to the capacity of that policy
or practice to increase student involvement (Astin, 1984).
Critical to understanding Astin’s theory of student involvement is to recognize that
psychic and physical time and energy of students is limited. Educators must compete with other
forces in the student’s life (i.e. family, friends, job, outside activities) for a share of that time and
energy. Administrators and faculty members must recognize that nearly every institutional
policy and practice can affect the way students spend their time and energy. The theory
encourages educators to focus less on what they do and more on what the student does (Astin,
1984).
The theory of student involvement is rooted in a longitudinal study of college student
persistence (Astin, 1975). This key study sought to identify factors in the college environment
that significantly affected student persistence in college. Astin (1984) noted that leaving home to
attend college has a significant effect on most college outcomes and that living on campus
substantially increases a student’s chances of persisting and of aspiring to graduate. Astin (1984)
RURAL STUDENT PERSISTENCE
41
stated that students who live on campus in residence halls have more time and opportunity to get
involved in all aspects of campus life. This assumption is now being challenged by a changing
student body that may not actually leave home, travel far for college, or who may be adult
learners. In his study, Astin (1975) reported intriguing findings regarding “fit” between student
and college. He found that students were more likely to persist at religious colleges if their own
religious backgrounds are similar; Black students were more likely to persist at Black colleges
than at predominantly White colleges; and that students from small towns were more likely to
persist in small than in large colleges. This conclusion helps to support Gibbs’ (1998) findings
that ultimately, rural students must be able to identify with the institution. This study will
provide much needed insight into how rural students identify with urban institutions during the
first-year experience. It will also seek to learn more about whether or not that relationship
affects first-year persistence.
In addition to “fit” and on campus residence, Astin (1975) also linked persistence to
academic involvement (e.g., the extent to which students work hard at their studies, the number
of hours they spend studying, the degree of interest in their courses, good study habits). Other
key aspects related to persistence were participation in honors programs, extracurricular
activities (i.e. social fraternities or sororities, athletics, student government), involvement in
ROTC, frequent student-faculty interaction, participation in undergraduate research projects, and
part-time employment on campus. As it relates to Astin’s theory, this study hopes to better
understand the role that involvement plays in the first-year persistence of rural students at urban
institutions.
RURAL STUDENT PERSISTENCE
42
Transitions
Building upon Astin (1984), Schlossberg (1989) found that involvement creates
connections between students, faculty, and staff that help individuals believe in their personal
worth. Schlossberg’s constructs of marginality and mattering may be important to understanding
first-year persistence of rural students on urban college campuses. Basing her work on exploring
transitions, events or nonevents that alter our lives (1981), Schlossberg established that
individuals in transition often feel marginal and that they do not matter. Each time an individual
changes roles or experiences a transition, the potential for feeling marginal arises. The larger the
difference between the former role and the new role the more marginal the person may feel
(Schlossberg, 1989). Rural students transitioning to life on urban college campuses may
question their sense of belonging.
Schlossberg found that first-year college students in transition often feel marginal, that
they do not make a difference, and do not matter to their colleges. In addition, first-year college
students’ feelings of marginality may equate to not fitting in academically or socially at their
colleges, and can result in feelings of worthlessness and increased self-consciousness
(Schlossberg, 1989). The resulting self-consciousness may, according to Sand, Robinson,
Kurpius, & Dixon Rayle (2005), directly affect students’ abilities to perform up to their academic
capabilities, thus resulting in lower academic success and greater academic stress (as cited in
Rayle & Chung, 2007).
Equally important to understanding marginality is to understand mattering. Believed to
be an influential component that informs individuals’ self concepts, mattering was first described
by sociologist Morris Rosenberg (1981). Essentially, mattering refers to our belief, whether right
or wrong, that we matter to someone else. According to Schlossberg (1989), this belief acts as a
RURAL STUDENT PERSISTENCE
43
motivator. Students often feel they do not matter to their college settings, which may lead to
increased departure rates (Schlossberg, 1989). Given the often-strong ties to community and
family that many rural students experience prior to college, mattering may prove to be an
important component to first-year persistence at urban institutions. The various aspects of
mattering (Rosenberg, 1981; Schlossberg, 1989) are important to understanding the construct.
First, “attention,” the most elementary form of mattering, is the feeling that one commands the
interest or notice of another person. Second, “importance” is to believe that other people care
about what we want, think, or do, or that they are concerned with our fate. Third, “ego-
extension” refers to the feeling that other people will be proud of our accomplishment or
saddened by our failures. Fourth, “dependence” suggests that our behavior is influenced by our
dependence on other people. Fifth, “appreciation,” the final aspect of mattering, highlights the
importance of feeling that an individuals’ efforts are appreciated (Schlossberg, 1989).
In a recent study on first-year college students’ mattering, 533 first-year college freshmen
completed surveys at a large, predominantly White, four-year, Southwestern university (Dixon
Rayle & Chung, 2007). Findings indicated that clusters of social support from family and
friends predicted greater levels of mattering. When first-year students made friends at school
and felt supported by their college friends they reported a greater sense of mattering and
significance to their college environments. Students who felt supported by friends and family,
and felt they mattered to their colleges experienced less academic stress. While the findings
support Schlossberg’s beliefs on mattering, Dixon Rayle & Chung (2007) noted that their study
highlighted the experiences of mattering with a 21
st
century generation of college students who
are likely facing very different familial, financial, sociopolitical, and academic concerns than
those students in the 1980s (Kuh, Kinzie, Schuh, Whitt, & Associates, 2005). Dixon Rayle &
RURAL STUDENT PERSISTENCE
44
Chung (2007) noted that although students and their life concerns may differ from those in the
1980s, mattering to the college environment remains important to the success of college students.
This study sought to better understand how rural students interpret mattering and marginality
during their first-year on an urban college campus.
Persistence
Like Astin, Vincent Tinto has significantly influenced university institutional policy and
practice regarding persistence and graduation. Tinto (1993) found that a student’s decision to
continue at an institution is due to personal characteristics, academic background, and integration
into the academic and social life of the campus. A decision to persist or leave a college or
university is not a one-time decision point; rather students are engaged in an ongoing process of
becoming more or less committed to an institution as a result of the degree to which they feel
integrated into the academic and social system of the institution (Tinto 1993, 1997). This study
provides insight into how rural students become more integrated into the academic and social
systems, and more committed to the institution, within the first-year on an urban college campus.
Critics of Tinto argue that his theory does not take into account minority students’
struggles with White cultural norms and values embedded within a predominantly White
university culture (Castillo, Conoley, Choi-Pearson, Archuleta, & Phoummarath, 2006).
Research indicates that minority student persistence and graduation are correlated with minority
stress, or the unique pressures experienced by minority students that interfere with their college
adjustment and integration into the university community (Wei, Ku, & Liao, 2011). In addition
to many others, these unique stresses may include experiencing a predominantly White
environment for the first time, feeling pressured to speak for an entire ethnic group, racial
segregation during in-class study groups, or low faculty expectations because of the stereotype of
RURAL STUDENT PERSISTENCE
45
low intelligence. Among African American students, minority stress was associated with low
academic persistence (Neblett, Philip, Cogburn, & Sellers, 2006) and low graduation rates
(Brown, Morning, & Watkins, 2005).
In predominantly White universities, positive diverse peer interactions and a sense of
community were the strongest predictors of a positive racial climate among African American
students (Park, 2009). Research has consistently found that a positive perception of the
university environment predicts college persistence for African American students (Gloria,
Robinson-Kurpius, Hamilton, & Wilson, 1999). Counseling centers can also offer support
groups for minority students. Rollock, Westman, and Johnson (1992) indicated that support
groups for African Americans help to improve perceptions of the university environment and
perceived social support.
Exploring Tinto’s theory, this study provides valuable insight into the ongoing process of
how rural students become more or less committed to an urban institution during their first-year
on campus. Are rural students cognizant of their commitment levels throughout the first-year
transition? Do rural students feel unique stresses attributed to being a rural student on an urban
college campus? The following section will delve into the significance of first-year retention and
examine existing studies of rural student postsecondary persistence.
First-Year Retention and College Persistence Among Rural Youth
First-year persistence literature has focused on entering student characteristics, such as
prior academic achievement, sex, age, race/ethnicity, socioeconomic support, and initial
commitment to obtaining a degree (Purdie and Rosser, 2011). While these characteristics have
been used to effectively study and predict retention (Astin, 1993; Astin 1997; Pascarella &
Terenzini, 2005), what a student experiences while in college may be equally important. Key
RURAL STUDENT PERSISTENCE
46
researchers (Astin, 1993; Nagda, Gregerman, Jonides, Von Hippel, & Lerner, 1999; Tinto, 1993)
have found that students may experience difficulties in identifying with, and connecting to, the
academic and social cultures within an institution. This can lead to poor academic performance
and departure. The first year of college is often the most stressful year and a time in which the
greatest number of college students withdraw or drop out of postsecondary institutions (Misra,
McKean, West, & Russo, 2000; Salinitri, 2005; Tinto, 1982; Tinto, 1993). While characteristics
of incoming students are significant, institutions influence both the academic performance and
retention of their students via the college experience (Purdie & Rosser, 2011).
Few studies have explored the factors associated with the persistence of rural students in
college. Schnonet, Elliott, and Bills (1991) conducted a study of postsecondary persistence
among students in rural Iowa. Selected randomly from rural districts in the state, rural student
participants numbered less than 300. Of these participants, 89 matriculated directly from high
school to a four-year institution. The study found that 76 percent persisted to degree completion.
The authors hail this statistic as evidence that rural students may be underestimated in regards to
persistence and degree attainment.
Schnonet, Elliott, and Bills (1991) found that mothers and fathers of rural students had a
significant influence on post high school plans and students who persisted were more than twice
as likely to indicate that teachers had a great deal of influence on them. Consistent with the
findings of Astin (1984), those in this study who persisted at four-year institutions were almost
twice as likely to participate in a sorority or fraternity. Rural youth in this study participated in a
significant number and variety of high school extracurricular activities. This was consistent with
research indicating that students from smaller rural schools engage in more extracurricular
activities in high school and assume more leadership roles than students from larger schools
RURAL STUDENT PERSISTENCE
47
(Schonert et al., 1991). Further research is needed to explore a possible link between rural high
school involvement and four-year college involvement. If such a relationship exists, it may help
to shed light upon an aspect of rural student persistence in college.
In the Schonert et al. (1991) study, those who dropped out or withdrew overwhelmingly
indicated career indecision and financial constraints as their reasons for withdrawal. In addition,
the researchers observed that several of those who left college chose to attend a university closer
to home. These students experienced more distress in making the separation from their family
and rural community than those who stayed at their original postsecondary institutions. The
findings illustrate the difficulty that rural students may face when presented with new
environmental and academic settings. The strong connection and separation distress that these
students struggle with in this new setting may be accompanied by feelings of marginality or a
lack of mattering (Schlossberg, 1989).
Schonert et al. (1991) suggested that the way in which rural students perceive their high
schools has an influence on their feelings of affiliation with their school. According to Dunne
(1977), in the rural community, the school building is perceived as being more than just a place
where students are educated; the school building is often considered to be the cultural center for
the community (as cited in Schonert et al., 1991). With this prior institutional connection and
understanding, rural college students’ perceptions of school climate and sense of belonging may
outweigh other determinants that commonly influence persistence.
In a study of rural youth in Pennsylvania, Yan (2002) examined longitudinal data from
surveys that were given to a cohort of eighth graders beginning in 1988. This cohort of students
supplied survey data at two-year intervals through 1994. The first follow-up in 1990 provided
data to understand the transition from elementary to secondary institutions. The second follow-
RURAL STUDENT PERSISTENCE
48
up in 1992 focused on the transition from high school to the labor force and postsecondary
education. The third follow-up questioned the cohort about their labor and postsecondary
experiences. The cohort consisted of 642 students from Pennsylvania; 216 of these students
graduated from rural high schools, 103 graduated from urban high schools, and 323 graduated
from suburban high schools. In this study, 48 percent of rural students did not attend college,
compared to 28 percent of urban students and 36 percent of suburban students.
Stressing the importance of high school academic preparation to persistence, Yan (2002)
found that persistent students were more likely to have taken high school sciences courses (i.e.,
physics, chemistry and biology) than college dropouts. Highlighting the significance of funding,
rural persistent students were also more likely to have at least one or more types of financial aid
compared to rural dropouts. This aid was exhibited in the form of grants, scholarships,
fellowships, college work-study programs, or loans. Rural students who persisted also benefited
from parental support in the decision to attend and persist in college. Yan found that the amount
of parental discussion about college plans was a significant contributor to college enrollment and
persistence of rural students. Rural persistent students were more likely to attend their first
choice postsecondary institution than rural dropouts, or even urban and suburban counterparts.
Further research may benefit from determining whether rural students have a better sense of
institutional fit in college planning than do urban or suburban students.
In addition to precollege data, Byun et al. (2012a) studied similarities and differences in
college experiences between rural, suburban, and urban young adults at a four-year institution.
Consistent with the observations of Gibbs (1998), Byun et al. (2012a) found that rural students
more often attended a public nonselective college than did urban and suburban students.
Emphasizing the important academic preparation characteristic noted in the literature, Byun et al.
RURAL STUDENT PERSISTENCE
49
(2012a) found that rural students had significantly lower high school rigor than did their urban or
suburban counterparts (Purdie & Rosser, 2011; Yan, 2002). However, Byun et al. (2012a) found
that despite this deficiency, the first-year cumulative GPA of rural students was as high as that of
urban students and significantly higher than that of suburban students. Also of interest, rural
students were more likely to be enrolled full-time. This is significant as Astin (1975, 1984)
found that full-time students were more likely to persist than those attending part-time.
The Byun et al. (2012a) quantitative study found several predictors of bachelor’s degree
completion among rural students. Family income was significantly related to completion for
rural students. Students whose family income was $50,000 or more were more likely than
students whose family income was $25,000 or less to earn a bachelor’s degree. Neither parental
education, family structure, or the number of siblings were predictors. For precollege
experiences, only curriculum rigor was a significant predictor.
Among the college experiences, timing and enrollment status were significantly
associated with the odds of bachelor’s degree attainment for rural youth. For example, students
who attended college right after high school, and who attended full-time, were both more likely
to complete a bachelor’s degree than those who delayed college entry, or attended part-time.
Consistent with Astin’s (1984) theory of involvement, rural students in this study who
participated in social clubs and/or fraternities/sororities were more likely to earn a bachelor’s
degree than those who did not; however, participation in intramural athletics and student
government/politics was not a significant predictor. Signifying the importance of academic
success early in the college career of rural students, a strong first-year cumulative GPA was
associated with a higher likelihood of obtaining a bachelor’s degree among rural students.
Particularly relevant is that none of the institutional features of college first attended (i.e.,
RURAL STUDENT PERSISTENCE
50
location, sector, level, and selectivity) predicted bachelor’s degree completion among rural youth
(Byun et al., 2012a). Disaggregating the data, Byun et al. (2012) found that for rural Hispanic
students, parental educational experiences, and participation in Greek social clubs were
significant predictors of bachelor’s degree completion for rural students, but not for suburban or
urban students. Results showed that Hispanic students from rural communities were
significantly less likely to earn a bachelor’s degree than their suburban and urban counterparts of
the same ethnicity.
While a great deal of research literature focuses on precollege experiences and the
“deficits” that rural students often face prior to postsecondary enrollment, few studies have
explored the rural student transitional experience of going to college. One difficult transition for
rural students attending large universities is the adjustment to the increased size of their
classrooms and campuses (Hemmings, Hill, & Ray, 1997; Maltzan, 2006; Parsons, 1992). From
relatively small rural class sizes and personal relationships with high school teachers, rural
students may experience more difficulty than their urban peers in adjusting to larger, lecture style
classrooms and limited, somewhat impersonal faculty interactions (Maltzan, 2006).
As noted by the racial/ethnic segregation in rural America, rural students may also
experience difficulty transitioning from their racially and culturally homogeneous home
environments (McIntire, Marion, & Quaglia, 1990; Pearson & Sutton, 1999) to more ethnically
and culturally diverse environments that are characteristic of larger universities (Guiffrida,
2008). In a study of rural students who attended the University of California (UC) at Berkeley,
Parsons (1992) found that rural students who left the university described being overwhelmed by
the significant amount of racial, ethnic, and cultural diversity that they experienced. Rather than
being stimulated by these new and diverse experiences, several students cited their discomfort
RURAL STUDENT PERSISTENCE
51
with diverse students and faculty at the institution as evidence that they did not fit in or belong at
a large university. Parsons (1992) also found that rural student fears about crime and homeless
people prevent rural students from experiencing the surrounding community if they attend a
large campus in an urban environment.
Broad cultural differences between rural and urban life may also add an additional burden
to rural students who are transitioning to large institutions, especially those located in urban
settings (Guiffrida, 2008). Swift (1988) found that the stress that occurs during transitions to
college may be heightened for students who must simultaneously make the transition from rural
to urban environments. Rural environments tend to be more relaxed, friendly, and collectivist in
nature, whereas urban environments tend to be more hurried, less friendly, and more competitive
(Swift, 1988). Additionally, social relationships in rural communities tend to be more personal
and closer than urban social relationships (McIntire, Marion, & Quaglia, 1990). Language
patterns and personal mannerisms also tend to differ between rural and urban communities,
which can add stress to rural students as they attempt to transition to urban universities (Swift,
1988). Challenges associated with navigating the differences between rural and urban cultures,
especially at larger colleges, can make rural students feel out of place and can lead to frequent
trips home to socialize with other “country kids” with whom they are comfortable (Maltzan,
2006).
Summary
Rural populations, while diminishing in size, are still numerous in the United States. To
help meet Completion Agenda goals set forth by the former presidential administration, it is
necessary to better understand how institutional settings may impact the first-year persistence of
this college-going population. In particular, minimal research has been conducted on rural
RURAL STUDENT PERSISTENCE
52
student populations attending urban postsecondary institutions. How do student involvement and
perceptions of mattering and marginality impact a rural student’s decision to persist beyond the
first-year at urban institutions? The lack of data, particularly current data, on rural students
experiences attending four-year institutions highlights the necessity of this study. In addition,
this study offers insight into the persistence of a distinctive college-going group within a four-
year college setting atypical for this student population. The following section will describe the
methodology chosen for this study and will describe the population and sample. Processes for
data collection and analysis will be featured and I will comment on validity and my role in the
study.
RURAL STUDENT PERSISTENCE
53
CHAPTER THREE: METHODOLOGY
Introduction
Focusing on a specific population attending college in America, this study provides a
better understanding of the issues that first-year rural students encounter on urban four-year
college campuses. With calls from political and educational leaders to increase degree
attainment, it is essential that researchers shed light on all college-going populations. To date,
minimal research has been conducted on rural student populations attending urban postsecondary
institutions. With a better grasp of how urban institutional settings may influence the first-year
persistence of rural undergraduates, higher education professionals working within urban
postsecondary settings will be able to better serve this unique student population.
Qualitative research methods were used in this study to better understand how rural
students interpret their experiences, how they construct their worlds, and what meaning these
individuals attribute to their experiences (Merriam, 2009). The study used a phenomenological
approach. This type of research is based on the assumption that there is an essence or essences
to shared experience, in this case, being a rural first-year student at a four-year urban institution.
These essences are the core meanings mutually understood through a phenomenon commonly
experienced. These experiences of different rural students are bracketed, analyzed, and
compared to identify the essences of the phenomenon (Merriam, 2009).
Brofenbrenner’s developmental ecological model (Brofenbrenner, 1974, 1977, 1979,
1989, 1993, 2005; Brofenbrenner & Morris, 2006) served as the guiding theoretical framework
for this study; however, the study also drew upon Renn and Arnold’s (2003) research on college
student peer culture using Bronfenbrenner’s model. The rural student remained the focus, with
the surrounding context understood as a critical location for interactions between the individual
RURAL STUDENT PERSISTENCE
54
and the environment (Evans, Forney, Guido, Patton, & Renn, 2010). This study sought to learn
more about how Bronfenbrenner’s microsystem, mesosystem, exosystem, and macrosystem
contexts influence the first-year persistence of rural students.
The knowledge and beliefs that rural students amass while growing up shape them in
ways that may affect their approach to the college environment. Prior experiences with family,
schooling, and community life, have primed these individuals for a variety of interactions in
college. Once in college, rural students develop new microsystems that interact to create their
experiences. Through these microsystems, such as friendship groups, clubs and organizations,
and academic classes, rural students will encounter cognitive and emotional challenges about
identity, mattering, and marginality. The framework selected for this study provided insight into
how mesosystems affect rural students at urban institutions. Are rural students able to scale
down the complexity of their new urban learning environment by successfully creating
microsystems and mesosystems that help them adapt? Do rural students participating in
multiple, interacting microsystems over time (via the chronosystem) form a mesosystem that
supports first-year persistence at urban institutions?
Given that the purpose was to gain a better understanding of the first-year experiences of
rural students at urban, four-year institutions, the following research questions were selected to
guide this study:
Main Research Question:
1. What kinds of first-year experiences affect persistence for rural students, at an urban, four-
year institution?
a. How do microsystems and mesosystems influence rural students’ decisions to persist
beyond the first-year at an urban, four-year college or university?
RURAL STUDENT PERSISTENCE
55
Population and Sample
In what Maxwell (2013) called purposeful selection, it was crucial to identify appropriate
respondents that were able to provide rich data relevant to the phenomenon. This study
employed typical, purposeful sampling, which reflected the average person involved in the
phenomenon of interest. In protecting the confidentiality of the institutions and participants
involved in this study, pseudonyms were created and are utilized from this point forward. To
identify appropriate participants, I used current student data from Hard Mountain University
(HMU).
Hard Mountain University is a large, public, four-year, land-grant university located in
the city of Kettering, situated in the Southeastern portion of the United States. According to the
2010 Census, Kettering had a population of approximately 180,000 and is located in a state with
a population of fewer than 6.5 million. Approximately 34% of the state’s population live in U.S.
Census defined rural areas. Interestingly enough, this 34% of the state’s population is spread
throughout 93% of the land in the state.
The Hard Mountain University campus is comprised of almost 600 acres and 600
buildings. HMU is a nationally recognized institution with a long rich history of culture and
tradition. The University’s founding predates 1800. While a nationally known postsecondary
institution, 90% of the degree-seeking undergraduate students are from the state where HMU is
located. In the fall of 2014, HMU had approximately 22,000 undergraduates and nearly 6,000
graduate students. The enrollment by gender is split at 50%. HMU is a predominantly White
institution with 20% of the degree-seeking undergraduate population identifying as a
racial/ethnic category other than White, non-Hispanic. The acceptance rate at HMU for first-
time, first-year freshman for fall 2014 was 75 percent; however, the matriculated fall 2014 class
RURAL STUDENT PERSISTENCE
56
had an average first-time freshman high school GPA of 3.79 and an average ACT composite
score of 27. Ninety percent of the fall 2014 incoming freshman class finished in the top quarter
of their high school.
HMU requires all first-time, first year students to live on-campus unless their permanent
residence is located within 50 miles of campus. These students may elect to commute to HMU if
they wish. In 2014, 93% of first-time, first year students lived in college-owned, -operated, or
affiliated housing. As of fall 2014, the first-year retention rate was 87% and the six-year
graduation rate was approximately 70%.
In working with the Office of the University Registrar at Hard Mountain University, this
study utilized HMU directory information to identify potential study participants. In 1974, the
Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) was established to protect the privacy of
information concerning students. While specific restrictions applied to the disclosure of
information contained in a student’s educational record, FERPA allowed certain information to
be released in a “directory” format. At HMU, directory information includes: name, semester,
local and permanent addresses, NetID, email address (university-supplied), telephone number,
classification, most recent previous educational institution attended, graduate or undergraduate
level, full-time or part-time status, college, major, dates of attendance, degrees and awards,
participation in school activities and sports, weight and height. Students at HMU may elect to be
excluded from this directory by submitting the official “Request for Directory Exclusion” form
available via the HMU Office of the University Registrar website.
Per my request, the HMU Office of the University Registrar provided directory
information that allowed me to identify potential participants. As this study had very specific
participant characteristics, I requested the following directory information: student names,
RURAL STUDENT PERSISTENCE
57
student university email addresses, and student classification for individuals from a number of
specific cities in the state where HMU is located. I provided the HMU Office of the University
Registrar a listing of rural locations in the state that met the specific population criterion of 2,500
or less. Once I received the report with my requested information, I reviewed the data to identify
sophomores, juniors, or seniors at HMU as potential study participants. This study did not
include first-year students or transfer students as participants. The majority of HMU
sophomores, juniors, or seniors identified to participate in this study were from a rural area in the
state with a population of less than 2,500. As I was unable to identify enough participants for my
study that met both my predetermined 2,500 population requirement and who were willing to
participate, I subsequently selected two students to participate from population areas of
approximately 2,800. I point this out because these two students technically are from what the
U.S. Census defined as urban cluster areas. Snowball sampling occurred in the recruitment of
one participant. While the goal was to identify a student sample that was representative of the
larger HMU demographics in gender and race/ethnicity, I was unable to indentify and secure a
representative gender sampling as two-thirds of the potential participants indentified were
female.
Once I analyzed the HMU directory information provided to me and identified potential
participants, I sent out a brief survey by way of email to prospective participants via Survey
Monkey. This survey provided a concise synopsis of the study, gauged interest, and asked
prospective participants to answer key questions to help ensure that these individuals did indeed
meet the study parameters (i.e., hometown, current year at institution). Once the appropriate and
interested participants had been selected, each was informed of the study expectations and their
rights as participants. Those willing to participate took part in a formal semi-structured
RURAL STUDENT PERSISTENCE
58
individual interview via Skype. These interviews were conducted throughout March and April
of 2017. Pseudonyms were assigned to each participant. These pseudonyms are throughout the
study in place of actual participant names.
Instrumentation
The interview protocol followed a semi-structured format. The interview was guided by
a list of questions; however, the format needed to offer flexibility to allow for expanded
questioning, clarification, and probing (Merriam, 2009). Considering Patton’s (2002) six types
of questions and Strauss, Schatzman, Bucher, and Sabashin’s (1981) four major categories of
questions, the interview protocol consisted of a number of carefully selected interview questions
relevant to noted theories and strategically tied to the guiding research questions. The final
interview protocol is included in the Appendices.
In addition to a semi-structured interview with each individual, participants were asked to
voluntarily submit unofficial college transcripts. The submission of an unofficial transcript was
not required to participate in the study and participants were notified that they could decline this
request. Individuals were able to obtain unofficial college transcripts at no cost from the
institution of record. Degree progress information with course grades accessible online to
students were permitted to suffice as unofficial transcripts. These unofficial college transcripts
were used for document analysis and provided insight into connections between interview data
and academic performance data. For example, were first-year student perceived struggles
reflected academically? To help with validity, these academic documents assisted in
triangulating data. For example, if a participant said that he/she struggled academically during
the first semester, the unofficial transcript was able to supplement the interview data by
providing a better understanding of how the participant perceived his/her academic “struggle.”
RURAL STUDENT PERSISTENCE
59
Data Collection
Once a student agreed to participate in the study, he/she was informed of the study
expectations and rights as a participant. After providing each participant with a brief purpose of
the study and interview expectations via email, all respondents granted consent to participate.
Those planning to participate took part in a formal semi-structured individual interview via
Skype. Expectations were communicated that each participant would only need to take part in
one round of interviews; however, follow up interviews could be requested depending on data
collected.
As the interviews took place via Skype, the participant and I agreed upon a designated
call time. I emphasized the need for the participant to identify a quiet location for the interview.
Ideal locations were described to participants as those with limited outside noise so that
distractions could be kept to a minimum. To ensure that technical issues did not interfere with
the collection of data, I coordinated with the participant to briefly test the Skype communication
feature prior to the start of the interview. As noted, pseudonyms were assigned to each interview
participant. These pseudonyms were then used throughout the study in place of actual
participant names. Upon initial agreement to participate in the study, all respondents were asked
for permission to audio and video record the interviews.
For individual interviews via Skype, I sat directly across from my respondents and
remained visible for the duration of the interview. A digital audio and video recording program
called Snagit was utilized to capture the interviews. In each interview, following the suggestions
of Merriam (2009), after pressing record on the audio and video program, I reintroduced myself
to my respondent, stated the purpose of the study and its confidentiality, and informed them of
their rights as participants. Using the designed interview protocol, I then asked a series of
RURAL STUDENT PERSISTENCE
60
questions, probing or asking for clarification when I deemed appropriate. Throughout the
interview I took notes on respondent comments and used these notes to guide some of my
probes. At the conclusion of each interview, I noted the length of the process and later reflected
in private upon each experience, writing a few paragraphs on each distinct interview. At the
conclusion of each interview, a Target gift card for $20 was mailed to each participant as a thank
you for participating.
Audio recordings were then sent to a transcription company, Verbal Ink, so that I could
obtain a written copy of each interview. As this study was composed of twelve participants, I
used the transcription service to conserve time. All data was kept secure in a locked storage
container in my home and on a password protected computer.
Data Analysis
With an abundance of raw data on hand, I reviewed the purpose of my study and the
accompanying research questions before setting out to code the data. Using the techniques
recommended by Merriam (2009), I created a system for coding, or a shorthand code, to help me
identify different parts of data so I could easily go back and locate related data when desired. In
a master document, I heeded the advice of Maxwell (2013) and noted organizational categories,
or broad areas and issues I wanted to investigate. I also remained open to emerging topics and
themes. As I reviewed the data, I created a consistent shorthand code to identify the locations of
specific passages and/or markers.
Once the coding procedure was complete and I had location points for all substantive
categorical data, I began the process of thinking about the data in theoretical categories
(Maxwell, 2013). Merriam (2009) and Corbin and Strauss (2008) proved to be instrumental in
this stage of analysis. I began broadly with the questioning technique suggested by Corbin and
RURAL STUDENT PERSISTENCE
61
Strauss (2008), asking myself sensitizing questions, such as, “What is the data indicating?” I
then contemplated the emotions and feelings that were provoked by specific situations or
questions mentioned in the interviews, and the important language cues that may have provided
insight into the situation. I then reviewed categorical data and looked for related themes that
helped to explain what I had set out to study and would answer my guiding research questions.
Using Bronfenbrenner’s work as the theoretical framework through which data would be
interpreted, it was important to recognize that key theories and constructs detailed in the previous
chapter could aid in the understanding of how microsystems and mesosystems impact rural
student persistence on urban college campuses.
Validity
While noting that validity is relative and that it is a property of inferences rather than
methods, I understood that it was critical to refer to the data at all times to help reduce validity
threats (Maxwell, 2013). In analyzing the data, I reminded myself of Maxwell’s (2013) validity
test checklist. As a researcher it was important to note that limitations exist in this study that
may have impacted the validity of the study. Due to time limitations prescribed to complete the
study, long-term participant observations and multiple interviews with each participant were not
conducted. These processes would have generated even more rich data that may have aided in
the analysis and could have helped to prevent any misinterpretations that may have occurred
based upon the limited data collected for the study. While strategies such as member checking
and triangulation were employed to provide reliability, it is still important to note the limitations.
Role of Researcher
It was my responsibility to ensure this study was completed in an ethical manner.
Participants and institutions were promised confidentiality and were identified throughout the
RURAL STUDENT PERSISTENCE
62
study by the use of pseudonyms. Prior to the collection of any data, participants were informed
of the purpose of the study and the participant expectations. A documentation of agreement was
collected in advance to protect all parties involved. On the day of each interview, participants
were reminded of their rights to privacy prior to the collection of data. Participants were also
reminded they had they right to refuse certain questions and that they could terminate the
interview at any time (Glesne, 2011).
It was also important to recognize my own history and bias as it relates to this study. I
am from a rural town in Ohio with a population of less than 2,000. While I recognized that not
all rural experiences are the same, my experiences growing up within a rural community and
attending a postsecondary institution in an urban setting helped to provide me with a unique
understanding and insight into the issues rural students face in making this transition. As a
qualitative researcher, it was important I let the data speak for my participants and for the study.
It is also appropriate to note I am an employee of the institution in this study. Constant reflection
helped ensure my own bias did not influence the study in an inappropriate manner. In the next
chapter, I will report the results of the study.
RURAL STUDENT PERSISTENCE
63
CHAPTER FOUR: FINDINGS
Introduction
The purpose of this study was to gain a better understanding of the issues that first-year
rural students encounter on urban four-year college campuses. With a better grasp of how urban
institutional settings may influence the first-year persistence of rural undergraduates, higher
education professionals working within urban postsecondary settings will be able to better serve
this unique student population. In this chapter, data from interviews will be presented to answer
this study’s main and guiding research questions:
Main Research Question:
1. What kinds of first-year experiences affect persistence for rural students, at an urban, four-
year institution?
a. How do microsystems and mesosystems influence rural students’ decisions to persist
beyond the first-year at an urban, four-year college or university?
Participant Profile
A participant profile has been provided to aid with transparency in reference to
participant characteristics. A total of twelve students at HMU participated in this study. Ten of
the participants were female and two were male. The preferred sample would have included an
equal number of male and female participants, but the pool of prospective participants that met
the study criteria consisted of two-thirds female and one-third male. Given that HMU is a
predominantly White institution with 20% of the degree-seeking undergraduate population
identifying as a racial/ethnic category other than White, non-Hispanic, the participants selected
for this study were representative of the institution’s student profile. Five of the participants
were in their second year at HMU and identified as sophomores, six participants were in their
RURAL STUDENT PERSISTENCE
64
third year and identified as juniors, and one student was in her fourth year at HMU and identified
as a graduating senior. It should be noted that participants Stacy and Rosa attended the same
high school, but were in different graduating classes. Snowball sampling occurred with one
participant as Katelyn recruited her friend, Stephanie. Katelyn and Stephanie both attended the
same rural high school and were in the same graduating class. For more details, including the
population of each participant’s hometown, and their high school graduation year, refer to Figure
2.
Figure 2: Participant Profile
Name Gender Race/Ethnicity Population
of
Hometown
High
School
Grad
Year
How many
years have you
been at HMU?
Is HMU the only
college/university
attended?
Stacy Female White 1,981 2015 2 (Sophomore) Yes
Mason Male White 2,383 2015 2 (Sophomore) Yes
Lily Female Asian 2,355 2014 3 (Junior) Yes
Melissa Female White 2,373 2015 2 (Sophomore) Yes
Alexa Female White 2,461 2015 2 (Sophomore) Yes
Joey Male White 1,781 2014 3 (Junior) Yes
Alicia Female White 450 2015 2 (Sophomore) Yes
Madison Female White 2,812 2014 3 (Junior) Yes
Rosa Female Hispanic
American
1,981 2014 3 (Junior) Yes
Katelyn Female White 2,306 2014 3 (Junior) Yes
Stephanie Female White 2,306 2013 3 (Junior) Yes
Aria Female White 2,850 2013 4 (Senior) Yes
Themes that Influence Persistence
Prior experiences with family, schooling, and community life have prepared rural
students for a variety of interactions in college. Participants in this study elaborated upon these
prior experiences and described their social and academic adjustment to this new urban school
setting. This chapter is organized by the salient themes identified by the data. These themes are
described below.
RURAL STUDENT PERSISTENCE
65
The Role of Family and Community Support
Participants in this study often cited that parents and family members were supportive of
the decision to enroll and persist at HMU. This family support is important because support was
not always mirrored in the high school or in the rural community. While many parents and
family members of participants initially had concerns with the distance, or the size of the
institution, they were all supportive of the decision made by their student. Ten participants
spoke about the sense of excitement and pride their parents and family members expressed at
their acceptance and decision to enroll at HMU. Joey stated,
They were absolutely ecstatic. As soon as I got my acceptance letter, my mom comes in
crying, giving me a big hug and is like – she couldn’t believe it. And I even called my
dad, and he was freaking out. She went on Facebook and posted everywhere, everywhere
she could. I remember one time we were at Wal-Mart and she met this one lady and she
was talking about her kids and she’s like, “You wouldn’t believe what happened to my
son!” I felt like a superstar for a little bit, you know? And everyone was like, “I can’t
believe you’re – you’re already practically a doctor!”
Aria expressed her parents’ initial apprehensive response to her admittance, their inability to
comprehend the details, and their eventual acceptance of her decision to enroll. She explained,
Since I’ve been a senior in high school, I’ve been a foreign species to my parents and
family. So when I first started talking to them about going to this school, they didn’t take
me seriously. They thought I would be going to the local four-year school, but they
would let me dream of this idea. Then when the scholarships started coming in, and I
started talking to them about dorms, it started getting real. My dad started calling friends
that he knew that lived in the area and giving me a list of people that I could call if I
needed, and they really wanted to be financially supportive. I remember that becoming a
conversation, and I knew that it wasn’t possible for them, so I just decided to tell them
that they just shouldn’t. So it wasn’t like they said, sorry, we can’t afford it. It was me
saying, I want this to be my thing, and that was kind of how I framed it, was like, I want
this to be something I’ve done on my own, and that way they could just think I was
stubborn and not have to worry about the money part. So I think for them that was a big
factor until I said that. Then it was the distance. So my mom, she went through all the
stages of grief. We talked about how often I would come home, and all of the things we
could do here, and they could come to the basketball games, and the football games, and
RURAL STUDENT PERSISTENCE
66
they did. I think they – they just couldn’t participate in the conversation, like whenever I
was trying to think about things or think through things, my dad would just say, “We
support you.” Because like, he didn’t know what going Greek was and he didn’t know
anything about the city. When it came to college he knew nothing at all. So honestly
they couldn’t say much in the conversation. They were just supportive. Once it became
real, my mom works in the bank, and that’s where everybody comes, to the bank, so she
was telling everybody like, “My daughter’s going to HMU. She starts this day. She’s
going to be this major, and I don’t really know what that is but she says it’s something
like this.”
Others in her rural community offered mixed sentiments of support. Aria noted,
I worked at a local grocery store at the time, so soon as word got out that I was going to
go to HMU, everybody in town would be coming in going, I heard you you’re going to
HMU. It’s fine if you come home, don’t worry. Everybody that I talked to – there was
never one person that said, oh my gosh, you’re going to love it. They all said you will
probably come home and that’s okay. Don’t worry about it. If it’s too big, don’t worry,
we love you, we support you. It was never like, oh my gosh, I could totally see you there.
According to Aria, the school counselor in the school shied away from recommending students
to the urban option of HMU. In recounting her college search preparation, Aria explained,
Our counselor made us all apply to the local four-year school. When I talked to her about
going to HMU, she told me I would come back, and I will always remember that, because
I think – I’m a very strong willed person so part of that made me even more just want to
get away. I know she said – she was pretty discouraging whenever it came to not going
to the local four-year school. There was nobody from my school that went anywhere
other than the local four-year school or just stayed in the area, so I was just very
abnormal, and she just didn’t know how to handle the situation, but her son went to HMU
and so that’s why she was like – he really didn’t like it. He felt like it was too big, and
wasn’t personal, and blah, blah, blah. And she definitely wasn’t bringing anybody in to
talk about their experience, which is something that I tried to do is contact her since my
freshman year, and say hey, can I come in? Can I speak? I haven’t been able to yet. She
hasn’t given me that opportunity, but I hope she does, because I think hearing from
somebody else would be really important.
Alicia, a legacy student at HMU, details how her family supported her decision and eventual
matriculation. She stated,
RURAL STUDENT PERSISTENCE
67
My parents were all for it. They’ve been very supportive and they have always wanted
me to attend college and thought I’d be able to do so. If I did not choose HMU, I believe
they still would be supportive, but of course with it being my parent’s school, they were
very excited and very helpful along the way. My mom helped me move-in and then she
was able to stay a few days after I moved in. I moved in a week or so before classes
started for sorority recruitment. And so, she stayed a few days during that to get me
acquainted and made sure that I didn’t forget anything at home and just made sure
everything was okay.
According to Mason, family support is not always a given in rural communities. He recounted
the culture in his community, stating,
My mom, who is a teacher, was talking to one of her students. I think they were probably
in fifth or sixth grade. He came up, my mom told him that he could go to college and the
boy said, no, I can’t. My parents told me I couldn’t. We don’t have enough money. So
even in elementary school, they’re being told they can’t go to college by their parents.
And that’s kind of how the whole culture is, really. They just think it’s unattainable.
Affordability
In speaking with participants about the factors that they considered when deciding to
enroll at HMU, nearly all mentioned cost and/or affordability. Hard Mountain University is a
public institution, and as all of the participants are residents of the state in which HMU is
located, all participants pay reduced in-state tuition costs. Madison, like her participant peers,
noted how cost affected her decision. She stated,
So my final decision came down to two schools – HMU and an out-of-state private
school. I sort of sat down, when I got the offers, ‘cause then you had a bunch of
scholarships coming from HMU and, obviously, it was in-state, and then there was the
out-of-state private school, so the cost was a little bit different. So my parents were just
like, “Well, feasibly, we can’t do the out-of-state private.” So HMU was relatively close
anyway, and cheaper, so I was like, “Yeah, that’d be fine.”
RURAL STUDENT PERSISTENCE
68
Aria also echoed the importance of cost in her decision to attend HMU. She stated, “The most
important factor in my decision was money because I knew that I would be paying on my own.”
For some, specific state programs provided an opportunity to receive reduced tuition
rates. Mason noted,
I was fortunate enough to receive scholarships, and it really wasn’t that expensive in the
first place, and since my mom’s a teacher I get twenty-five percent off tuition at any
public university in the state. So that was really cool.
Despite not participating in ROTC in high school, Stacy joined ROTC at HMU as an option to
help fund her education. She stated,
The way I was raised I was like, I’m not ever gonna be a burden on my parents for my
education. At first I was like, “What am I doing?” You got to look professional every
day. You got to dress up in a suit. I hated it, but I was doing it because they gave me a
full ride. I’m just gonna go through it.
As the participants noted the importance of cost, nearly half still sought out employment during
the first-year, with mixed results. Katelyn spoke about why she decided to work while at HMU
and about the challenges that she faced juggling both work and school. She stated,
I don’t like being a financial burden to my parents. So it made me feel uncomfortable
having to ask for money constantly for food and stuff like that. I was like, I can just
make my own money. I didn’t work the first semester, but I worked at a restaurant about
thirty minutes away from campus the second semester. I was working five days a week
and going to school five days a week. I worked close to forty hours a week. They would
never let me go over forty, but they would let me work right up to it. I got very stressed
out and was staying up and not sleeping. I would stay up the full night and never go to
bed, and finish writing my papers for my business writing class and stuff. And that was
really stressful for me.
RURAL STUDENT PERSISTENCE
69
Academic Preparedness and Ability to Adapt to Rigor
As noted earlier, the acceptance rate at HMU for first-time, first-year freshman for fall
2014 was 75 percent; however, the matriculated fall 2014 class had an average first-time
freshman high school GPA of 3.79 and an the average ACT composite score of 27. Ninety
percent of the fall 2014 incoming freshman class finished in the top quarter of their high school.
While not all high schools are equal in terms of rigor and college preparedness, the academic
numbers highlighted above at HMU would indicate that the vast majority of matriculated first-
time, first-year freshman would likely be prepared for the academics they would encounter at
HMU. While participants in this study boasted strong academic backgrounds at their respective
high schools, ten of the twelve students were vocal and spoke with emotion when commenting
on just how underprepared they were for HMU. Many students commented on the ease with
which they skated through high school. Mason described his frustration,
I wish that we had teachers that would have pushed us, instead of just doing the bare
minimum. High school was a cakewalk for me. I don’t really remember like any class
that I struggled in, honestly. And if we just, I mean, I’d be fine with making lower grades
if I was actually learning. And at my high school there’s just this culture of oh, if you get
a good grade you’re smart.
Joey commented on the test score focus and on the lack of teacher motivation. He stated,
The teachers prepped everyone for our ACT, because they wanted a great score – that
was really what was the most important thing was trying to get their scores up. When I
was brought up to the fast paced math, at least once a week, our teacher, he would
[laughter], we’d go in, he’d solve a problem, and he said, “You guys want a free day
today?” and then we’d watch movies. He was also the offensive coordinator for our
football team, so he’d send us to lunch early so that he could use that time for himself.
Rosa noted the perception that students in her high school have about those who enroll at HMU.
She stated,
RURAL STUDENT PERSISTENCE
70
The way that people were perceived when they went to HMU was that like, “Oh, they’re
super smart. They’re going to HMU.
Katelyn reflected on the ease of her high school experience and how she felt underprepared for
HMU. She stated,
In high school, academically, there wasn’t anything challenging. I went into college not
knowing that I was supposed to study for things. I flew through all of my classes in high
school. It was basically, I could look over the materials before class, take the test, and
pass. I had all A’s. I took so many Biology classes in high school, I thought taking Bio
at HMU would be a breeze. And I got in there, and the first test, I made a 60. And I was
like, I had never made a grade like that in my life, and I was so taken aback. So for the
next one I had to teach myself to study. And I have attention problems, so I couldn’t
really pay attention to the lecture. I would just look around the room and stuff and not
learn the material like I should have. And I would have to teach myself at night. And
that was super stressful. I really had to teach myself how to study and how to focus in
class especially.
Math and science courses were not the only areas where participants felt frustrated with their
high school education. Katelyn, a business student, explained how the lack of options in her
high school left her unprepared for HMU. She stated,
I honestly did not get the type of education I should have gotten from high school at all.
Knowing the people that I know now, I talk to them about their high school and they
were able to take marketing classes in high school and stuff like that. And the only
business classes we were ever offered were like typing, and learning how to balance a
balance sheet and stuff. The personal finance class I took in high school was all about
writing checks and keeping your checkbook. And that was just irrelevant for what I was
learning in college. I was super behind everyone else. I would say that a lot of my high
school teachers wanted to be better than we were, but it was just a matter of we weren’t
allowed to have any more AP classes. That’s what I was told. So I think a lot of it comes
from money and stuff like that, that the school wasn’t able to give as many programs as
they would have liked to.
Stephanie discussed the poor job her high school did in preparing her for HMU and how she
struggled to make up the ground her first year on campus. She stated,
RURAL STUDENT PERSISTENCE
71
Being from such a small high school kind of set me up for failure. I breezed through high
school. I didn’t study. I could do my homework in ten minutes. I was on the smarter
side in high school, but was not prepared for college whatsoever. I was not prepared for
the workload, the intensity, or the difficulty. It was easy A’s in high school. It just felt
like the teachers didn’t really care that they were being so easy. It would just be like
memorization and spit the information back out. You never really had to apply what you
were learning. I think I struggled my first year because of my high school. I would have
classmates that would come from more – not like rich, but better high schools, like
private and magnet schools, and they would have no problem. They’d be like, “Oh yeah,
that homework was easy,” or they would just have no problem getting a concept that
would take me probably a good hour or so to read through and really dissect it. They
would have no problem doing all of their work, managing their time, because that’s what
they did in high school. It was time consuming trying to make that improvement from
high school to college, being not behind, but having to change my studying style and my
time management. It was time consuming trying to figure out how to reach that level that
I needed to be for class.
Aria, one of the top academic students in her former high school, spoke about how her high
school experience left her feeling behind her HMU classmates in multiple ways. She noted how
this made her feel unintelligent and out of place. She stated,
When it comes to anything historical, I feel like I don’t have any context on who certain
people were, and I can’t remember a history teacher that’s taught me anything concrete,
so that’s been one of the main things about my high school education is that I felt like I
had a lot of catching up to do when I got to HMU. I feel like my school didn’t teach me
things that I needed to know. For example, I was speaking with some other HMU
students, and they were having a conversation about Stephen Hawking, and I was like,
who’s Stephen Hawking? Everybody looked at me and just stared. I won’t say that’s
how everything is, but that’s how so many things were, when it came to pop culture,
when it came to references to things that everybody else had read in school. So whenever
it came to having cultural discussions about things everybody else grew up knowing and
learning, I felt really out of place. Classes were hard, and in my Spanish class, I would
stay up every night until 1:00 in the morning working on Spanish homework then going
to the class the next morning at 8:00 am. I didn’t have any idea what was going on and
that was frustrating because I was salutatorian of my high school. Then I came here and I
felt stupid.
Stacy, an engineering student at HMU, described her frustration in realizing that she was
underprepared for college. She stated,
RURAL STUDENT PERSISTENCE
72
I made it through all of the hard classes my freshman year with that little my high school
gave me to back it up. I really didn’t have a good backbone though. A lot of the other
engineering students that went to my high school that are also in – they’re about the same
thing. They’re like, “Our high school, man. Our high school just really screwed us.” I
remember I was in a huge class of 600 in the beginning. These people knew exactly what
to do. They knew how to lecture. We had lecture and then we had labs. I thought I was
really getting the concepts. I really did until I got the first test. I was like, “I’m probably
gonna make a 90 or above on this.” I’ll never forget. I got a 67, and I literally cried my
eyes out for the rest of the day I felt so bad about myself. And the average was about a
70. I was like, “How am I below average?” I did not understand that at all. I studied.
It’s a whole other level of studying I guess. So I tried again and I got better. I think I got
a 72, but I was a straight A student. It kind of pissed me off to think that I wasn’t
adequate enough for this engineering thing. It was a struggle. It really was. I was just
really shocked and I knew it was because back at my high school they did not prepare us
enough and they didn’t really care.
Similar to her peers in this study, Alexa explained the lack of rigor at her high school and how it
left her unprepared for HMU. She stated,
I took every math course our high school offered. It’s not challenging at all, which was
the biggest difference coming to HMU, was we weren’t challenged a whole lot. My
Calculus class was probably the closest thing that I was prepared for, because I had a
very similar course. But other than that, I wasn’t prepared at all. I was in Chemistry I
class in high school, and we barely scratched the surface. I didn’t feel very prepared at
all for that or for my physics class.
Alicia commented on the different learning expectations comparing her high school experience
to her first-year at HMU. She stated,
My high school probably didn’t prepare me the best for this. You kind of halfway pay
attention in high school courses and you get A’s easily. It’s not the case with most
college courses. My high school didn’t really prepare me for that kind of hands-on
experience and really thinking and getting into the details of concepts. It was more
black-and-white in high school. Things were either A, B, or C.
RURAL STUDENT PERSISTENCE
73
Rosa noted that she felt academically unprepared and nervous to enroll at HMU, even before she
set foot on campus. Her fear turned to stress when she realized that she was correct about her
lack of preparation. She stated,
I was so scared of coming to HMU because I really did not think I was ready. It was
really hard for me going to HMU because I wasn’t used to, I guess like, studying because
my high school didn’t really prepare me for that. High school wasn’t hard at all, and then
going to HMU, it was hard, which made me stressed out because I’m so used to being in
control of something, like being able to make good grades without really thinking about
it.
While the majority of participants in this study felt underprepared for HMU, there were
those that did feel their high school experience prepared them adequately. Two students noted
dual enrollment courses in high school as the reason for their HMU academic preparedness. Lily
noted, “I would argue that the dual enrollment courses I took better prepared me than the high
school itself did.” Melissa, who attended a high school that she said had a strong reputation for
academics in her county, cited dual enrollment as a means to promoting college at her high
school,
We had a lot of dual enrollment classes that were offered starting our junior year. So
basically senior year I was just taking dual enrollment, like statistics and English and
stuff that would count for both high school and college. They really pushed dual
enrollment on us. Really, that was our goal, was to prepare us for school, for university.
So I think they did a pretty good job on that.
For the majority of participants who felt, or who realized, they were underprepared for
the academic rigor, teaching style, or time dedication needed to be successful at HMU, adapting
to this challenge became vital. For some, like Katelyn, seeking academic help on campus did not
seem like an option. She stated,
RURAL STUDENT PERSISTENCE
74
I was terrified of my professors. I didn’t realize that you were able to build that kind of
relationship with them. I kind of just treated them all like my high school treated it. I
didn’t realize that people were supposed to go to office hours, I thought that was just if
you were stupid. I basically just assumed I should teach myself, and if I couldn’t do that
I didn’t deserve to be in college. So I would stay in the library until 6:00 am studying
and stuff and writing my papers.
Like Katelyn, Alicia didn’t utilize campus resources for academic aid; however, she developed
study strategies and sought the help of her peers when needed. She stated,
I didn’t use tutoring my first year. I don’t really know why I didn’t. I often studied by
myself. The library became my best friend. I would make my own flashcards and go
over there. For my speech class, I would often write my speech on my own, kind of go
over it in my head, say it to myself and then I would have either my roommate or my
suitemates help me and they’d listen to my speech so that I could better memorize it.
Aria discussed how she heeded the advice she received at HMU orientation and how utilizing
faculty office hours impacted her in a positive way. She stated,
I remember going to my psychology professor’s office hours, and he was the first
professor that I went to his office hours, and I went from a 65 on a test to a 90 in his
office hours. I remember calling my dad and being like, I am a believer. I will always go
to office hours. A lot of my classes were like that my freshman year, because I really
wanted to know my professors, and I wanted them to know me, and I remember that was
the advice that we got as a freshman group of students coming to HMU, at orientation
was like, know your professors, go to their office hours.
Stephanie shared her process of academic adaptation by utilizing tutoring services at HMU. She
stated,
About halfway through the semester I realized I was not doing as good as I wanted to,
and I went to my academic advisor about what I should do. She actually informed me
that my grades weren’t that terrible. I ended up with B’s in most of my classes, but
coming from pretty much breezing through high school with easy A’s, it was a wake up
call to be like, “You were really great in high school and now you’re normal. You need
to adjust.” For calculus, I sought out tutoring. I was actually really good at calculus, but
it was my teacher. My teacher made it a lot more difficult than it needed to be, so I had
RURAL STUDENT PERSISTENCE
75
to go to tutoring just to catch up with what he was expecting. I knew the basics and I
could do the homework easily, but his tests were very, very advanced compared to his
homework. So I had to go to tutoring just to kind of get that step up from the homework
to the exams, which the tutoring helped me a lot. It definitely saved my grade in there.
Like Stephanie, Rosa commented on her positive experiences with tutoring at HMU. She stated,
I went to the math and writing tutoring centers a lot. My professors recommended it and
I’m bad at writing. They were really helpful there. They’ll like answer everything to the
best of their knowledge.
Alexa shared mixed feelings on her experiences with tutoring; however, she sought out the help
of peers when needed. She stated,
I went to a tutoring place a few times. It was somewhat helpful, but not really because a
lot of it is the students there. They would rather just give you the answers than try to
teach you. I had friends in my physics and calculus classes, so we would meet up and go
over a few of the problems together, kind of talk through it. That was probably the most
helpful for me.
Putting in the additional time to study and/or use campus resources had its trade-offs. Stacy
elaborated on the internal struggle to utilize tutoring versus using that time for socializing. She
stated,
I used tutoring services as much as I could. Honestly getting down to the end probably
twice a week I had to go and work on homework and really try to figure it out. It’s so
time consuming that all I cared about was just getting it done. It’s horrible. I really
should have focused more on learning it and going slow. I just wanted to be social and I
guess I just wanted to branch out from that country-ness I guess and meet different
people from all over the world. That was more appealing to me than sitting down for
hours and trying to learn something.
RURAL STUDENT PERSISTENCE
76
Development of Key Relationships
From academic to social, students often noted the formation of multiple key relationships
that would prove to be important during that first year at HMU. While the majority of key
relationships cited were formed in a social or informal setting, over half of the participants noted
the importance of relationships they had formed with academic advisors and/or professors.
Madison reflected upon on the importance of one relationship she had with an English professor
that first semester of her freshman year. She stated,
That professor was really, really sweet, and she helped me feel like it was okay to speak
up in class because I was one of only two freshmen in that class. It wasn’t a general
education class, so I felt really awkward at very first because it was a class of mostly
seniors and juniors and a few sophomores. The point of the class was to write fiction, so
we had to give someone a story we had written and talk about it. I didn’t wanna talk
about it, so I was really freaked out at first, like, “Oh crap. I’m gonna be writing stuff as
an 18-year-old, and we’ve got 21-year-olds who actually know that they’re doing. It’s
gonna be weird.” But she was really nice and she always made the class feel totally cool
to speak up with whatever you have to say.
Stephanie recalled the relationship she had with her Spanish instructor during her first year and
how it was essential to her success. She stated,
I had been placed into an intermediate level course, and I probably needed to be in a basic
course. I connected with my teacher because she kind of just helped me catch up to be
where I needed to be. I was definitely in the wrong class, but she helped me catch up to
what I needed to do. I was pretty close with her those first two semesters.
Recalling a faculty member who also served as an advisor in her specific college, Alicia noted,
I had an awesome advisor. The Agriculture faculty made an effort if they worked with
me, especially as advisors. They would get to know my interests and they would – they
really helped me get pointed in the right direction.
RURAL STUDENT PERSISTENCE
77
Aria discussed changing her major during her second semester, and the importance of that initial
meeting with her new advisor. She stated,
I met my new advisor in the College of Business, and he was part of a recruitment team
for the honors business college program that studies abroad their sophomore year, and
they take classes together throughout the rest of their collegiate experience. We talked
about the program and about what I wanted out of life at the time and he saw something
in me in that meeting and I’m so thankful because I did become a part of that community.
I cannot imagine my experience in college without it. He was instrumental. Throughout
that second semester we met two or three times talking through the process. When I got
into the community he knew me by name and knew so much about me, and that meant a
lot to me that someone knew me and wanted to know me.
In addition to faculty and advisors at HMU, participants in this study made key
connections that first year with a variety of individuals on campus. Stacy, an ROTC student,
described the importance of the relationship she formed with her squadron commander. She
stated,
She was a young lady and she was also in the same academic college as me. I just looked
up to her and she actually took me under her wing and showed me the ropes and how to
survive as a college student with all the stress that it gives you. She was a junior when I
was a freshman. I got lucky with that and I’m still really good friends with her.
While some participants noted negative freshman year roommate experiences, nearly half
commented on the significance of their roommate relationships in their transition to HMU. Aria,
a senior at HMU, recalled her first-year roommate and the importance of that relationship. She
stated,
We’re not close anymore, but she was huge in helping me in every way. Obviously with
every roommate there are going to be difficulties and there were definite reasons why we
didn’t stay close, but she helped me to talk through and work through so many of the
things I was dealing with as far as the transition from high school and some of the things
that happened in my senior year of high school. I honest to God think I would have spent
a lot of time in my room in the dark with how to go forward if it wasn’t for her.
RURAL STUDENT PERSISTENCE
78
While Alexa did not get along with her roommate, she did form a close bond with her suitemate,
a girl she had not known prior to enrolling at HMU. She stated,
That’s a very important friendship that we have. I don’t know if I’d still be here without
her actually. She made everything a lot easier and better, more fun.
Katelyn, while she got along with her roommate, also formed a close relationship with her
suitemate that proved to be key that first year. She stated,
She kept me going through it. Encouraged me when I was really worn out at work and
stuff. To just keep pushing. And would help me keep my grades up. She was very
focused on her academics. She would help me stay focused.
Stephanie, who is from the same rural town and high school graduation class as Katelyn, talked
about the significance of having her hometown friend with her at HMU that first year. While
they were not roommates, they still lived in the same residence hall. Stephanie stated,
If I was ever struggling with being homesick or just didn’t feel good about a test or
something, she (Katelyn) would definitely keep me motivated and cheer me up. I think
freshman year she was probably the biggest factor of helping me. She was really there
for me if I was having struggles. In the same sense, I was there for her too. We were
both from a small town and we could rely on our friendship. She knew the struggles I
was going through and she understood. So it was definitely nice to have someone that
was going through the same situations as me.
While he noted his roommate as the most important relationship he developed that first year,
Mason, similar to Stephanie, found connections and bonds with other rural students at HMU. He
stated,
A friend of mine here is from the same kind of small-minded, close-minded view place
where I’m from, so we kind of connected on that. And we’re both just relieved to kind of
RURAL STUDENT PERSISTENCE
79
be in a more open-minded worldly-view community. And even people that I work with,
I’ve talked to, at HMU, who are from mainly small towns on the far side of the state, they
say, “Oh yeah, I don’t want to go back there. There’s no jobs.”
A few participants in this study even noted their roommates, like themselves, were from rural
communities. Madison, for example, had a roommate from her same rural hometown. Joey’s
roommate at HMU was a high school friend with whom he had known and grown up. Melissa,
when her initial roommate moved out, had a high school friend move in with her that second
semester on campus. While the majority of participants may not have had roommates from rural
communities, some of these participants noted it was not uncommon for their former classmates
and friends to room with each other at HMU.
Those study participants who had boyfriends/girlfriends prior to enrolling at HMU, and
those who established a romantic relationship that first year, commented on how those
relationships and experiences impacted their freshman year. Joey recounted how important his
relationship is with a girl that he met on campus that first year. He stated,
I met my girlfriend that first year, and we’re still together today, so I would say that our
relationship was very important that freshman year. She was from an even smaller town
than I. We met at orientation and we had a couple of classes together. She was also pre-
med, and I gotta say, she really helped – she was very, very helpful. I was going through
all of this partying stuff my first year, and she was the one who was like, “You gotta stop.
You gotta stop.” She wasn’t into it. She was like, “School is more important. You can
always do that.” She was like, “I know it’s not the same, but that stuff can wait.” She
had a lot clearer head on her shoulders at the time. And she was like, “I know that’s what
college kids do. I know that, I know all of that. But if you ruin your GPA now, it’s over,
because it’s a rock.”
Stacy discussed the relationship she formed that first year and how she benefited from it. She
stated,
RURAL STUDENT PERSISTENCE
80
He and I were both in engineering programs and going through the same thing together.
He pushed me a lot to keep going and he was really adequate on studying. We were a
really good team together. I was really adequate on working out. So it was a good
balance. We tried to get the most of our life, studying and school and having a good time
at the same time. He definitely helped me. Even though we broke up we’re still really
good friends and we respect each other. So I got lucky with that.
Like Stacy, Mason reflected on a similar positive relationship he had with a girl he met on
campus. He stated,
I met a girl in my Arabic class and we did homework together. I actually wound up, I
guess you could say, dating her for about two or three months. That was definitely an
important, and really good relationship my freshman year. And we’re still friends now,
so that’s good. We’re still in the same Arabic class and we’ve been, this is our fourth
semester of Arabic together. So we’ve definitely had a relationship, a strong relationship
in that time.
Involvement
Participants in this study listed quite a few ways in which they became involved in the
campus community at HMU. Before proceeding, it’s important to note that while the previous
section addressed key participant relationships, including those with faculty, roommates, and
romantic interests, several key relationships were also formed via campus involvement at HMU
and will be referenced in this section. All participants in this study noted partaking in some form
of campus engagement, or involvement, during that first year. Many participants commonly
listed things like attending athletic events, taking part in intramurals, and participating in clubs or
organizations. Even those who shied away from these types of reoccurring activities or
commitments still participated in alternative campus programming, such as guest speakers on
campus, residence hall events, and the year-end campus concert. Aria discussed the importance
of involvement in her first year, noting how these experiences and challenges helped her grow.
She stated,
RURAL STUDENT PERSISTENCE
81
I think that being involved made the transition quicker. For me, being a part of
organizations, it’s funny now, still really funny, really brought me from being really
closed off to a lot of cultural norms to being a person that was well acclimated. Now I
can adapt. Being in those organizations helped me see the people that I work well with
and the people that I don’t, and the things that I liked. So being able to be in a lot of
different groups that year taught me about how to love myself despite the reactions of
other people, with who I am, and how to be okay with not being good or not liking
something, because that was okay. They taught me to challenge myself. Joining a
sorority was a huge boundary pushing experience. So I think it taught me that I was able
to push those boundaries and I could get through that and to the other side, and I actually
loved it as a result.
Half of the students in this study participated in a Living and Learning Community (LLC) during
year one. According to these participants, their HMU LLC experiences were very positive.
Mason commented on how his LLC helped him to meet individuals at HMU with similar
interests. He stated,
I lived in an LLC that was public policy centered. So I was living with students and
around students that had similar interests as me. We were able to form a group of ten of
us that were really, really close friends and I think that was probably the biggest thing
that helped me get comfortable with the university. I don’t know what I would have done
without it, honestly. Just being able to meet all those people through that has been
amazing.
Now a sophomore, Alicia noted her experiences and the sense of community formed in her LLC.
She stated,
I think the most positive social organization I experienced was my living and learning
community. I was in an LLC where everyone on my floor was an agriculture major and
I’m very thankful for that opportunity. The LLC was recommended to me by my brother.
He is also an agriculture major. He did not live in an LLC but he had friends that did and
he always would tell me about how diverse their friend group was. And so, with his
advice, I went after it and I’m so happy I did. He’s right. Because of this, I have a totally
diverse friend group. I’m still in contact with them today even though I no longer live on
campus. Most of them don’t either. But I see them on the agriculture campus and it’s
like a little reunion every day. We have a group message so if anyone wants to get lunch
together or we still have classes together so they are always good to study with, or if I
RURAL STUDENT PERSISTENCE
82
have a question about what a homework assignment is, they are still always there just like
they were the first year.
Introduced to the concept of LLCs by her high school guidance counselor, Madison, a junior,
reflected on how she benefited from her LLC. She stated,
I was in an LLC specifically for leadership and service, so the thing was that every girl on
the floor was there because they were gonna be in the same one-hour class with me and
do service together, so I was like, “Yeah, that’d be a good way to meet people,” and it
was super cool. I’m currently living with a girl who was in that LLC.
Madison’s roommate moved out after the first semester, and she commented on how it soon
became a unique and welcoming space within her LLC community. She stated,
I knew everybody on my floor well enough that it became - “Madison’s Sanctuary,” so
anytime anybody had a problem or something, they would all come and lay on my floor
like, “Madison, I need help.” And so it was like the group community room, and it was
really fun. I made an Excel form and people would put down times they wanted to talk.
Lily noted why she decided to join an LLC at HMU. She stated,
I figured it would provide me with an opportunity to meet more people who were kind of
in the same boat as me in terms of academic plans and things like that. And HMU had
just opened a new dorm on campus and the LLC was based there so that increased my
chances of getting in.
Aria commented on the expectations and similarities of her peers within her HMU Honors LLC.
She stated,
I did live with all honors students and I did like that. Because when I came home and I
wanted to study during the day, it was understood. Whenever I was up late at night, it
was understood and supported by the people around me. All of us wanted to do well
academically, and then it felt like the community had events going on.
RURAL STUDENT PERSISTENCE
83
Aria also reflected on how the women in her LLC helped her navigate the sorority recruitment
process, which was a totally new experience for her. She stated,
I went through the sorority recruitment process at HMU the first week on campus and it
was crazy because a lot of these girls have been bred to be in a sorority, and I was not,
and so I started realizing really quickly that the way I dressed and the way I talked was
very different than the other people. I feel like – I try to be an adaptable person, but you
can’t really adapt that much in a week. So I remember not getting on with the girls so
well because we were just very different. So my roommate kind of took me under her
wing as this little experiment, and she helped me pick out outfits for all the different days
of recruitment, and talk me through maybe some of the conversations I should have
because her older sisters were in sororities. I ended up joining a sorority. I called my
friend back home every day, literally. I remember being so confused by the way that
people dress. There’s this oversize t-shirt and track shorts thing that is popular with
sorority girls. I had never seen that before. At first I thought girls were naked and just
walking around campus naked, and I was really confused. Things like that were very
foreign. I made two of my best friends in the whole world in that sorority. When I was a
high school student, whenever I was scared to come to HMU, my biggest fear for me was
not having friends, and it wasn’t just not having friends, it was not having friends who
were like, real, real friends. They showed me that that was possible, and they were going
to love me, and work with me, and be friends with me, even if I wasn’t exactly like them.
Aside from Aria and Alicia, Melissa was the only other participant in this study who decided to
go through sorority recruitment. She commented on the benefits of that experience, stating,
I rushed a sorority but ended up dropping because I didn’t like the one I got. But rush
itself introduced me to a lot of people and I’m still friends with them today, those people
I met during that first week of rush.
In the previous section, Katelyn noted how working many hours caused her to struggle
with balancing work, school, and social life. Two participants in the study however, described
how positive work experiences influenced their first-year experience. Joey, who worked for the
HMU Office of Information Technology as a student assistant in the library, discussed how his
manager at work had become something of a mentor. He stated,
RURAL STUDENT PERSISTENCE
84
He was a mentor of sorts, one that I didn’t really have. I mean, I love my parents to
death, but they didn’t have a clue what to do. My mom’s like, “You’re in college, you’re
doing better than me.” And I’m like – what do I do with that? It feels like I’ve always
been on my own. And my manager at work was like, “You need to choose what you’ll
be happy with and you need to work on it. It’s something that you’ll figure out in time.”
Stephanie, who worked in the apparel shop on campus, talked about the social aspects of her job
and the escapism that it offered. She stated,
I think that working has helped my social life. My work friends are probably some of my
closest friends. They don’t so much understand the school part of it, because most of
them are older and they’re out of school already, but I did work with several students. So
it was nice being able to come to work and just shut your mind off from homework for a
little bit and just interact with customers. It’s fun because you always meet new people.
I think coming in to work always improved my mood, just because I didn’t have to worry
about doing my homework, and it could just be a stress-free environment.
In addition to the LLC experience, Greek life, and employment on campus, students also
commented on other HMU organizations or commitments from which they benefited. While
Stacy has had her frustrations with being in ROTC, she still recognizes the program’s importance
to her success, by saying, “ROTC has taught me a lot about honesty and discipline. It’s kind of
kept me afloat in a weird way.” Madison recounted her experience with getting involved early
and finding like-minded individuals in her first semester. She stated,
There was a student organization fair, and I found this satirical newspaper at the fair, and
I was like, “Oh, this sounds awesome,” so I joined it. And I think, the first week or two
of school, they had the first meeting, and I really liked those people, so it was really cool
to get to meet – and they were all older too, so I got to meet a bunch of older students
who knew their stuff, and we would hang out, and it was really cool.
Willingness to Interact with New Cultures, Peoples, and Beliefs
The participants in this study all came from homogenous communities in rural areas
throughout the state where HMU is located. Many voiced their excitement to experience
RURAL STUDENT PERSISTENCE
85
something new as a deciding factor to attend HMU. This sense of exploration and desire to meet
new individuals may have helped in the transition to a much more diverse community. In her
rationale for choosing HMU, Rosa simply said, “I wanted to move to the city. I guess I just like
the culture around here.” Like Rosa, Katelyn was ready to leave her hometown as well. She
stated,
I basically was just never happy in this town. I knew that I would prefer to be basically
anywhere else and meet new people. When I got my acceptance letter for HMU, I
instantly enrolled and started signing up for all that. I just, my, personally I wasn’t even
thinking about academics. I just wanted to get out. I had a friend from home that was
also going to go to HMU and we were going to room together, and she lasted six months.
One semester. And then she moved back home. Said she couldn’t be away from home
that long. And I completely was the other direction. Never wanted to come back home.
In adjusting to the diversity at HMU, Katelyn commented,
It was really easy and really exciting. I’ve always loved different cultures, different,
diverse groups and stuff. So I’ve, I’ve enjoyed it going to HMU. I was super excited to
realize the different cultures that are like all foreign exchange students. I was so excited
about it. My friend that came to HMU with me from my hometown was always taken
aback by how many different people were at the university. I was like, no, it’s awesome!
As one of the two underrepresented students in this study, Lily commented on the diversity of
HMU and how she planned to benefit from it. She stated,
It was really refreshing, actually just to kind of see people from all walks of life in
general. I felt like in a way it would kind of prepare me for what to expect whenever I
get a job and things like that.
Mason described the differences that he encountered and the relationship that he formed with his
random roommate pairing in his LLC. He stated,
RURAL STUDENT PERSISTENCE
86
I didn’t know anything about him. We moved in the same day and that’s when I met
him. I was wondering, because I’m a Christian, he was an atheist, so that was a, I mean,
we had a lot of, not really back and forth. We never argued about it. We just pretty
much, this is what you believe, this is what I believe. But I didn’t know what to expect.
But now, I couldn’t see not being friends with him. That’s just how our friendship
progressed. And it definitely, really because back home when I was friends with all
people that really had similar ideologies that I had, and it’s just been really cool to be
exposed to different ideologies.
Mason also participated in an Arabic-English language mentoring program his freshman year.
He commented on the importance of that program, stating,
I was in the Arabic program and I got an email about the English Language Institute. I
was paired with another student on campus, who was from Iraq, and I would teach him
some English, and he’d teach me some Arabic. And I got to be good friends with him.
And that was one of the biggest impacts, definitely the first half of my freshman year,
was just being with him. Learning, we talked about religion and just Islam, and
Christianity, and how they can get along better. It was just really cool to see his
perspective on that. I’d never really spoken to a Muslim before.
Joey also noted some of Mason’s similar inexperience and awkwardness with new cultural
interactions. He stated,
I had a suitemate who was an international student, and to be completely honest, I had
never shared a conversation with someone from another country until I went to HMU. I
mean, my high school, if you look it up, the ratio is 99.7 percent white. It’s ridiculous.
That’s just how these little small towns are. It was very intimidating because you get so
scared to not – you don’t wanna tread on someone’s toes, and that can give the exact
opposite effect, you know what I mean? I assumed that pretty much everything was
offensive if I said it wrong, or if I did the wrong thing. So that comes off as me being,
like, “Hey! How are you? I’m fine!” You know? And just being like, so generic and
basic, but over time, over the freshman year, I started to have more friends from different
culture, different races.
Alexa discussed the initial adjustment, and her eventual appreciation of being in a diverse HMU
environment. She stated,
RURAL STUDENT PERSISTENCE
87
It was definitely a bit overwhelming. It was like, “Wow, there are so many different
types of people that you kind of don’t even think about until you surround yourself with
people of different cultures, ethnicities, and religions. I came from a very conservative
religious town to a place that’s more liberal and everybody is open to different things. In
my hometown, everyone is close-minded and set in their ways. In this city, everybody is
more open-minded and willing to try new things. It was intimidating at first, but I’ve
grown to appreciate it a lot more because you can feel free to be who you want to be,
more so than you could in a very close-minded town.
Similar to what many of her peer participants have commented on, Melissa also discussed
adjusting to the diversity at HMU. She stated,
It was just a lot different because the majority of my high school was completely white.
But coming to the city, it was really – it was trying a little bit, because definitely a lot of
my classes, with them being sociology classes and psychology classes, those are issues
that you touch upon. One of our classes was named “Race and Ethnicity.” So that’s
really my first touch of the controversial stuff that happens that I guess really never
happened before.
Like many of the participants, Aria echoed the awkwardness in adjusting to a much more diverse
environment. She stated,
That was probably the biggest difference, and what’s so funny is I just remember way
over thinking everything. I remember sitting on a bus, and I was sitting next to
somebody who was African American, and we were having a conversation. I think we
were both on our way to some kind of sorority event, and she was getting her letters, so I
knew she was also in a sorority, so we were talking, and I remember talking to her and
thinking to myself, I wonder if she thinks that I think I’m better than her because I’m
white and she’s black. I remember overanalyzing everything like that.
Overcoming Homesickness
Homesickness is an issue that many first-year college students face. Being from small,
tight-knit communities where family relationships are a significant part of everyday life, a few of
the participants in this study did struggle with this transition. Mason offered an insightful
opinion on the differences that rural students face when transitioning to college. He stated,
RURAL STUDENT PERSISTENCE
88
I was never like, “I’m gonna leave.” But I did, I thought about, if what I was doing was
the best thing to do. And I mean, it doesn’t take a genius to figure out, I’m in a good
place. I’m in college. But it was, after I got back some exam I did alright on or
whatever, and you know, I sat down, was looking at my schedule for the next semester
and I was like, “Should I be here? Do I deserve to be here? Should I, you know, should I
just drop out and find a somewhat livable job and have a family, like everyone else I
know?” And it just, it made me – I mean, it made me think. And that’s part of the reason
why – you overcome that and you do a lot better. But I feel that’s something a lot of kids
who didn’t grow up in a rural area wouldn’t really understand, almost. Because if you
didn’t come from this high school or you came from a more groomed environment, I
don’t think you would have the same thing. I mean, you’re gonna look on your Facebook
or your whatever, your Twitter, and you’re gonna see the majority of people you know in
college. You’re gonna – if you’re in college, you’re gonna feel like you’re the norm. If
you’re one of the – say you’re one of ten kids out of 100 who went to college while
everyone else went and got normal jobs, started their lives, started all this, then you feel
like you are the minority, you’re the outcast. And that was something I really had to
think about, and I was wondering – like, I wondered, was it worth it? Should I be here?
Aria, while maybe not willing to admit that she was homesick, noted how she missed just being
known. She stated,
I do remember very much missing the people who knew me well, which is why I would
call my best friend back home really often because I just wanted her to be involved in my
life decisions. So anytime I made a new decision, or there was a class that was hard or
whatever, I would call her a lot and I missed her a lot, but I never missed home. I
remember one day about a month and a half in I called her and just lost it. I said my
classes were really hard. I’m not doing as well as I want to do. I miss you. I miss the
familiarity, and I just don’t feel like I’m good enough. I remember that hard
conversation, and her talking me through that. I missed being known, if that makes
sense.
Alicia confessed that she considered transferring due to homesickness. She stated,
I got homesick. I even considered transferring to a place closer to home. I was from a
smaller town in a very rural community where most of my family made up the
population. I guess I had not been exposed to so many different people. And so, it was a
bit of a culture shock coming here.
RURAL STUDENT PERSISTENCE
89
Katelyn, a working student, noted her struggles with homesickness, and when that typically
occurred. She stated,
I didn’t start missing home until I got into the habit of not, of only working and going to
school and I didn’t have much of a social life, so I was, that’s when I really started
missing home I guess, probably, when I was unhappy.
Stephanie commented on her struggles, the importance of adjustment time, and the support that
she received from her family. She stated,
It was definitely tough. I think the first week was a wakeup call. I’ve always been one of
the people that is a homebody kind of. I always liked being at home. I’m a very big
family person. So that first month was very, very difficult. It was a rude awakening.
With working so much and then my classes being pretty difficult compared to what I was
used to, I had to stay on weekends to study and work, and I wanted to be home. I think
the first maybe month or two I really doubted if I could actually handle being away for
four years, but once I got used to my environment and kind of got in the swing of
studying and working at the same time, it got a lot better. I finally got used to it I think,
but the first two months were the worst. My family was supportive, definitely my mom,
because I’m a lot closer to my mom. She would kind of talk me through it and be like,
“You can do this. You’re going for your career, with what you want to do.” She would
really just kind of motivate me to stay, to push through the homesickness. I would
FaceTime her a lot. She would pretty much just try to keep me in school.
Whether it was struggling with homesickness, adapting to a tougher academic climate, or
balancing work/school/life, participants in this study who felt stress and anxiety found comfort in
key individuals or groups which helped these participants to navigate through this tumultuous
first-year experience. When questioned about the decision to return for a second year at HMU,
participants offered the following answers with resolve. Rosa citied her family in her decision,
stating,
It was a no-brainer. I wasn’t going to let myself give up. I didn’t want to go and not
finish because my family is so proud of me and I didn’t want to let them down.
RURAL STUDENT PERSISTENCE
90
Several participants demonstrated Rosa’s kind of mental toughness when questioned about a
return for year two. Stacy commented how she had mentally prepared herself for the long haul,
saying, “I knew that this is what I was meant to do. I think I just really mentally prepared
myself.” Melissa echoed that same mental preparedness. She stated,
It was just kind of understood. “I started here and this is where I’m going to graduate
from,” kind of thought process.
Aria shared a similar mental mindset, however she also notes her sorority as an important factor
in her decision to return to HMU. She stated,
My sorority was a huge part of it because I knew that next year I was going to be getting
a “little sister.” I knew that I was going to be moving to a sorority house. I never
considered not coming back to HMU. There were hard things, but nothing that would
have ever made me want to go back to where I was before. I love being challenged and
pushed, and I think that’s what HMU was for me.
Alicia commented on the opportunities offered and her specific College’s community as key
reasons for her decision to return. She stated,
I decided to return because of the opportunities and involvement that HMU offered. I
started with the HMU television channel and I had talked to so many people who had
been a part of this and I heard about these amazing internships I got with E!
Entertainment, ESPN, HSN, and I really enjoyed in that time learning about video
production. I also loved the agriculture campus and what they offered. They have a very
close-knit community there.
Lily noted her summative first-year experience and the value that she placed on her friends and
the environment. She stated,
I had a really good first-year experience, honestly. I felt like I had successfully adjusted
to the environment, which was my biggest concern going in. I still had most of my
RURAL STUDENT PERSISTENCE
91
friends there. To go somewhere else would feel like starting over in a way and it was
really important to me to kind of maintain those relationships. I also generally loved the
environment and the city.
Katelyn and Stephanie, two students who had among the lowest HMU first semester and first
year GPAs in the study, shared their thought processes. Stephanie stated,
I kind of knew that HMU was where I needed to be and after I actually got through that
second semester, I realized that it would be okay and I actually did come to love the city
and the people I had met and just the environment, and I could not really imagine going
anywhere else at that point.
Katelyn credited her experience returning home for the summer as an important moment. She
stated,
Wrapping up at the end of last semester, at the end of my freshman year, I had to move
back home. And when I did I started working at my high school job again, just to save
up some money. And when I started doing that, I started seeing the people that I knew in
high school or that had never stopped working there. And that kind of convinced me that
I had to go back to school in the city, because it, I knew that I could not be stuck here like
that for the rest of my life. So I came back home kind of licking my wounds from the
first year, because I just didn’t have much of a social life, and I told myself that was not
happening again.
HMU as a New Home
For ten of the twelve participants, HMU had become a home by the conclusion of the
first-year. I spoke with each participant about how they came to that conclusion and/or
realization. Aria, the graduating senior, stated,
What I do remember is at the end, right before Christmas break, my roommate and I –
she had a boyfriend at the time, and he had a friend, and the four of us went around on
campus and roasted marshmallows on the iconic flame, snuck into the football stadium,
and jumped into the fountain at the neighboring public park, and I think that’s when it felt
like home, because it was my place. The friend we were showing around didn’t go to
HMU at the time and I felt like I was showing him my home. That was definitely a night
RURAL STUDENT PERSISTENCE
92
I will always remember that the city was my place to explore. I was so excited to spend
the next three years.
Mason reflected on the moments that he realized HMU was his new home. He stated,
The first football game I ever went to I was like, I’m just here with a bunch of screaming
fans, sitting with all my friends that I’ve made, and I’m just like wow, this is really where
I belong. When I went home for winter break, I was like wow, I really want to get back
to the university. That’s when I kind of realized I was like, this place is boring and
people, I’ve changed. And the friends that I hung out with over winter break hadn’t
really gotten out of my hometown, and were the same. And I was just like I don’t want
that anymore.
Stacy explained her excitement to return for year two, stating,
At the conclusion of my first year, I did not want to go home. I really didn’t for the
summer. It’s not that I don’t love my parents and where I’m from, but this is where the
exciting things are happening. I was kind of addicted to it and I’ve met a lot of cool
people. When I come back to this crappy little room that I have I definitely feel at home.
I couldn’t see myself going anywhere else. This is definitely the school for me. Even
when my boyfriend and I broke up and my grades were suffering. I don’t know, just
walking around campus just gives you this sense of home and community and just seeing
other people thrive in this environment. Winning and losing we’re all going up and
down. It’s all a rollercoaster. I think that unity I guess of everyone going together. It’s
just like it’s all a learning experience.
Joey offered a nuanced definition of how his new location had become a home, stating,
The city feels like home. I wouldn’t say so much the school, but I definitely felt – I felt
at home where I lived. I felt at home in the dorm, I had family there. I gotta say, I was
pretty happy. I remember there was a moment, and that was – the exact moment when I
felt that was move out day, freshman move out day. Where, you know, we all pack up
our stuff from our dorm, everyone’s leaving, and I walk out and I see a couple – you
know, I see my friends, I see everyone I live with, and I was like, “I like these people,
you know? I’m happy.” And in that same moment I got really sad because I was leaving
for the summer. I realized, “I’m happy here, and this really is my home – being in this
city, being here.”
Melissa shared her thoughts on HMU as a home, stating,
RURAL STUDENT PERSISTENCE
93
Definitely the city and HMU I consider a second home. I think I realized this when I
stopped going home so often. I was like, “You know, I like being here more than I like
going home, so let’s just stay here for a while.”
Alicia pondered the question, and considered the definition of “home” before offering a
response. She stated,
I’m still at a stage of is HMU home or is my hometown home? I guess all of the times I
would go to my dorm, go in the elevator and the doors would open up to a lobby full of
people. And it was always like, hey, how are your classes? They’re so excited and I was
always so excited to see them. And so really being able to make those connections and of
course, maybe you’ll go to the cafeteria with a group, it’s a pretty day and you just look
around and say wow, what a beautiful campus. What great friends. It’s a good day. And
you think this is home.
Alexa noted a couple of key moments where she realized HMU was a home. She stated,
HMU had become a home type place. We had a resident advisor that was very nice and
kind. She was like, “You’re home,” and redecorated our room. At the end of the year I
just remember thinking, “I made it and I can’t wait to come back. This is it. I really
enjoy it here.”
Rosa and Katelyn were the two participants who stated that HMU did not necessarily feel like a
home to them at the conclusion of year one. Both cited differing reasons. Rosa commented on
the stress that she felt her first year. She stated,
HMU didn’t feel like a home because I was super stressed out. I was very unhappy. I
was really sad actually, because I actually had like little anxiety attacks and like every
time I would call my mom, or my aunt, or my grandmother I would just be very upset. It
was mainly during the second semester because I wasn’t sure about my grades, but I
ended up doing okay. It was nice having the summer to decompress.
RURAL STUDENT PERSISTENCE
94
Katelyn, who worked approximately forty hours, five days a week during her second semester,
places the blame on herself for her first year experience. She stated,
HMU didn’t feel like a home so much. It was no one’s fault but my own. My freshman
year I just kind of made myself an outcast because I didn’t really know how to socialize
in that setting. So I didn’t really feel that welcome my freshman year. And once I went
back to school and tried again, took a different approach to everything, I felt a lot more
comfortable.
RURAL STUDENT PERSISTENCE
95
CHAPTER FIVE: ANALYSIS
Introduction
To increase college completion rates in the United States, researchers have set out to
better understand various student populations and postsecondary degree attainment issues.
Recent research is focusing on the importance of geographic, racial/ethnic, socioeconomic, and
religious diversity, among others, in the United States, as potential characteristics that may
influence postsecondary attendance and degree attainment. Approximately nine million students
attend public schools in rural areas, representing nineteen percent of the public school population
in the United States (Byun, Irvin, & Meece, 2012a). Rural high school graduates are
increasingly attending four-year colleges and universities (Snyder & Dillow, 2010) and the rise
in educational aspirations of rural youth may indicate that these students recognize education as a
means to economic mobility.
Despite the growing number of rural high school students matriculating to postsecondary
institutions, this student population has received little research attention. Not much is known
about the background characteristics, precollege experiences, and postsecondary educational
experiences of these students and how these factors may shape their college completion (Byun,
Irvin, & Meece, 2012a; Gibbs, 1998; Schonert, Elliott, & Bills, 1991). For those electing to
continue on to postsecondary education, institutional settings present rural students with a host of
new challenges that may impact persistence and degree attainment.
This qualitative research study sought to utilize rich descriptive data collected from rural
high school graduates in the Southeastern United States on their first-year experiences at an
urban, four-year postsecondary institution. The data gathered via semi-structured interviews will
provide researchers and practitioners with a better understanding of how these individuals
RURAL STUDENT PERSISTENCE
96
experience college life in an urban setting. Using Bronfenbrenner’s developmental ecological
model (1974, 1977, 1979, 1989, 1993, 2005; Bronfenbrenner & Morris, 2006), this study
explored how microsystem, mesosystem, exosystem, and macrosystem contexts may influence
the first-year persistence of rural students at urban four-year institutions. While not
generalizable, data suggest that the formation of microsystems and mesosystems may play a
crucial role in influencing a rural student’s decision to persist beyond the first-year at an urban,
four-year college or university. While similarities may exist among differing student
populations, the rural student experience is a unique experience. The knowledge and beliefs that
rural students develop throughout childhood and adolescence shape them in ways that may affect
their approach to the college environment. Prior experiences with family, schooling, and
community life, have prepared these individuals for a variety of interactions in college. With a
better grasp of how urban institutional settings may influence the first-year persistence of rural
undergraduates, higher education professionals working in urban postsecondary settings will be
able to better serve this unique student population.
Research Questions
The following research questions guided this study:
Main Research Question:
1. What kinds of first-year experiences affect persistence for rural students, at an urban, four-
year institution?
a. How do microsystems and mesosystems influence rural students’ decisions to persist
beyond the first-year at an urban, four-year college or university?
RURAL STUDENT PERSISTENCE
97
Discussions and Implications for Practice
In this section, salient themes found in the data will be discussed in relation to relevant
theories on student persistence highlighted in previous chapters. These relevant theories are
important to include in this study as they compliment the guiding framework and help to provide
additional insight, through various lenses, into the phenomenon. Key aspects of Astin’s theory
of involvement (1984), Schlossberg’s (1981, 1989) constructs of marginality and mattering, and
Tinto’s (1993, 1997) theory on persistence can all be consistently found in the data from this
study.
According to Astin, student involvement in college leads to increased student learning
and personal development (Astin, 1984). In addition to “fit” and on campus residence, Astin
(1975) linked persistence to academic involvement (e.g., the extent to which students work hard
at their studies, the number of hours they spend studying, the degree of interest in their courses,
good study habits). All participants in this study lived on campus their first year, and half of the
participants lived in HMU Living and Learning Communities, which provided additional
academic and social support systems. Participants in this study also learned to develop strong
study habits, such as utilizing faculty office hours or tutoring services, and many participants
emphasized the amount of time that they spent dedicated to their academics.
Astin noted that other key aspects related to persistence were participation in honors
programs, extracurricular activities (i.e. social fraternities or sororities, athletics, student
government), involvement in ROTC, frequent student-faculty interaction, participation in
undergraduate research projects, and part-time employment on campus. At least one of these
aspects, if not multiple, was found in the first-year experiences of each participant in this study.
It is important for urban institutions to note, as Astin stated, the psychic and physical time and
RURAL STUDENT PERSISTENCE
98
energy of students is limited. Educators must compete with other forces in the student’s life (i.e.
family, friends, job, outside activities) for a share of that time and energy (Astin, 1984).
Participants in this study often discussed their struggles with time management and its impact on
their first-year experience.
Building upon Astin (1984), Schlossberg (1989) found involvement creates connections
between students, faculty, and staff that help individuals believe in their personal worth.
According to Schlossberg (1989), this belief of mattering acts as a motivator. Given the often-
strong ties to community and family many rural students experience prior to college, mattering
proved to be an important component to first-year persistence at urban institutions. As Aria
noted in her initial struggles that first semester, “I missed being known.” As the year progressed,
participants formed key relationships with roommates, residence hall peers, classmates, faculty
members and advisors, individuals within campus clubs and organizations, and fellow work
employees. Aria stated of her academic advisor that second semester, “He knew me by name
and knew so much about me, and that meant a lot to me that someone knew me and wanted to
know me.”
Data from this study also supports research from Dixon Rayle & Chung (2007) that found
that clusters of social support from family and friends predicted greater levels of mattering. In
addition to the gradual building of social support that was being established on campus,
participants overwhelmingly had the support of their family and caregivers back home before
and during their first-year. As Stephanie noted of her mother, “She would really just kind of
motivate me to stay, to push through the homesickness. I would FaceTime her a lot. She would
pretty much just try to keep me in school.” In the Dixon, Rayle, and Chung (2007) study, when
first-year students made friends at school and felt supported by their college friends they reported
RURAL STUDENT PERSISTENCE
99
a greater sense of mattering and significance to their college environments. Students who felt
supported by friends and family, and felt they mattered to their colleges experienced less
academic stress. As Alexa stated about her roommate, “I don’t know if I’d still be here without
her actually. She made everything a lot easier and better, more fun.” In discussing his
involvement with the HMU Living and Learning Community, Mason commented, “We were
able to form a group of ten of us that were really, really close friends and I think that was
probably the biggest thing that helped me get comfortable with the university. I don’t know
what I would have done without it, honestly.”
Regarding persistence, Tinto (1993) stated that a decision to persist or leave a college or
university is not a one-time decision point; rather students are engaged in an ongoing process of
becoming more or less committed to an institution as a result of the degree to which they feel
integrated into the academic and social system of the institution (Tinto 1993, 1997). The data in
this study would support Tinto’s theory. The first-year experience for rural participants in this
study often proved to be an emotional roller coaster, comprised of the excitement of enrolling at
an urban institution, the heartache of missing family and familiarity, the confidence gained in
making new friends, and the struggles to adapt to the academic rigor. Data suggest that rural
students are cognizant of their commitment levels throughout the first-year transition. Due to the
development of strong support systems, participants in this study were able to find comfort and
encouragement in times of need that ultimately helped in their ongoing decisions to persist at key
moments.
Revisiting Bronfenbrenner’s Developmental Ecological Model
Bronfenbrenner’s developmental ecology model offers a way to look inside the
interactions between individuals and their environments to see how and why outcomes may
RURAL STUDENT PERSISTENCE
100
occur as they do. There are four main components of the developmental ecology theory:
process, person, context, and time. The context element of the ecology model is a significant
part of this study. Bronfenbrenner proposed a nested series of contexts, in which the person is in
the center, with four levels of context surrounding her or him: the microsystem, mesosystem,
exosystem, and macrosystem. These systems are where the work of development would occur as
a rural student’s developmentally instigative characteristics inhibit or provoke reactions from the
environment in the course of proximal processes. The contexts provide stressors and buffers,
creating opportunities for increasingly complex activities in which the student can participate,
while supporting and rewarding sustained commitment to those increasingly complex endeavors
(Evans et al., 2010). Renn and Arnold (2003) depicted the context component of the PPCT
model in the following form.
Figure 1: Bronfenbrenner’s Model as Applied to Postsecondary Environment
RURAL STUDENT PERSISTENCE
101
Summary of Findings: Microsystems and Rural Student Persistence
According to Bronfenbrenner (1993), a microsystem is a pattern of activities, roles, and
interpersonal relationships experienced by the developing individual in a face-to-face setting
with particular physical, social, and symbolic features that invite, permit, or inhibit engagement
in sustained, progressively more complex interaction with, and activity in, the immediate
environment.
One key part of the microsystem all participants in this study had were emotionally
supportive families or caretakers back home. While not all families could provide the financial
support or the general college knowledge needed to navigate the first-year experience, these
individuals, whether they were parents, siblings, extended family members, or community
groups, such as church members, all supported the decision of these participants to enroll at
HMU and to persist. Many participants noted that their rural high schools were apprehensive
and/or unwilling to promote HMU and the city as a college option; therefore, having an
emotionally supportive family or caregiver was important in developing self-confidence to attend
HMU. Several participants, including Mason and Aria, for example, cited a strong sense of pride
that their parents had in them in deciding to attend HMU. Aria spoke about the cautioned
responses that rural community members gave; therefore, having a strong support system at
home could help juxtapose that community or high school doubt in a participant’s ability to
persist at HMU.
Several participants commented on how their parents and/or support systems back home
helped with their first-year transition. Alicia’s mother helped her move in and stayed in town
that first week. A few participants noted that family members or key friends from home would
visit throughout the year, and would go out to dinner in the city or attend athletic events with
RURAL STUDENT PERSISTENCE
102
their student. Most participants were able to also find time on select weekends to visit home to
“recharge.” Many participants also maintained phone contact with key family members and
caregivers throughout that first year. Stephanie and Aria, for example, both commented on how
their phone conversations with friends and family back home helped them work through issues
like homesickness and loneliness.
Another important part of the microsystem to participants in this study was their
roommate experience. While a couple of participants noted negative roommate experiences,
which may have been influenced by what Bronfenbrenner would have described as the attributes
of the person, the majority of participants in this study had positive roommate experiences.
Alexa, Katelyn, Aria, and Mason all commented on the importance of relationships they formed
with roommates at HMU that initial year. During those difficult transitional times when
participants questioned whether or not they should be at HMU, these individuals were often key
in helping them in their decision to persist. Half of the students in this study participated in a
Living and Learning Community (LLC) at HMU. These participants commented they enjoyed
living with other HMU students who shared similar interests. Many noted this sense of
community was extremely important during their transition and helped them to establish another
key part of the microsystem, a friendship group.
The development of a friendship group in a microsystem was commonly cited as a
decision to persist. In this study, friendship groups were often formed via campus involvement.
Three participants, Aria, Alicia, and Melissa, took part in the sorority recruitment process at
HMU. And while Alicia elected not to join a sorority, all three participants stated this campus
involvement activity had helped them to form a friendship group by the conclusion. Madison
was able to form a key friendship group by joining a student organization. That group, as
RURAL STUDENT PERSISTENCE
103
Madison commented, which primarily consisted of upperclassmen at HMU, helped her acclimate
to the city. As faith was important to some participants, like Mason and Aria for example, they
sought and found friendship groups who valued this similar belief system both on campus and in
the urban community.
Employment, as part of the microsystem, impacted participants differently. Joey and
Mason both had campus-based jobs with limited work hours each week. They reported positive
experiences with employment. Joey noted his manager became a critical mentor in his first year,
offering guidance and support. For Katelyn and Stephanie, employment offered mixed
experiences. Stephanie, who worked at the campus apparel shop, stated the relationships she
established with her coworkers formed her most significant friendship group. She also noted
work as a form of escape from the stress of her first year. Counter to these positive experiences,
Stephanie worked several hours and every home football game weekend in the fall; therefore, at
times she felt overworked and homesick as she was not able to visit home as often as she would
have liked. Katelyn, one of two study participants who worked off-campus, worked nearly thirty
minutes from campus, five days a week at almost forty hours per week. For a full time, first-year
student, juggling this work schedule while struggling academically proved to be incredibly
stressful, impacting her first-year experience in a negative way.
Similarly, classes and faculty interactions as parts of a microsystem also impacted
students differently. Ten of the twelve participants noted they felt their respective high schools
had not prepared them adequately for HMU; many participants struggled with the academic
rigor, the higher-level thinking, and with time management and study skills. Some had positive
interactions and developed relationships with faculty, while others were intimidated and were
unaware creating a relationship with a faculty member was possible.
RURAL STUDENT PERSISTENCE
104
Summary of Findings: Mesosystems and Rural Student Persistence
The mesosystem consists of linkages and processes taking place between two or more
microsystem settings containing the developing rural individual (Bronfenbrenner, 1993).
According to Renn (2003), it is the synergy across microsystems and webs of mesosystems that
creates additional possibilities for proximal processes that promote development. Mesosystems
may be consonant, reinforcing developmental effects, or dissonant, sending competing messages
or creating inconsistent influences that may provoke or inhibit development. The mesosystem is
at the center of campus peer culture, where students’ multiple microsystems interact to create a
web of developmental possibilities (Renn & Arnold, 2003).
For the majority of participants, mesosystems included various forms of campus
involvement. Aria, for example, was encouraged to go through sorority recruitment with the aid
of her roommate. Her roommate helped her successfully navigate this process and they became
a part of this campus organization’s friendship group, which in turn, helped her build additional,
similar friendship groups. This positive linkage between roommate and organization helped
connect Aria to HMU in multiple ways. When she noted her reasons for wanting to return to
HMU in year two, she noted that she was excited to move into the sorority house and to mentor a
“little sister” in her organization.
Students who participated in the LLC experience at HMU had a built-in mesosystem.
The LLC experience, according to participants, provided a roommate and occasionally
suitemates, as well as peers on the floor who shared some commonality, whether it was by
academic interest or other, such as those with a leadership focus or dedication to serve. These
individuals also shared some common classes, campus-based experiences, and off-campus
experiences together, providing an opportunity to form multiple linkages. While they still
RURAL STUDENT PERSISTENCE
105
acknowledged the importance of their LLC experience, two participants did feel as if the LLC
restricted their opportunities to meet new people. Stacy may have expressed it best, stating “I
already had a bunch of classes with these people and then I’d come home and I’m living with
them.”
The study found other areas of the mesosystem that also contributed to persistence. A
few students found connections between their classes and a romantic interest. Often these
romantic relationships began as peers in a single class, but soon these individuals found
themselves studying together, taking additional classes together, and supporting each other
emotionally during difficult times. It is important to note that while the majority of these
romantic relationships ended, the two individuals remained friends and continued to support one
another, and these interactions supported persistence.
Another aspect of the mesosystem that affected persistence was related to campus
activities. HMU offered a variety of university-wide events, like guest lectures and concerts on
campus. Participant attendance at athletic events, such as the popular football games, also
became an opportunity for participants to make connections between visiting family members,
roommates or friendship groups. These connections reinforced participants’ home and school
identities, which affected persistence.
Recommendations
This section offers recommendations for supporting the persistence of rural high school
graduates at four-year, urban institutions.
1. Urban institutions should identify prospective and admitted rural high school students to
encourage participation in Living and Learning Communities on campus. Urban
institutions need to do a better job of marketing LLCs to prospective rural students in an effort to
RURAL STUDENT PERSISTENCE
106
help rural students and communities understand that it is possible to have a close-knit community
akin to that of their hometown in an urban school setting. Of the study participants, half
participated in an LLC. The LLC experience provided participants an early opportunity to form
connections within a mesosystem.
2. Urban institutions should implement an elective mentoring program for rural first-year
students that would pair them with upperclassmen from a rural background. Participants
in this study often found comfort in rooming with another rural classmate or in bonding with
other students from rural backgrounds at HMU. Some participants, who desired this rural
community link, remained connected to former high school friends and family members back
home. The rationale behind much of this activity was that these rural first-year students often
felt overwhelmed with all of this newness and needed to speak with someone like them, who had
a similar upbringing, and with whom they could relate. A mentoring program would provide
these rural first-year students with a positive mentor who had persisted, who had knowledge and
recommendations for strategies that could help these first-year students navigate academically
and socially, and who could relate to their rural backgrounds. A mentoring program would play
a key part in a rural student’s microsystem, leading to early connections. HMU could utilize
these rural student mentors in communication efforts with prospective rural students and rural
high school college counselors. Nearly all of the participants in this study visited HMU before
deciding to enroll; however, many had misconceptions and inaccurate ideas about what college
life at HMU would look like. While speaking to the experience of transitioning from a rural to
urban setting, these rural student mentors could help alleviate rural high school student and
counselor concerns and address common misconceptions.
RURAL STUDENT PERSISTENCE
107
3. Urban institutions should implement and require a first-year diversity course for all
students. Many college students, not those just in rural communities, come from homogeneous
backgrounds. Lichter et al. (2007) argues that rural America is highly segregated by race, and
that the political and economic processes that maintain racial segregation often parallel those
found in inner-city neighborhoods (Johnson, Parnell, Joyner, Christman, & Marsh, 2004). While
the majority of students in this study were excited to experience new cultures, beliefs, and
peoples, they found those early initial interactions to be awkward and intimidating. A diversity
course would help students from rural backgrounds to better understand student differences and
similarities and would promote a friendlier, less intimidating, first-year experience.
4. Urban institutions should actively promote student success programs and resources on-
campus, such as tutoring services, and study skills development. Ten of the twelve
participants in this study believed their respective rural high schools did not prepare them for the
academic rigor of HMU. In a related study, Byun et al. (2012a) revealed that rural students were
more likely to be first-generation college students and enter with a less rigorous academic
curricular background than urban or suburban students. Lacking study skills, intimidated by
university faculty members, and unaware of campus-based academic resources, participants in
this study scrambled searching for ways to make up the ground on their own, often resulting in
high levels of stress and feelings of inadequacy. Urban institutions must do a better job at
educating this population at orientation on how utilizing campus-based resources and facilities
can lead to a less stressful, and academically successful, first year.
5. Urban institutions must be mindful of how tuition costs affect those in rural areas. While
high college tuition rates across the country provide a barrier for certain college-going
populations, the perception in rural communities is often that a four-year college degree is
RURAL STUDENT PERSISTENCE
108
unaffordable, and therefore, unattainable. Nearly all of the participants in this study noted that
the affordability of attending HMU, one of their in-state tuition options, was one of the most
important factors, if not the most important factor, in their decision to enroll. One reason why
these rural participants were able to persist was that they could simply afford to persist. As noted
earlier, the national rural poverty rate (based on pre-tax income of less than $23,492 for an
average family of four) reached 17.7 percent in 2012, its highest rate since 1986. The
Department of Agriculture (2013b) has disaggregated rural poverty data by ethnicity. Rural non-
Hispanic Blacks had the highest occurrence of poverty in 2012 at 40.6 percent. This rate is three
times the 13.5 percent for rural non-Hispanic Whites. The 2012 poverty rate for rural Hispanics
was 29.2 percent. Four-year college tuition is a real barrier for the majority of rural populations;
therefore, if urban institutions intend to continue attracting, enrolling, and retaining rural
students, affordability must drive decision-making.
Future Research
This study also revealed opportunities for future research. One recommendation for
future research should be on the frequency and/or impact of rural first-year students utilizing
faculty office hours and/or tutoring services. Ten of the twelve participants in this study strongly
felt as if their respective high schools had not prepared them for HMU. Many of the participants
who utilized these campus academic aid resources had positive interactions and testified to
individual academic improvement. Further exploration into how and when rural first-year
students discover these resources and why they decide to either utilize them or not could prove
beneficial. A comparison between those who utilize these services and those who did not in that
first-year could also prove informative.
RURAL STUDENT PERSISTENCE
109
Perhaps associated to the recommendation above, researches should examine rural
student persistence in relation to selected majors. Do students studying in fields that are heavy in
the math or science have lower persistence rates than those studying in the social sciences?
Results could provide more insight into rural high school preparation and potential academic
deficiencies that could create barriers to early academic success in college.
Another recommendation for future research is to explore working rural students at urban
institutions. While nearly half of the participants in this study were able to shed some light on
their experiences with employment and how it impacted their first-year, full-time student
experience, further research is needed. An examination of hours worked and academic success,
for example, could provide valuable insight. Further exploration into campus-based jobs and
off-campus employment would also prove helpful.
All participants in this study were involved or engaged in some capacity at HMU. Future
research should explore the potential relationship between rural high school involvement and
college involvement. How does high school involvement affect the college transition at urban
institutions? Are rural high school graduates more likely to be involved at four-year, urban
colleges and universities if they were involved in high school? Is there a connection between
high school involvement for rural students and first-year persistence at urban institutions?
Finally, all participants in this study were residents of the state where HMU was located;
therefore, each received a reduced in-state tuition rate, in addition to any merit-based or
college/departmental scholarship, or federal funding. As cited by nearly all participants,
affordability was a major factor to deciding to attend HMU. This likely also impacted their
financial ability to persist. Future research should explore rural out-of-state student persistence.
RURAL STUDENT PERSISTENCE
110
As out-of-state tuition rates are significantly higher, how does this have an impact on an out-of-
state student’s decision to enroll at and persist at HMU?
Conclusion
The most educated generation in the United States of America is in the midst of retiring
(Collins, 2003; Lee & Rawls, 2010). Projections suggest that 25- to 34-year-olds will fail to
meet or exceed the educational levels of their parents (Collins, 2003; Lee & Rawls, 2010). This
projected educational shortfall poses a significant problem for the United States. Given the
charge put forth by political and educational leaders to increase higher education degree
attainment, it is essential to have a better understanding of the barriers that impact specific
college going populations and college degree attainment (Obama, 2009, 2010).
This study found that a rural first-year student’s formation of relationships and networks
in their microsystems and mesosystems at an urban, four-year institution had a positive effect on
persistence. While many obstacles and challenges exist during this first year of transition,
including academic adjustment to rigor and new cultural experiences, students in this
phenomenological study were able to make strong connections, such as roommate relationships,
faculty contacts, and new friendship groups via campus organizations, that helped them feel like
their presence mattered on the campus, and aided in their transition to the urban college setting.
RURAL STUDENT PERSISTENCE
111
References
Albrecht, D. E. (1998). The industrial transformation of farm communities: Implications for
family structure and socioeconomic conditions. Rural Sociology, 63, 51-64.
Albrecht, D. E., Albrecht, C. M., & Albrecht, S. L. (2000). Poverty in nonmetropolitan America:
Impacts of industrial, employment, and family structural variables. Rural Sociology, 65,
87-103.
Astin, A. W. (1975). Preventing students from dropping out. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Astin A. W. (1984). Student involvement: A developmental theory of higher education, Journal
of College Student Personnel, 24, 297-308.
Astin, A. W. (1993). What matters in college: Four critical years revisited. San Francisco:
Jossey-Bass.
Bronfenbrenner, U. (1974). Developmental research and public policy and the ecology of
childhood. Child Development, 45, 1-5.
Bronfenbrenner, U. (1977). Toward an experimental ecology of human development. American
Psychologist, 32, 513-531.
Bronfenbrenner, U. (1979). The ecology of human development: Experiments by nature and
design. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Bronfenbrenner, U. (1989). Ecological systems theory. In R. Vasta (Ed.), Six theories of
development (pp. 187-249). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
Bronfenbrenner, U. (1993). The ecology of cognitive development: Research models and
fugitive findings. In R. H. Wozniak & K. W. Fischer (Eds.), Development in context:
Acting and thinking in specific environments (pp. 3-44). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
RURAL STUDENT PERSISTENCE
112
Bronfenbrenner, U. (Ed.). (2005). Making human beings human: Bioecological perspectives on
human development. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Bronfenbrenner, U., & Morris, P. A. (2006). The biological model of human development. In W.
Damon & R. M. Lerner (Eds.), Handbook of child psychology (6
th
ed., pp. 793-828).
Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
Brown, A. R., Morning, C., & Watkins, C. (2005). Influence of African American engineering
student perceptions of campus climate on graduation rates. Journal of Engineering
Education, 94(2), 263-271.
Burney, V. H., & Cross, T. L. (2006). Impoverished students with academic promise in rural
settings: 10 lessons from project aspire. Gifted Child Today, 29(2), 14-21.
Byun, S., Irvin, M. J., & Meece, J. L. (2012a). Predictors of bachelor’s degree completion among
rural students at four-year institutions. Review of Higher Education, 35(3), 463-484.
Byun, S., Meece, J. L., & Irvin, M. J. (2012b). Rural-nonrural disparities in postsecondary
educational attainment revisited. American Educational Research Journal, 49(3), 412-
437.
Castillo, L. G., Conoley, C. W., Choi-Pearson, C., Archuleta, D. J., & Phoummarath, M. J.
(2006). University environment as a mediator of Latino ethnic identity and persistence
attitudes. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 53(2), 267-271.
Cobb, R. A., McIntire, W. G., & Pratt, P. A. (1989). Vocational and educational aspirations of
high school students: A problem for rural America. Journal of Research in Rural
Education, 6(2), 11-16.
RURAL STUDENT PERSISTENCE
113
Colangelo, N., Assouline, S. G., & New, J. K. (1999). Gifted education in rural schools: A
national assessment. Iowa City: University of Iowa. (ERIC Document Reproduction No.
ED430766).
College Board Advocacy and Policy Center (2010). The college completion agenda 2010
progress report. Executive summary. Retrieved from
http://helmut.knaust.info/resource/2010CBAPC.pdf.
Corbett, M. (2007). Learning to leave: The irony of schooling in a coastal community. Halifax,
Canada: Fernwood.
Corbin, J., & Strauss, A. (2008). Basics of Qualitative Research: Techniques and procedures for
developing grounded theory (3
rd
ed.). Los Angeles: Sage.
Crockett, L. J., & Bingham, C. R. (2000). Anticipating adulthood: Expected timing of work and
family transitions among rural youth. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 10(2), 151-
17.
Crockett, L. J., Shanahan, M. J., & Jackson-Newsom, J. (2000). Rural youth: Ecological and life
course perspectives. In R. Montemayor, G. Adams, & T. Gullotta (Eds.), Adolescent
diversity in ethnic, economic, and cultural contexts: Advances in adolescent development
(43-74). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Retrieved from
http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1245&context=psychfacpub.
Crosnoe, R., Mistry, R. S., & Elder, G. H. (2002). Economic disadvantage, family dynamics and
adolescent enrollment in higher education. Journal of Marriage and Family, 64(3), 690-
702.
Dayton, J. (1998). Rural school funding inequities: An analysis of legal, political, and fiscal
issues. Journal of Research in Rural Education, 14, 142-148.
RURAL STUDENT PERSISTENCE
114
Demi, M. A., Coleman-Jensen, A., & Synder, A. R. (2010). The rural context and secondary
school enrollment: An ecological systems approach. Journal of Research in Rural
Education, 25(7), 26.
Dixon Rayle, A., & Chung, K. (2007/2008). Revisiting first-year college students’ mattering:
Social support, academic stress, and the mattering experience. Journal of College Student
Retention, 9(1), 21-37.
Domina, T. (2006). What clean break?: Education and nonmetropolitan migration patterns, 1989-
2004. Rural Sociology, 71(3), 373-398.
Dorner, P. (1983). Technology and U.S. agriculture. In G. F. Summers (Ed.), Technology and
Social Change in Rural Areas: A Festschrift for Eugene A. Wilkening, edited by G.F.
Summers, 73-86, Boulder: Westview.
Dunne, F. (1977). Choosing smallness: An examination of the small school experience in rural
America. In J. Sher (ed.), Education in Rural America: A Reassessment of Conventional
Wisdom (pp. 81-124). Boulder, CO: Westview.
Durand, J., Massey, D. S., & Capoferro, C. (2005). The new geography of Mexican immigration.
In V. Zuniga & R. Hernandez-Leon (Eds.), New Destinations: Mexican Immigration in
the United States (1-20), New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
Elder, G. H., & Conger, R. (2000). Children of the land: Adversity and success in rural America.
Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Evans, N. J., Forney, D. S., Guido, F. M., Patton, L. D. & Renn, K. A. (2010). Student
development in college: Theory research and practice. (2
nd
Ed.) San Francisco, CA:
Jossey-Bass.
RURAL STUDENT PERSISTENCE
115
Fan, X., & Chen, M. J. (1999). Academic achievement of rural school students: A multi-year
comparison with their peers in suburban and urban schools. Journal of Research in Rural
Education, 15(1), 31-46. Retrieved from: http://www.jrre.psu.edu/articles/v15,n1,p31-
46,Fan.pdf.
Friedman, S. E, & Lichter, D. T. (1998). Spatial inequality and poverty among American
children. Population Research and Policy Review, 17, 91-109.
Gibbs, R. M. (1998). College completion and return migration among rural youth. In R. M.
Gibbs, P. L. Swaim, & R. Teixeira (Eds.), Rural education and training in the new
economy: The myth of the rural skills gap (61-80), Ames: Iowa State University Press.
Gibbs, R., Kusmin, L., & Cromartie, J. (2005). Low skill employment and the changing
economy of rural America (USDA Economic Research Report No. 10). Retrieved from
http://www.ers.usda.gov/publications/err 1 0/err10.pdf.
Gloria, A. M., Robinson-Kurpius, S. E., Hamilton, K. D., & Wilson, M. S. (1999). African
American students’ persistence at a predominately White university: Influences of social
support, university comfort, and self-beliefs. Journal of College Student Development,
40, 257-268.
Goodman, J. Schlossberg, N. K., & Anderson, M. L. (2006). Counseling adults in transition (3
rd
ed.). New York: Springer.
Gouveia, L. (2005). Latinos in rural America and U.S. agriculture: From pioneers to new
arrivals. The Journal of Latino-Latin American Studies, 1, 1-25.
Gouveia, L., & Saenz, R. (2000). Dances with cows: Beefpacking’s impact on Garden City,
Kansas, and Lexington, Nebraska. In Donald D. Stull, M. J. Broadway, & D. Griffith
RURAL STUDENT PERSISTENCE
116
(Eds.), Any way you cut it: Meat processing and small-town America. Lawrence:
University Press of Kansas.
Graham, S. E. (2009). Students in rural schools have limited access to advanced mathematics
courses. Durham, NH: Carsey Institute, University of New Hampshire. Retrieved on
November 12, 2010, from http://www.carseyinstitute.unh.edu/publications/IB-Graham-
MathAccess.pdf.
Guiffrida, D. A. (2008). Preparing rural students for large colleges and universities. Journal of
School Counseling, 6(14). Retrieved from http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ894785.pdf.
Haller, E. J., & Virkler, S. J. (1993). Another look at rural-nonrural differences in students'
educational aspirations. Journal of Research in Rural Education, 9, 170-178. Retrieved
from http://www.jrre.psu.edu/articles/v9,n3,p170-178,Haller.pdf.
Hammer, P. C., Hughes, G., McClure, C, Reeves, C, & Salgado, D. (2005). Rural teacher
recruitment and retention practices: A review of the research literature, national survey of
rural superintendents, and case studies of programs in Virginia. Charleston, WV:
Edvantia. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED489143)
Hardré, P. L., Sullivan, D. W., & Crowson, M. H. (2009). Student characteristics and motivation
in rural high schools. Journal of Research in Rural Education, 24(16). Retrieved from
http://www.jrre.psu.edu/articles/24-16.pdf.
Hemmings, B., Hill, D., & Ray, D. (1997). First year university in retrospect: the voices of rural
students. In Celebrating Rural Education: Proceedings of the 13th National Conference
of the Society for Provision of Education in Rural Australia, Adelaide, South Australia,
July 6-8, 1997. (Eric Document Reproduction Service No. ED 429 791).
RURAL STUDENT PERSISTENCE
117
Hendrickson, K. A. (2012). Student resistance to schooling: disconnections with education in
rural Appalachia. The High School Journal, 95(4), 37-49.
Herman, M. V., Huffman, R. E., Anderson, K. E., & Golden, J. B. (2013). College entrance
examination score deficits in ag-intensive, rural, socioeconomically distressed North
Carolina counties: An inherent rick to the post-secondary degree attainment for rural high
school students. North American College and Teachers of Agriculture (NACTA) Journal,
57(4), 45-50.
Hicks, T. (2005). Assessing the academic, personal, and social experiences of pre-college
students. Journal of College Admission, (186), 19-24.
Hoppe, R. A., MacDonald, J. M., & Banker, D. E. (2006). America's diverse family farms:
Structure and finances. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Economic
Research Service.
Howley, C. B. (1998). Distortions of rural student achievement in the era of globalization.
Charleston, WV: Appalachia Educational Laboratory.
Howley, C. W. (2006). Remote possibilities: Rural children’s educational aspirations. Peabody
Journal of Education, 82, 62-80.
Howley, A., Rhodes, M., & Beall, J. (2009). Challenges facing rural schools: Implications for
gifted students. Journal for the education of the Gifted, 32(4), 515-536, 576-577.
Hughes, K. (2012). The college completion agenda: 2012 progress report. College Board
Advocacy and Policy Center. New York, NY.
Iceland, J., Weinberg, D. H., & Steinmetz, E. (2002). Racial and ethnic residential segregation in
the United States: 1980-2000. U.S. Census Bureau, Census Special Report, CENSR-3.
RURAL STUDENT PERSISTENCE
118
Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office. Retrieved from
http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/housing/housing_patterns/pdf/paa_paper.pdf.
Irvin, M. J., Meece, J. L., Byun, S., Farmer, T. W., & Hutchins, B. C. (2011). Relationship of
school context to rural youth’s educational achievement and aspirations. Journal of
Youth and Adolescence, (40)9, 1225-1242.
Jamelske, E. (2009). Measuring the impact of a university first-year experience program on
student GPA and retention. Higher Education, 57(3), 373-391.
Johnson, J. H., Parnell, A., Joyner, M., Christman, C. J., & Marsh, B. (2004). Racial apartheid in
a small North Carolina town. Review of Black Political Economy. 31:89-107. Retrieved
from http://www.facstaff.bucknell.edu/marsh/cankiri/racial_apartheid.pdf.
Johnson, J., & Strange, M. (2009). Why rural matters 2009: The realities of rural education
growth. Arlington, VA: The Rural School and Community Trust.
Kannapel, P. J., & DeYoung, A. J. (1999). The rural school problem in 1999: A review and
critique of the literature. Journal of Research in Rural Education, 15, 67-79. Retrieved
from http://www.jrre.psu.edu/articles/v15,n2,p67-79,Kannapel.pdf.
Kuh, G. D., Kinzie, J., Schuh, J. H., Whitt, E. J., & Associates (2005). Student success in
college: Creating conditions that matter. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Lapan, R. T., Tucker, B., Kim S., & Kosciulek, J. F. (2003). Preparing rural adolescents for post-
high school transitions. Journal of Counseling and Development. 81(3), 329-342.
Lawrence, B. K. (2009). Rural gifted education: A comprehensive literature review. Journal for
the Education of the Gifted, 32(4), 461-494.
RURAL STUDENT PERSISTENCE
119
Lawrence, B. K. (2001). Effects of state policies on facilities planning and construction in rural
districts. Charleston, WV: ERIC Clearinghouse on Rural Education and Small Schools.
(ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED459970)
Lee, J. M., & Rawls, A. (2010). The college completion agenda: 2010 progress report. College
Board Advocacy and Policy Center. New York, NY.
Lichter, D., & Johnson, K. (2007). The changing spatial concentration of America's rural poor
population. Rural Sociology, 72, 331-358.
Lichter, D. T., Parisi, D., Grice, S. M., & Taquino, M. C. (2007). National estimates of racial
segregation in rural and small-town America. Demography (pre-2011), 44(3): 563-81.
Lyson, T. A. (1979). Going to college: An emerging rung on the agricultural ladder. Rural
Sociology, 44, 773-790.
MacBrayne, P. S. (1987). Educational and occupational aspirations of rural youth: A review of
the literature. Research in Rural Education, 4(3), 135–141.
Maltzan, T. L. (2006). Rurality and higher education: Implications for identity and persistence.
Unpublished doctoral dissertation, The Ohio State University. Retrieved from
https://etd.ohiolink.edu/ap/0?0:APPLICATION_PROCESS%3DDOWNLOAD_ETD_S
UB_DOC_ACCNUM:::F1501_ID:osu1149275308%2Cattachment.
Maxwell, J. A. (2013). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach (3
rd
ed). Los
Angeles: Sage Publications.
McGranahan, D. A., & Beale, C. A. (2002). Understanding rural population loss. Rural America,
17(4), 2-11.
McGranahan, D., Cromartie, J., & Wojan, T. (2010). The two faces of rural population loss
through outmigration. Amber Waves, 8(4), 38-45.
RURAL STUDENT PERSISTENCE
120
McGrath, D. J., Swisher, R. R., Elder, G. H., Conger, R. D. (2001). Breaking new ground:
Diverse routes to college in rural America. Rural Sociology, (66)2, 244-267.
McIntire, W. G., Marion, S. F., & Quaglia, R. (1990). Rural school counselors: Their
communities and schools. The School Counselor, 37, 166-172.
Meece, J. L., & Farmer, T. W. (2009). Findings of the rural high school aspirations study.
National Research Center on Rural Education Support. Retrieved from
http://www.nrcres.org/HSA.htm.
Merriam, S. B. (2009). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation. San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Misra, R., McKean, M., West, S., & Russo, T. (2000). Academic stress of college student:
Comparison of student and faculty perceptions. College Student Journal, 34, 236-245.
Monk, D. (2007). Recruiting and retaining high-quality teachers in rural areas. Future of
Children, 17(1), 155-174.
Nagda, B. A., Gregerman, S. R., Jonides, J., Von Hippel, W., & Lerner, J. S. (1998).
Undergraduate student-faculty research partnerships affect student’s retention. The
Review of Higher Education, 22(1), 55-72.
National Center for Education Statistics (2007). Percentage of gifted and talented students in
public elementary schools, by sex, race/ethnicity, and state: 2002 and 2004. Retrieved
July 9, 2008, from http://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d07/tables/dt07_051.asp.
National Center for Education Statistics (2014). Identification of rural locales. Retrieved June
15, 2014, from http://nces.ed.gov/ccd/rural_locales.asp#defs.
RURAL STUDENT PERSISTENCE
121
National Center for Education Statistics (2014b). Jacoby High School. Retrieved June 22, 2014,
from
http://nces.ed.gov/globallocator/sch_info_popup.asp?Type=Public&ID=390494603605.
Neblett, E. W., Philip, C. L., Cogburn, C. D., & Sellers, R. M. (2006). African American
adolescents’ discrimination experiences and academic achievement: Racial socialization
as a cultural compensatory and protective factor. Journal of Black Psychology, 32(2),
199-218.
Noble, L., Flynn, N. T., Lee, J. D., & Hilton, D. (2007). Predicting successful college
experiences: Evidence from a first-year retention program. Journal of College Student
Retention, 9(1), 39-60.
Obama, B. H. (2009). “Remarks of President Barack Obama – As Prepared for Delivery;
Address to Joint Session of Congress,” Retrieved from
http://www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office/Remarks-of-President-Barack-Obama-
Address-to-Joint-Session-of-Congress.
Obama, B. H. (2009b). “Remarks by the President on The American Graduation Initiative.”
Retrieved from http://www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office/Remarks-by-the-President-
on-the-American-Graduation-Initiative-in-Warren-MI/.
Park, J. J. (2009). Taking race into account: Charting student attitudes towards affirmative
action. Research in Higher Education, 50(7), 670-690.
Parsons, J. W. (1992). Undergraduate persistence rates of rural Californians at the University of
California, Berkeley. Unpublished dissertation, University of California, Berkeley.
Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods (3
rd
ed.). Thousand Oaks,
CA: Sage.
RURAL STUDENT PERSISTENCE
122
Paul, C. (2005). A proposal to address the shortage of highly qualified mathematics teachers.
Mathematics Teacher, 98, 456-458.
Pearson, R. E., & Sutton, J. M. (1999). Rural and small town school counselors. Journal of
Research in Rural Education, 15, 90-100.
Peshkin, A. (1982). The imperfect union. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Post, D., & Stambach, A. (1999). District consolidation and rural school closure: E pluribus
unum? Journal of Research in Rural Education, 15(2). Retrieved February 26, 2009,
from http:// www.jrre.psu.edu/articles/vi5,n2,p106-117,Post.pdf
Provasnik, S., Kewal-Ramani, A., Coleman, M. M., Gilbertson, L., Herring, W., & Xie, Q.
(2007). Status of education in rural America (NCES 2007–040). Washington, DC:
National Center for Education Statistics. Retrieved from
http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2007/2007040.pdf.
Quaglia, R. (1989). Student aspirations: A critical dimension in effective schools. Journal of
Research in Rural Education, 6(2), 7-9. Retrieved from
http://www.jrre.psu.edu/articles/v6,n2,p7-9,Quaglia.pdf.
Renn, K. A., & Arnold, K. D. (2003). Reconceptualizing research on peer culture. Journal of
Higher Education, 74, 261-291.
Rojewski, J. W. (1999). Career-related predictors of work-bound and college-bound status of
adolescents in rural and nonrural areas. Journal of Research in Rural Education, 15, 141-
156. Retrieved from http://www.jrre.psu.edu/articles/v15,n3,p141-156,Rojewski.pdf.
Rollock, D. A., Westman, J. S., & Johnson, C. (1992). A Black student support group on a
predominantly White university campus: Issues for counselors and therapists. Journal for
Specialists in Group Work, 17, 243-252.
RURAL STUDENT PERSISTENCE
123
Rosenberg, M., & McCullough, B. (1981). Mattering: Inferred significance and mental health
among adolescents. Research in Community and Mental Health, 2, 163-182.
Rosenkoetter, S. E., Irwin, J. D., & Saceda, R. G. (2004). Addressing personnel needs for rural
areas. Teacher Education and Special Education, 27, 276-291.
Salinitri, G. (2005). The effects of formal mentoring on the retention rates for first-year, low
achieving students. Canadian Journal of Education, 28(4), 853-873, 924.
Schlossberg, N. K. (1981). A model for analyzing human adaptation to transition. Counseling
Psychologist, 9(2), 2-18.
Schlossberg, N. K. (1989). Marginality and mattering: Key issues in building community. In D.
C. Roberts (Ed.), Designing campus activities to foster a sense of community (pp. 5-15).
New Directions for Student Services, No. 48. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Schonert, K. A., Elliott, J. P., & Bills, D. B. (1991). Rural Iowa youth: A descriptive summary of
postsecondary persistence five years after high school. Research in Higher Education,
32(3), 269-288.
Snyder, T. D., & Dillow, S. A. (2010). Digest of education statistics 2009 (NCES 2010-013).
Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics, Institute of Education
Sciences, U.S. Department of Education.
Swift, D. (1988). Preparing rural students for an urban environment. Las Cruces, NM: ERIC.
Tinto, V. (1982). Limits of theory and practice in student attrition. Journal of Higher Education,
53(6), 687-700.
Tinto, V. (1993). Leaving college: Rethinking the causes and cures of student attrition (2nd
edition). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
RURAL STUDENT PERSISTENCE
124
Tinto, V. (1997). Classrooms as communities: Exploring the educational character of student
persistence. Journal of Higher Education, 68, 599-623.
Tinto, V. (2012). Completing College: Rethinking Institutional Action. Chicago: University of
Chicago Press.
Trow, M. (1992). Class, race, and higher education in America. American Behavior Scientist,
35(4/5), 585-605.
United States Census Bureau (2014a). Urban and rural areas. Retrieved from
http://www.census.gov/history/www/programs/geography/urban_and_rural_areas.html.
United States Census Bureau (2014b). Urban and rural classification. Retrieved from
http://www.census.gov/geo/reference/urban-rural.html.
United States Census Bureau (2014c). Geographic terms and concepts – urban and rural.
Retrieved from http://www.census.gov/geo/reference/gtc/gtc_urbanrural.html.
United States Census Bureau (2014d). Community facts – Jacoby village, Ohio. Retrieved from
http://factfinder2.census.gov/faces/nav/jsf/pages/community_facts.xhtml.
United States Census Bureau (2014e). Community facts – Snyder village, Ohio. Retrieved from
http://factfinder2.census.gov/faces/nav/jsf/pages/community_facts.xhtml#none.
United States Department of Agriculture (2013a). Report on the definition of “rural.” Retrieved
from http://www.rurdev.usda.gov/Reports/RDRuralDefinitionReportFeb2013.pdf.
United States Department of Agriculture (2013b). Geography of poverty. Retrieved from
http://www.ers.usda.gov/topics/rural-economy-population/rural-poverty-well-
being/geography-of-poverty.aspx#.Uu18sBb5nzI.
United States Department of Agriculture (2013c). Rural America at a glance. Retrieved from
http://www.ers.usda.gov/publications/eb-economic-brief/eb24.aspx#.Uu2Dehb5nzI.
RURAL STUDENT PERSISTENCE
125
Vigdor, J. L., Clotfelter, C. T. (2003). Retaking the SAT. The Journal of Human Resources,
38(1), 1-33.
Waters, M. C., & Jiménez, T. R. (2005). Assessing immigrant assimilation: New empirical and
theoretical challenge. Annual Review of Sociology, 31, 105-125.
Wei, M., Ku, T., & Liao, K. Y. (2011). Minority stress and college persistence attitudes among
African American, Asian American, and Latino students: Perception of the university
environment as a mediator. Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology, 17(2)
195-203.
Witherspoon, D., & Ennett, S. (2011). Stability and Change in rural youths’ educational
outcomes through the middle and high school years. Journal of Youth and Adolescence,
40(9), 1077-90.
Yan, W. (2002). Postsecondary enrollment and persistence of students from rural Pennsylvania.
Harrisburg, PA: Center for Rural Pennsylvania. Retrieved from
http://www.rural.palegislature.us/Postsecondary_Ed.pdf.
Zúñiga, V., & Hernández-León, R. (Eds.) (2005). New destinations: Mexican immigration in the
United States. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
RURAL STUDENT PERSISTENCE
126
APPENDIX A: SAMPLE EMAIL SOLICITATION
Hello. My name is Jason Hale and I am a doctoral student at the University of Southern
California – USC. The purpose of this email is to inform you about a research project entitled,
“First-Year Persistence of Rural High School Graduates at Four-Year Urban Institutions.” I am
partnering with your University and you have been identified as a potential study participant.
The purpose of this study is to learn more about the first-year experiences of rural high school
graduates at four-year urban institutions. Approximately 10-12 students will be interviewed for
this research study. Your participation is voluntary.
To determine eligibility, please complete a pre-survey at:
https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/Z2RLPWV
If selected, I will discuss the process with you more in detail over the phone.
If you would like to know more about this study, please contact me at jhale@usc.edu.
I appreciate your time and consideration. Thank you!
Jason Hale
RURAL STUDENT PERSISTENCE
127
APPENDIX B: ONLINE PARTICIPANT RECRUITMENT SURVEY
1.) What is your first and last name?
2.) What is your gender?
3.) What race/ethnicity do you identify as?
4.) What is the name of your hometown?
5.) What high school did you attend?
6.) What year did you graduate from high school?
7.) What college or university do you currently attend?
8.) Where is the college or university located? (City, State)
9.) How many years have you been a student at this institution?
10.) Is this the only college or university that you have attended? Explain.
11.) Are you a full-time, or part-time student? (Full-time / Part-time)
12.) Would you be willing to participate in a short (no longer than 60 minutes) interview with the
researcher about your college experiences? Study participants will be compensated with a $20
Target gift card. (Yes / No)
13.) If you are interested in participating, please provide your preferred email address and phone
number.
RURAL STUDENT PERSISTENCE
128
APPENDIX C: STUDENT PARTICIPANT INTERVIEW PROTOCOL
Main Research Question:
1.) What kinds of first-year experiences affect persistence for rural students, at an urban, four-
year institution?
a.) How do microsystems and mesosystems influence rural students’ decision to persist
beyond the first-year at an urban, four-year college or university?
“Q” = Question, followed by the number or letter referenced above.
The following codes indicate the relationship to theory:
• “MM” = Bronfenbrenner
Sub theories related to each question that may help interpret “MM”:
• “I” = Involvement, “S” = Mattering/Marginality, “P” = Persistence
1.) I’d like to start by learning more about your hometown or the type of community that
you’re from? (Background, MM, S)
2.) Describe your high school academic and social experiences? (Background, MM, I, S)
Follow up: Were you involved in school organizations or clubs?
3.) Tell me all of the things that you considered when making your decision to attend
University X? (Background, MM, I, S)
Follow up: Which of those became the most important reasons why you chose
that school?
4.) Did you visit University X before deciding to enroll? (Background)
Follow up: If so, tell me about that visit? If not, why didn’t you visit?
5.) As a high school student, what did you imagine attending University X was going to
be like? (Background, MM, I, S)
6.) Describe how you parents and/or family felt about you enrolling at University X?
(QA, MM, S)
7.) Tell me about your first month on-campus? (Q1, QA, MM, I, S, P)
Probe: Were you a full-time student or part-time student during your first year?
(Q1, QA, MM, I)
RURAL STUDENT PERSISTENCE
129
Probe: Did you live on-campus during your first-year? (Q1, QA, MM, I)
Follow up: Tell me about your relationship with your roommate.
8.) Did you work during your first year at University X? (Q1, QA, MM, I)
Probe: If so, on-campus or off-campus?
9.) Tell me about your experiences off-campus during your first-year? (Q1, QA, MM, I)
Follow up: How did you feel about the urban environment?
10.) How would you describe your experiences with homesickness that first-year? (Q1,
QA, MM, S, P)
Follow up: How often did you go home? Why?
11.) What were your classes like during your freshman year? (Q1, QA, MM, I, S)
Follow up: Talk about your experiences with faculty members that first year.
Follow up: What was your GPA at the end of your first year?
12.) What responsibilities or activities did you have outside of school during your
freshman year? (Q1, QA, MM, I)
13.) How did these responsibilities/activities affect your academics and social life during
your freshman year? (Q1, QA, MM, I)
14.) Describe any kind of first-year social activities that you enjoyed at University X?
(Q1, QA, MM, I, S)
Probe: Explain why you enjoyed these activities.
15.) When you think about your freshman year experience at University X, are there
particular relationships that you developed that come to mind? (Q1, QA, MM, P)
Follow up: How important would you say these relationships were to your
freshman year?
16.) Can you talk about any situations that may have occurred during your first-year that
caused you to want to leave University X and not return? (Q1, QA, MM, P)
17.) Tell me about your thought process in deciding to return to University X for a
second year. (Q1, QA, MM, P)
Follow up: What aspects were most important to you in your decision to return?
18.) At the conclusion of your first-year, did University X feel like a home to you? (QA,
MM, P)
Follow up: If so, how did you come to that realization? Or why didn’t it feel like
a home?
RURAL STUDENT PERSISTENCE
130
APPENDIX D: INFORMED CONSENT FOR NON-MEDICAL RESEARCH
University of Southern California
Rossier School of Education
INFORMED CONSENT FOR NON-MEDICAL RESEARCH
First-Year Persistence of Rural High School Graduates
at Four-Year, Urban Institutions
You are invited to participate in a research study conducted by Jason I. Hale at the
University of Southern California, because you are a rural high school graduate currently
attending an urban, four-year college or university. 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. You may also decide to discuss participation with your family or
friends. 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 study is to learn more about the first-year experiences of rural high
school graduates at four-year urban institutions. With this student insight, urban
postsecondary professionals may be able to improve practice to increase rural student
retention and graduation rates.
STUDY PROCEDURES
If you volunteer to participate in this study, you will be asked to take part in a 60-minute
interview regarding your first-year experience at the urban, four-year college or university
that you currently attend. You will also be asked to submit a copy of your unofficial college
transcripts; however, submission of these transcripts is voluntary. One-on-one interviews
will either take place via phone or online (using the visual/audio Skype platform). The
researcher will utilize an interview protocol and the interview will be recorded. The
interviews will be transcribed and the transcripts coded for emerging themes.
POTENTIAL RISKS AND DISCOMFORTS
There are no anticipated risks in participating in this study.
POTENTIAL BENEFITS TO PARTICIPANTS AND/OR TO SOCIETY
You will be able to reflect upon your college experience as it relates to retention and
graduation. Urban college administrators and professionals will be able to achieve a better
understanding of rural populations and their set of needs within this institutional context.
PAYMENT/COMPENSATION FOR PARTICIPATION
You will receive a $20 Target gift card for participating in this study.
RURAL STUDENT PERSISTENCE
131
CONFIDENTIALITY
We will keep your records for this study confidential as far as permitted by law. However, if
we are required to do so by law, we will disclose confidential information about you. 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 data will be stored in a locked storage container in the home of the researcher and on a
password protected computer. At the conclusion of the research project, the digital
recordings will remain in locked storage indefinitely until it is deemed appropriate by the
researcher to be professionally deleted. It is important to note that data must be kept for a
minimum of three years after the completion of the study. Transcripts of interviews will
have no personal information connecting them to individual participants or to institutions.
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’S CONTACT INFORMATION
If you have any questions or concerns about the research, please feel free to contact the
Principal Investigator, Jason I. Hale, and/or the Faculty Dissertation Chair, Dr. Tracy
Tambascia. You may reach Jason I. Hale at 865-206-6387 (C) or jhale@usc.edu. You may
reach Dr. Tambascia at tpoon@rossier.usc.edu.
RIGHTS OF RESEARCH PARTICIPANT – 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. I have been given a chance to ask questions.
My questions have been answered to my satisfaction, and I agree to participate in this
study. I have been given a copy of this form.
AUDIO
□ I agree to be audio-recorded
□ I do not want to be audio-recorded
RURAL STUDENT PERSISTENCE
132
Name of Participant
Signature of Participant Date
SIGNATURE OF INVESTIGATOR
I have explained the research to the participant and answered all of his/her questions. I
believe that he/she understands the information described in this document and freely
consents to participate.
Name of Person Obtaining Consent
Signature of Person Obtaining Consent Date
RURAL STUDENT PERSISTENCE
133
APPENDIX E: STUDY INFORMATION SHEET
University of Southern California
Rossier School of Education
PROJECT TITLE: First-Year Persistence of Rural High School Graduates at Four-Year, Urban
Institutions
APPROVAL DATE OF PROJECT:
EXPIATION DATE OF PROJECT:
PURPOSE OF THE RESEARCH: The purpose of this study is to learn more about the first-year
experiences of rural high school graduates at four-year urban institutions. With this student
insight, urban postsecondary professionals may be able to improve practice to increase rural
student retention and graduation rates.
Response to the interview questions will constitute consent to participate in this research
project.
PROCEDURES OR METHODS TO BE USED: This will be a qualitative study relying upon
qualitative interview methods to answer research questions. Working with the University, I will
secure contact information for prospective participants. I will send out a survey to these
prospective participants explaining the study and asking each to complete a brief set of questions
to determine eligibility and willingness to participate. Students who meet the study requirements
and who indicate a desire to participate will receive a follow-up phone call or email asking them
to schedule a 60-minute interview. Using an interview protocol, recorded interviews will either
take place via phone or online (using the visual/audio Skype platform). The interviews will be
transcribed and the transcripts coded for emerging themes.
POTENTIAL RISKS AND DISCOMFORTS: None
POTENTIAL BENEFITS TO PARTICIPANTS AND/OR TO SOCIETY: Participants will be
able to reflect upon their college experience as it relates to retention and graduation. Urban
college administrators and professionals will be able to achieve a better understanding of rural
populations and their set of needs within this institutional context.
PAYMENT/COMPENSATION FOR PARTICIPATION: Participants will each receive a $20
Target gift card for participating in the study.
CONFIDENTIALITY: Pseudonyms will be used throughout the study to protect all participants
and institutions. All data will be kept in a locked storage container in the home of the researcher.
At the conclusion of the research project, the digital recordings will remain in locked storage
indefinitely until it is deemed appropriate by the researcher to be professionally deleted. It is
important to note that data must be kept for a minimum of three years after the completion of the
study. Transcripts of interviews will have no personal information connecting them to individual
participants or to institutions.
RURAL STUDENT PERSISTENCE
134
CONTACTS AND QUESTIONS: The researcher conducting this study is Jason I. Hale. The
dissertation chair is Tracy Tambascia. You may ask any questions you have now or later by
contacting 865-206-6387 (C) or jhale@usc.edu. You will be given a copy of this form to keep
for your records.
Abstract (if available)
Abstract
This dissertation assesses the kinds of first-year experiences that affect persistence for rural students at an urban, four-year institution, as understood through the guiding theoretical framework of Urie Bronfenbrenner’s developmental ecological model. Despite the growing number of rural high school students matriculating to postsecondary institutions, this student population has received little research attention. Not much is known about the background characteristics, precollege experiences, and postsecondary educational experiences of these students and how these factors may shape their college completion. Using data collected from semi-structured interviews with twelve rural high school graduates attending an urban, four-year institution in the Southeastern United States, findings suggest a student’s formation of relationships and networks in their microsystems and mesosystems had a positive effect on persistence. This study recommends that: (1) urban institutions should identify prospective and admitted rural high school students to encourage participation in living and learning communities on campus, (2) urban institutions should implement an elective mentoring program for rural first- year students that would pair them with upperclassmen from a rural background, (3) urban institutions should implement and require a first-year diversity course for all students, (4) urban institutions should actively promote student success programs and resources on-campus, such as tutoring services, and study skills development, and (5) urban institutions must be mindful of how tuition costs affect those in rural areas.
Linked assets
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
Conceptually similar
PDF
Factors impacting four-year postsecondary matriculation at a college-preparatory, Catholic high school: an innovation study
PDF
First-generation college students: perceptions, access, and participation at urban university
PDF
Latino male community college students' persistence to transfer
PDF
Non-academic factors affecting sense of belonging in first year commuter students at a four-year Hispanic serving institution
PDF
Factors influencing the academic persistence of college students with ADHD
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
Developing a sense of belonging and persistence through mentoring for first-generation students
PDF
Building mentoring relationships: the experiences of first-generation Latinx scholars
PDF
Impact of academic scholarships on persistence of first-generation low-income students
PDF
A pathway to persistence: perspectives of academic advising and first-generation undergraduate students
PDF
Play-testing a video game prototype with low-SES college-bound urban high school students
PDF
The intersection of grit and social capital: a mixed methods examination of successful first-generation college students
PDF
Fulfillment of a regional college promise: lessons from the first year, first cohort
PDF
High-achieving yet underprepared: first generation youth and the challenge of college readiness
PDF
Persistence interventions for Native Hawaiian students
PDF
Perspectives of Native American community college students
PDF
School-wide implementation of the elements of effective classroom instruction: lessons from high-performing high-poverty urban schools
PDF
Latino high school students: Self-efficacy and college choice
PDF
The contribution of family members to first-generation college student success: a narrative approach
PDF
The advanced placement program: a case study of one urban high school
Asset Metadata
Creator
Hale, Jason I.
(author)
Core Title
First-year persistence of rural high school graduates at four-year, urban colleges and universities
School
Rossier School of Education
Degree
Doctor of Education
Degree Program
Education (Leadership)
Publication Date
09/29/2017
Defense Date
08/28/2017
Publisher
University of Southern California
(original),
University of Southern California. Libraries
(digital)
Tag
OAI-PMH Harvest,persistence,rural,rural high school,urban colleges,urban universities
Language
English
Contributor
Electronically uploaded by the author
(provenance)
Advisor
Tambascia, Tracy (
committee chair
), Ballaret, Karen (
committee member
), Venegas, Kristan (
committee member
)
Creator Email
jhale@usc.edu,jhale162@gmail.com
Permanent Link (DOI)
https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c40-440261
Unique identifier
UC11264260
Identifier
etd-HaleJasonI-5799.pdf (filename),usctheses-c40-440261 (legacy record id)
Legacy Identifier
etd-HaleJasonI-5799.pdf
Dmrecord
440261
Document Type
Dissertation
Rights
Hale, Jason I.
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
Tags
persistence
rural high school
urban colleges
urban universities