University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Community college transfer student involvement experiences at a selective, private four-year university

(USC Thesis Other)

Community college transfer student involvement experiences at a selective, private four-year university

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content

COMMUNITY COLLEGE TRANSFER STUDENT INVOLVEMENT EXPERIENCES
AT A SELECTIVE, PRIVATE FOUR-YEAR UNIVERSITY

by

Carolina Castillo

A Dissertation Presented to the
FACULTY OF THE USC ROSSIER SCHOOL OF EDUCATION
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
In Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree
DOCTOR OF EDUCATION

December 2011

Copyright 2011 Carolina Castillo

ii

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

This dissertation is a culmination of the time and support of many individuals
who are dear to me and who have taught me a great deal along this journey. I would like
start by thanking my committee beginning with my chair, Professor Melora Sundt, who
provided me with guidance, vision, and encouragement from the early days of being a
professor in my masters program to agreeing to chair my dissertation committee. My
committee members, Professors Adriana Kezar and Tatiana Melguizo, provided me with
expert insight and constructive criticism that was valuable in guiding my work and
growth as a scholar.
This work could not have been possible without my family’s love,
encouragement, and confidence in my abilities. I am eternally gratefully to my mother,
Eloisa Castillo, who showed me strength and persistence to overcome any challenge and
whose words of wisdom have been a guiding light in my life. I am thankful to my father,
Guillermo Castillo, for his inquisitiveness that helped me stay grounded and for always
fulfilling my bizarre requests without question. I am thankful to my sister, Patricia
Castillo, who has been a pillar of emotional support throughout the most trying and
joyous of times. My niece, Patricia E. Sevaaetasi, with her great imagination and drive
inspired me to be creative in my thinking. My deepest thanks goes to the love of my life,
my son, Robert A. Castillo Amaro, Jr., for his unconditional love, understanding, and
persistence during my absences and for the generosity of bear hugs when I needed them
the most. Mijo, I hope you are as proud of me as I am of you.
iii

I want to acknowledge my extended family who has been incredibly
understanding and encouraging: Brenda Farfan who is like a sister to me, Robert Amaro
for his support, Eddie and Martha Amaro who cheered me on every step of the way, and
my nina Alicia Carbajal for being so caring and thoughtful.
I would also like to thank my colleagues and friends who were steadfast in their
support and had an overflowing well of encouraging words. Thank you to my dear
colleagues for your flexibility, thoughtful insight, and mentorship throughout my higher
education pathway: Professor Reynaldo Baca, Professor Michael Genzuk, Carolyn Webb
de Macías, Professor Reynaldo F. Macías, Professor Robert Rueda, Raul Vargas,
Domenika Lynch, Dolores Sotelo, Lisa Gallegos, Blair Sillers, and Ghecemy Lopez.
Thank you to my dearest friends for cheering me on, never letting me give up, and for
your friendship: Ana Martinez, Teresa Avila, Elaine Padilla, Karina Cabral,
Dr. Paz Oliverez, Dr. Gustavo Ortiz, and Manuel Rodarte.

iv

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ii

LIST OF TABLES vi

LIST OF FIGURES viii

ABSTRACT ix

CHAPTER 1: CONTEXT FOR LATINAS(OS) IN HIGHER EDUCATION 1
Background of the Problem 5
Statement of the Problem 9
Purpose of the Study 11
Research Questions 14
Hypotheses 15
Significance of the Problem 15
Methodology 16
Assumptions 17
Limitations 17
Delimitations 18
Definition of Terms 18
Organization of the Study 20

CHAPTER 2: REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE 22
Student Persistence 24
Community College Transfer Students 30
Barriers to Transfer 30
Student Adjustment 33
Transfer Shock 36
Latina(o) Community College Students 37
Academic Preparation 38
Student Adjustment 38
Campus Culture 39
Transfer Adjustment of Students of Color 42
Conclusions 44
Implications 45

v

CHAPTER 3: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY 48
Research Questions 48
Hypotheses 51
Research Design 51
Population and Sample 52
Instrumentation 53
Data Collection 61
Data Analysis 63
Limitations 64
Summary 65

CHAPTER 4: DATA AND RESULTS 66
Sample Characteristics 66
Reliability Analysis of Key Variables 71
Results for Total Sample 76
Factorial Analysis of Variance 81
Results for Latina(o) Sample 90
Latina(o) Sample Group Factorial Analysis of Variance 96
Summary 101

CHAPTER 5: DISCUSSION AND IMPLICATIONS 103
Data Analysis and Recommendations for Future Research 103
Findings for Total Sample Involvement 106
Findings for Latina(o) Sample Involvement 108
Findings for Student Adjustment 111
Implications for Practice 115
Conclusion 118

REFERENCES 120

APPENDICES
Appendix A: Survey Instrument Email and Consent 126
Appendix B: Survey Instrument 128

vi

LIST OF TABLES
Table 1: Factor Loading for Quality of Effort – Academic Involvement Scale 57

Table 2: Factor Loading for Quality of Effort – Social Involvement Scale 58

Table 3: Factor Loading for Social Adjustment Scale 59

Table 4: Factor Loading for Academic Adjustment Scale 60

Table 5: Respondent Distribution by Racial/Ethnic Identification 68

Table 6: Respondent Distribution by Age 69

Table 7: Respondent Distribution by Gender 70

Table 8: Respondent Distribution by Major 71

Table 9: Descriptive Statistics for Key Variables 72

Table 10: Reliability Coefficients for Academic Adjustment 73

Table 11: Reliability Coefficients for Social Adjustment 74

Table 12: Reliability Coefficients for Academic Involvement 75

Table 13: Reliability Coefficients for Social Involvement 76

Table 14: Descriptive Statistics for Key Variables 77

Table 15: Correlation Results for Key Variables 78

Table 16: Tests of Between-Subjects Effects for Social Adjustment 82

Table 17: Tests of Between-Subjects Effects for Academic Adjustment 83

Table 18: Estimated Marginal Means for Academic Adjustment and Major 84

Table 19: Latina(o) and Non-Latina(o) Respondent Distribution by Age 91

Table 20: Latina(o) and Non-Latina(o) Sample Distribution by Gender 92

vii

Table 21: Latina(o) and Non-Latina(o) Respondent Distribution by Major 93

Table 22: Descriptive Statistics for Key Variables for Latina(o) and 94
Non-Latina(o) Groups

Table 23: Independent-Samples T-test for Key Variables for Latina(o) and 95
Non-Latina(o) Groups

Table 24: Reliability Statistics for Key Variables for the Latina(o) Group 86

Table 25: Latina(o) and Non-Latina(o) Student Sample Group Correlation 89
Results for key Variables

Table 26: Tests of Between-Subjects Effects for Latina(o) and 97
Non-Latina(o) Student Social Adjustment

Table 27: Tests of Between-Subjects Effects for Latina(o) and Academic 99
Adjustment

Table 28: Estimated Marginal Means for Latina(o) Sample Academic 100
Adjustment and Major

Table 29: Estimated Marginal Means for Non-Latina(o) Sample 101
Academic Adjustment and Major

viii

LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1: Hispanic Undergraduate College Completions Rates 3
Figure 2: Community College Transfer Student Adjustment Pathway 13
Figure 3: Community College Transfer Student Adjustment Pathway 49
Figure 4: Community College Transfer Student Adjustment Pathway 85
Correlations for All Respondents
Figure 5: Latina(o) and Total Group Adjustment Pathway Correlations 105

ix

ABSTRACT
This dissertation tested the constructs of academic and social involvement and
adjustment on grades as a pathway to explain community college transfer student
experiences beyond the concept of transfer shock. The study contributes to the growing
body of literature on Latina(o) community college transfer student experiences with the
application of conventional theories of student involvement at a traditional, highly
diverse institution. The presence of transfer shock was examined as well as the degree to
which the community college transfer student involvement model helped to explain
student persistence, as defined by GPA. It was hypothesized that Latina(o) student
involvement in social and academic activities would positively contribute to persistence.
Factorial analysis of variance was used to test the relationship between two key variables:
social and academic involvement and four independent variables: race/ethnicity, age,
major, and gender. The analyses focused on seven research questions that examined the
relationship between these variables and were conducted with two groups: the total
sample of 517 students and a sub-sample of 75 Latina(o) students. The results of the
study confirmed that the community college transfer student involvement pathway
worked for the large sample. However, the pathway was not a good fit for explaining
Latina(o) student involvement experiences. The student engagement construct is
reviewed as a better fit for studying underrepresented transfer students’ higher education
experiences. Limitations of the study are discussed including implications for practice
and recommendations for future research.
1

CHAPTER 1
CONTEXT FOR LATINAS(OS) IN HIGHER EDUCATION
In the United States, educational attainment is linked to social and economic
mobility. A college degree has become a key minimum requirement for upward mobility
(Fry, 2002; Suarez, 2003). Relatedly, there has been a call from the federal government
as well as private education foundations to increase the number of adults with
postsecondary degrees in the United States (Kelly, Schneider, & Carey, 2010).
In particular, minority student access to higher education has become a major initiative
for policy makers and postsecondary institutions.
Despite this interest, research studies and education statistics continue to
demonstrate that a disproportionate number of Latinas(os) complete high school and
continue on to college (Jasinski, 2000; NCES, 2003). The economic progress and civic
involvement of the Latina(o) population is threatened by low high school and college
going rates, creating a crisis for the future of this growing population and for the nation.
The Latina(o) population in the United States, particularly in California, has
grown exponentially over the last couple of decades. Estimates suggest that 12% of the
population in the United States is of Hispanic origin (Hagedorn & Cepeda, 2003). It is
also estimated that by the year 2020, Latinas(os) will comprise 22% of the college-age
population in the nation (Kelly, Schneider, & Carey, 2010). The growth of the Latina(o)
population has become a challenge for educators, administrators, and policy makers
throughout the educational system. Latinas(os) are the least likely of any other major
2

group to graduate from high school, attend college, and obtain a college degree (Gandara,
1997; NCES, 2003).
Higher education researchers have focused much attention on factors that
contribute to the retention of college students such as social and academic integration
(Tinto, 1993) and involvement (Astin, 1984). In addition, access to financial aid, level of
academic preparedness, campus climate, and degree of commitment to educational goals
impact minority college student retention (Nora & Rendon, 1996; Swail, Redd, & Perna,
2003). According to the National Center for Education Statistics (2003), the enrollment
of Latinas(os) in colleges and universities increased by 22% between 1980 and 2000.
However, the postsecondary enrollments for Latinas(os) are still proportionately lower
than their white counterparts (NCES, 2003).
In a recent report (Kelly, Schneider, & Carey, 2010) on enrollment and
completion data reported by 641 colleges and universities across the nation, Latina(o)
students’ completion rates significantly lagged behind their white counterparts. Figure 1
illustrates the extent to which graduation rates for Latina(o) students fell behind their
white peers (NCES, 2003). The data show a six to eight percentage point difference in
Latina(o) completions rates at various institutional types from the least competitive
colleges to highly competitive ones. Proportionately, Latinas(os) over age 25 still lag
behind in the completion of a bachelor’s degree with 1 in 4 whites completing a college
degree compared to 1 in 10 Latins(os) and 1 in 6 Blacks (NCES, 2003). Thus, although
Latina(o) student college enrollments may have increased in the last decade, a great
3

disparity continues between their enrollment and their postsecondary educational
completion rates (Fry, 2002).
Figure 1: Hispanic Undergraduate College Completions Rates
Note: Adapted from “Community College Students: Goals, Academic Preparation, and
Outcomes,” NCES, 2003.

A key pathway to completion of a four year college degree is through the
community college system, with transfer to a four year institution. According to the
California Postsecondary Education Commission (2002), in the year 2000, Latinas(os)
made up 28% of the community college enrollment in California and over 50% in the Los
Angeles Community Colleges. Of those Latinas(os) attending community colleges, only
21% transferred to a UC or CSU, while even fewer (18%) enrolled in a four-year
institution overall. In the 1999-2000 academic year, the large proportion of Latinas(os)
attending community colleges resulted in Latinas(os) earning 9% of all associate degrees
(NCES, 2003). These statistics for Latina(o) students confirm Johnson’s (2009)
4

positioning of the community college as an entry point to the postsecondary education
pathway for minority, low income, and working adults who would not otherwise attend
college.
While Latinas(os) are one of the largest populations utilizing the community
college system in California (Fry, 2002), little is known about the factors that impact their
success, patterns of involvement, and adjustment experiences after they transfer to four-
year institutions (Laanan, 1998). Numerous studies (discussed in Chapter 2) suggest that
behaviors that contribute to a student’s involvement in college life are highly correlated
with completion of a four year degree (Astin, 1984; Tinto, 1993). Rarely have transfer
students’ behaviors been disaggregated in those studies, nor have transfer studies
disaggregated student experiences by race/ethnicity as transfer populations are often
small. While a key issue for transfer students, “transfer shock,” has been identified (Hills,
1965), that concept presumes that the shock is related to under-represented students
transferring from a more diverse, less rigorous institution (the community college) to a
less diverse, more rigorous institution (the four year college).
This study tested those assumptions by applying a traditional model of student
involvement (Astin,1984; Tinto, 1993) with the community college transfer student
population at a highly diverse, highly selective traditional four-year university. The study
sought to test for the presence of transfer shock, and the degree to which the model
helped to explain student persistence, as defined by GPA. This chapter calls attention to
the gaps in the research on community college transfer students, problems they encounter
5

that impact their persistence, and the significance of the present study as a contribution to
the research on Latina(o) community college transfer student involvement and its effect
on their persistence.
Background of the Problem
Researchers have explored various areas of community college student
achievement and behaviors. Barriers to transfer such as accreditation issues and loss of
transfer credits (Arnold, 2001) have been identified. The experiences of community
college transfer students at the four-year university have focused on academic
performance and transfer shock (Hills, 1965; Harbin, 1997; Cejda, Kaylor, & Rewey,
1998) and preparing for transfer (Harbin, 1997). These studies have informed the
literature about the complexities of community college student experiences and their
transition to four-year institutions. However, the literature specifically on Latina(o)
community college transfer students is sparse and recent studies on this issue are lacking.
The influence of academic preparedness or “transfer readiness” of Latina(o)
students on their educational outcomes has recently been studied. Berger and Melaney
(2003) found that students who were better prepared for the transfer process successfully
adjusted to the four-year university and experienced better educational outcomes.
Students’ behaviors at the university differed greatly than when they attended the
community college. Results also showed that students who had family commitments and
who worked more hours off-campus were less likely to be satisfied with their university
experience (Berger & Melaney, 2003). Students’ knowledge of the transfer process,
6

academic preparation, and knowledge of university expectations are vital to their ability
to transfer and successfully adjust to the four-year university.
Research conducted by Suarez (2003) focused on individual, institutional, and
environmental factors at the community college that influenced Latina(o) transfer
students. The effect of a sense of belonging at the four-year institution on Latina(o)
student achievement has also been explored (Hurtado & Carter, 1996). Researchers
(Hurtado & Carter, 1996) found a strong relationship between students’ sense of
belonging and frequent interactions with classmates and faculty outside of class.
However, they found that grades were not significantly related to students’ sense of
belonging as was expected (Hurtado & Carter 1996). Latina(o) students seemed to excel
academically regardless of their sense of affiliation with the institution.
Similarly, the influence of campus culture and racial climate on Latina(o) student
achievement and transfer to the four-year institution has been investigated (Rendon &
Valadez, 1993). The study found family influences impacted students’ educational
aspirations with males encouraged to attend college with a focus on law, business, or
vocational careers while females were encouraged to seek employment (Rendon &
Valadez; 1993). Due to their family’s meager economic students in this study were forced
to seek employment to contribute financially to the household as well as to support their
educational costs (Rendon & Valadez; 1993). As a result, the time commitment for their
employment interfered with the students’ studies and prolonged their enrollment at the
community college or worse, contributed to their dropping out of college (Rendon &
7

Valadez, 1993). Researchers (Rendong & Valadez, 1993) also found that as a result of
the fast-paced increase of immigrants at the institution, its faculty, curriculum, and
policies were not prepared to address the needs of the large immigrant population.
Little research exists on the post-transfer experiences of Latina(o) community
college students at four-year colleges. The growing body of literature in this area is
comprised of pioneering research studies that cover various aspects of the transfer student
experience. Wawrzynski and Sedlacek (2003) examined the differences in student
expectations, learning outcomes, and academic behaviors by race and gender of transfer
students who attended a four-year institution. Significant differences were found between
males and females with females tending to prefer a more holistic academic experience in
terms of their learning, academic and social behaviors (Wawrzynski & Sedlacek, 2003).
Significant differences were also found among ethnic groups in their academic behaviors.
Latinas(os) were more likely to want a broad and well-rounded education and to learn to
communicate orally than their white peers (Wawrzynski & Sedlacek, 2003).
Theoretical frameworks on student persistence (Tinto, 1993; Astin 1984) at four-
year institutions have been applied as the tools for understanding undergraduate student
experiences. However, the multitude of research using these frameworks has paid little
attention to the experiences of underrepresented and community college transfer students.
Thus, the effectiveness of traditional models for understanding the experiences of
minority college students has been questioned (Rendon, et al. 2000; Tierney, 1999). The
model of student departure (Tinto, 1993) has been criticized for expanding the concept of
8

rites of passage to include the passage from one culture into another; in this case a
student’s assimilation into the college campus (Tierney, 1999). According to the student
departure model, students must become well integrated or assimilated into the campus
culture which requires students to disassociate themselves from their ethnic identity and
community in order to persist (Tinto, 1999). However, critics assert that it is impractical
for a student to completely separate themselves from their culture and community in
order to successfully integrate at the college without suffering other psychological, social,
and financial retribution (Tierney, 1999).
More recently, researchers (Kuh 2009; Harper & Quaye, 2009) have expanded on
the construct of student involvement to include student and institutional engagement. The
student engagement framework builds on student involvement – participation in
educational and social activities and organizations – by measuring the degree to which
students engage in activities beyond their mere presence at an activity – ask questions,
apply theoretical concepts, discuss ideas from readings, and take on leadership roles.
Additionally, researchers (Bensimon & Dowd, 2009) have begun to bestow higher
education institutions with the responsibility of student learning and persistence by
examining institutional policies and educational offerings that contribute to student
engagement.
The literature on student persistence has continued to grow and evolve as the
diversity of student populations and their varying experiences challenge traditional
models of student persistence. Adding to the complexity of student experiences is the
9

community college transition, transfer shock, and the behaviors, expectations and
experiences of minority transfer students at four-year universities. The literature on
community college students has confirmed the complex circumstances and needs of
Latina(o) community college transfer students and demonstrate the need for further
research in this area.
Statement of the Problem
Student enrollments in higher education are increasingly representative of diverse
backgrounds with complex college-going patterns that challenge colleges and universities
to re-evaluate their teaching, research, curriculum, and programming practices. It is
estimated that minorities will comprise 40% of undergraduate enrollments in the next two
decades (Cole, 1997). Latinas(os) are disproportionately represented at community
colleges. In 2000, Latinas(os) accounted for 28% of community college enrollments with
over 50% in the Los Angeles Community College system. Latinas(os) over the age of 25
demonstrate dismal graduation rates with 1 in 10 Latinas(os) completing a college degree
compared with 1 in 4 whites and 1 in 6 blacks (NCES, 2003).
The literature on Latina(o) academic achievement highlights the inadequate
educational opportunities afforded to Latina(o) students and is an “indictment of a system
that has been unable to rectify inequities in how it educates all students, not just those
from the higher rungs of the economic ladder or those with an educational legacy that
opens up their future educational options” (Swail, Redd, & Perna, p. 56). It is evident that
10

the implications of studying Latina(o) student educational achievement in higher
education are of paramount concern for educators, administrators, and policy makers.
The academic and social involvement (Tinto, 1993) and academic and social
adjustment (Laanan, 1998) of community college students have been shown to impact
student persistence and achievement. Increasing numbers of Latina(o) students who
transfer to a four-year institution require colleges and universities to develop an
understanding of the complex experiences of this population in order to effectively serve
them and promote student success.
Current retention models may not adequately address the characteristics and
experiences of minority students (Tierney, 1999). Involvement (Tinto, 1993) has been
used for decades to study traditional students’ educational experiences at traditional
colleges and universities. Harper and Quaye (2009) caution that the changing
demographics of universities today demand new theoretical constructs, curriculum
development, and programming that addresses the needs of a diverse student population.
With the higher education context changing, a one-size fits all approach is no longer
effective in supporting students to meet their educational goals. Minority students
attending predominantly white institutions have a difficult time adjusting to the
institution (Hawkins & Larabee, 2005) and often experience feelings of alienation due to
perceptions of a negative cultural climate (Hurtado, 1992).
With community colleges being the primary point of entry to a postsecondary
education for Latinas(os), identifying the factors that enhance the transition and
11

adjustment at the four-year university is important in the retention and graduation of this
important group. Can conventional theories of student involvement (Tinto, 1993; Astin
1984) used in traditional higher education settings be used to explain the experiences of
Latina(o) community college transfer students at a traditional, yet diverse four-year
university? If we are to increase the representation of Latinas(os) holding undergraduate
degrees, increasing enrollments is not the end all solution. It is critical to develop a better
understanding of Latina(o) students’ postsecondary pathway from the community college
to the four-year institution. This pathway includes students’ involvement defined as the
amount of physical and psychological energy that is devoted to their education as well as
their adjustment defined as satisfactorily meeting the academic standards at the four-year
university.
Identifying the factors that impact community college transfer student experiences
during the transition from community college to the four-year university is critical to
Latina(o) students’ educational outcomes (Laanan, 1998). Furthermore, research on
student involvement experiences will facilitate the development of successful access,
retention, and student support service interventions as well as effective institutional and
national policy making.
Purpose of the Study
This study sought to examine how community college transfer students’
involvement influences their social and academic involvement at the four-year university.
Conventional models of student persistence (Tinto, 1993; Astin, 1984) have been used to
12

examine traditional students attending traditional institutions. The highly cited traditional
model of student persistence (Tinto, 1993; Astin, 1984) was applied to a highly diverse
yet traditional four-year university to test its strength in explaining student persistence
among an equally diverse community college transfer student population. Key variables
included in the study were: a) student social involvement at the four-year university
(Tinto, 1993; Astin, 1984; Laanan 1998; Laanan, 2001), b) academic involvement (Tinto,
1993; Astin, 1984; Laanan 1998; Laanan, 2001), c) academic adjustment (Laanan 1998;
Laanan, 2001), and d) social adjustment (Laanan, 1998; Laanan, 2001).
The multifaceted characteristics and academic experiences of community college
transfer students have been clearly documented. While some have focused on
institutional barriers to the transfer process (Arnold, 2001; Harbin, 1997), others have
focused on academic indicators such as transfer shock (Hills, 1965; Cejda, Kaylor, &
Rewey, 1998) that influence transfer student persistence (Kozeracki, 2001). This study
contributes to the gap that exists in the research on community college transfer students
that has neglected the factors that contribute to their involvement at the four-year
university as a critical component to student success.
Figure 2 demonstrates the proposed pathway for community college students who
transfer to a four-year university. The study examined the relationship between students’
academic and social involvement and their social and academic adjustment and grades.
The study also examined the relationship between students’ social and academic
adjustment and grades.

Figure 2: Community College Transfer Student Involvement Pathway

13
14

Research Questions
This study focused on eight research questions that emerged from the literature
reviewed.
1. What is the relationship between transfer students’ social involvement at
the four-year university and their social adjustment at the four-year
university?
2. What is the relationship between transfer students’ academic involvement
at the four-year college and their academic adjustment?
3. What is the relationship between transfer students’ social involvement at
the four-year university and their grades?
4. What is the relationship between transfer students’ academic involvement
at the four-year university and their grades?
5. What is the relationship between transfer students’ social adjustment at the
four-year university and their grades?
6. What is the relationship between transfers students’ academic adjustment
at the four-year university and their grades?
7. How do students differ in their social and academic adjustment at the four-
year university by age, gender, major, and/or race/ethnicity?
8. To what extent are the answers to research questions one through six
replicated in a sample comprised exclusively of Latina(o) students?
15

Hypotheses
1. There is a positive relationship between transfer students’ social
involvement at the four-year university and their social adjustment at the
four-year university.
2. There is a positive relationship between transfer students’ academic
involvement at the four-year university and their academic adjustment at
the four-year university.
3. There is a positive relationship between transfer students’ social
involvement at the four-year university and their grades.
4. There is a positive relationship between transfer students’ academic
involvement at the four-year university and their grades.
5. There is a positive relationship between transfer students’ social
adjustment at the four-year university and their grades.
6. There is a positive relationship between transfer students’ academic
adjustment at the four-year university and their grades.
Significance of the Problem
The uniqueness of this study is its focus on student adjustment experiences at the
university level, looking at variables that impact transfer student success at the four-year
institution. Previous studies have focused on academic adjustment or “transfer shock” as
measured by students’ GPA without accounting for the social aspects of the transfer
process (Laanan, 1998). Moreover, few studies have analyzed the differences in student
16

social and academic adjustment across ethnic groups. This study develops a better
understanding of transfer student involvement and adjustment experiences at the four-
year university (Cuseo, 1998; Eggleston & Laanan, 2001).
The focus of this study on students’ social and academic adjustment provides
insight into the factors that contribute to a successful pathway for community college
students to the four-year university. This study informs the research on the relationship
between students’ social and academic involvement and social and academic adjustment
on student persistence as measured by grades.
The findings from this study inform community college enrollment practices and
transfer policies, and interventions to prepare students for the complexities of the transfer
process, post-transfer academic rigors, and adjustment to a new campus culture at the
four-year institution. This study also informs university transfer policies, assists with the
development of targeted support programs for incoming community college transfer
students such as transfer orientation programs, and determines the need to create
opportunities for student engagement.
Methodology
This study was non-experimental and employed a quantitative approach to
analyze the data collected by an on-line survey. All community college students who
transferred within a three year period from 2008 to 2010 to a selective, private research
university in Southern California were invited to participate. The survey measured
transfer student academic and social involvement and social and academic adjustment
17

experiences at the university. Demographic measures included variables for age, gender,
race/ethnicity, and major.
Assumptions
An artifact of conducting research is that certain assumptions are made about the
study such as:
1. The participants provided honest and accurate responses.
2. The questions and scales used are reliable and valid measures of the variables being
studied.
3. The hardware and software technology utilized by respondents to complete the on-
line survey will work properly and will not interfere with data collection.
4. The sample of students is representative of other community college transfer students
at private, selective, research universities.
Limitations
The nature of the study creates inherent limitations which are described in further
detail in chapter 3. Below are some of the limitations found in the study:
1. This study is limited by the institution type as a top-ranked, selective research
university which yielded a student sample that was highly academically successful.
2. The study yielded a 22% response rate making it difficult to evaluate and generalize
the research findings.
3. Over half of the respondents were of traditional college age which would not be
expected for community college transfer students.
18

4. This study is limited by the subjects who agree to participate voluntarily.
5. The generalizability of the results of this study is limited to the selective, private
research university where the study was conducted.
6. This study is limited to the number of subjects surveyed and the amount of time
available to conduct the study.
7. The validity of this study is limited to the reliability of the instruments used.
Delimitations
This study confined itself to surveying community college transfer students at one
selective, private research university. This study focused on community college transfer
student social and academic involvement, post-transfer university experiences, and
student academic and social adjustment experiences. Only students who were admitted to
the four-year university in the Fall and Spring of 2008, 2009, and 2010 were included in
the study.
Definition of Terms
Latina(o) – In the literature reviewed, the terms Hispanic and Latina(o) were used
interchangeably. For the purpose of this paper, the term Latina(o) was based on the U.S.
Census Bureau definition as follows: persons of Hispanic origin such as Mexican, Puerto
Rican, and Cuban, or from any Spanish-speaking country (On-line, 2002). The combined
use of the masculine and feminine form of the term was intended to recognize the
individuality of both genders.
19

Transfer shock – A drop in GPA experienced by community college transfer
students during their first semester/quarter at a four-year institution (Hills, 1965).
Academic Adjustment – The term builds on the adjustment experienced by
transfer students commonly referred to as “transfer shock” and included other adjustment
experiences such as academic standards, stress level, and the sense of competition among
students (Laanan, 1998; Laanan 2004).
Social Adjustment – The adjustment of students within the four-year college
community including the social environment, making friends, and involvement in social
activities (Laanan, 1998; Laanan 2004).
Student Involvement – The amount of physical and psychological energy that a
student devotes to their higher education experience with higher levels of involvement
producing better academic results for the student (Astin, 1984).
Academic Involvement – Similar to the construct of student involvement, this
variable measured involvement specifically in terms of involvement in activities related
to engagement with faculty in which increased involvement results in integration rather
than departure (Laanan, 1998; Tinto, 1993).
Social Involvement – Similar to the construct of student involvement, this
variable measured involvement specifically in terms involvement in activities related to
student clubs and organizations in which increased involvement results in integration
rather than departure (Laanan, 1998; Tinto, 1993).
20

Student Engagement – The time and effort students devote to inquiry-based
activities that affect educational outcomes and institutional encouragement for students to
participate in those activities (Kuh, 2009).
Persistence – Students grades have proven to be reliable predictors of persistence
as a result of time and effort invested which produce higher learning and development
outcomes (Astin, 1984). For the purpose of this study, student grades were used to
measure student persistence.
Organization of the Study
This chapter presents an overview of the study including an introduction, the
background of the problem, the statement of the problem, the purpose of the study, the
questions to be answered, the research hypotheses, the significance of the study, a brief
description of the methodology, the assumptions, limitations, delimitations, and the
definitions of terms. A brief roadmap is provided to outline the organization of the study.
Chapter 2 is a review of relevant literature to set the framework for this study. It
provides a discussion of previous research studies on community college transfer students
addressing the following topics: transfer student experiences and Latina(o) transfer
student experiences. The most frequently used theoretical perspectives for community
college student involvement are also presented.
The methodological design used in the study is presented in Chapter 3, including
the research design; population and sampling procedure; and the instruments and their
selection or development, together with information on validity and reliability. Each of
21

these sections concludes with a rationale, including strengths and limitations of the
design elements. The chapter goes on to describe the procedures for data collection and
the plan for data analysis.
The results of the data analyses are provided in Chapter 4. Data and results are
organized by the eight research questions. A comprehensive summary of respondent
demographics is included along with descriptive statistics.
In Chapter 5 an analysis of the data is presented summarizing the findings of the
study with corresponding support from the literature for both the whole sample and the
Latina(o) sample. Support of the community college transfer student pathway by the data
is discussed. Implications for practice are provided as well as recommendations for future
research.

22

CHAPTER 2
REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE
A paucity of research exists on community college transfer student experiences
and the factors that contribute to their adjustment at the four-year university. The purpose
of this literature review is to examine the trends and challenges associated with the
academic and social adjustment experiences of community college transfer students and
in particular, students from Latina(o) heritage. Research in this area will inform scholars,
practitioners, and policy makers about the factors that impact Latina(o) community
college transfer student achievement. Identifying the individual and institutional factors
that impact Latina(o) students’ adjustment experiences will contribute to the knowledge
base for the preparation of students for college, support at the community college and
university level, and ultimately increase student retention.
The community college plays a preeminent role for Latina(o)s seeking a
postsecondary education. In California, minority students are highly overrepresented in
the community college system. In 1994, the enrollment of Latinas(os) in four-year
institutions lagged behind other groups at 31% compared to 42% of African American,
47% White, and 54% Asian students (as reported in Swail, et. al., 2003). During the same
year, whites comprised almost 25% of community college enrollments while African
Americans accounted for almost 23%, Asians accounted for 28%, and Latinas(os)
accounted for 34% (as reported in Swail, et. al., 2003). In 2000, the trend of large
numbers of Latina(o) student enrollment in community colleges continued with them
23

accounting for over 30% of the 126,742 first-time community college students compared
to 10% were Asian/Pacific Islander, 6.7% were Black, and just under 1% were Native
American (CPEC, 2002). These statistics indicate that Latina(o) students’ educational
gains are slowly improving but are still disproportionately low compared to other groups.
Transfer is only one of the many functions of the community college system and
it is not expected that all students will transfer to a four-year university. However,
research points out that fewer minorities enrolled in community colleges transfer to a
four-year university compared with their white counterparts (Cuseo, 1998). Furthermore,
little attention has been given to the experiences of minority transfer students once they
arrive at the four-year university.
Several factors have been identified as impacting community college transfer
students such as lack of knowledge about transfer process (Arnold, 2001), adjustment at
the four-year institution (Harbin, 1997) and a decline in GPA referred to as transfer shock
(Cejda, Kaylor, & Rewey, 1998). The postsecondary educational path for Latina(o)
community college students is filled with similar challenges and barriers (Hagedorn &
Castro, 1999). Additional factors influence Latina(o) community college student
persistence.
Ornelas and Solarzano (2004) assert that community college students are not
prepared for the academic rigor that is required at the four-year university. They maintain
that community college students typically are provided with a weak academic curriculum
which instantly places them at a disadvantage when they reach the four-year university
24

(Ornelas & Solorzano, 2004). Indeed, Terenzini, Rendon, Upcraft, Millar, Allison,
Gregg, and Jalomo (1994) found that first generation, minority students have found the
adaptation to college is a difficult one that required them to negotiate between their
cultural values and institutional ones. In most cases, studies like these have relied on
Tinto’s (1993) model of student persistence as a framework for analysis, a model for
which the applicability to the experience of underrepresented students as been criticized,
as discussed next.
Student Persistence
Tinto’s (1993) model of student departure has made a significant contribution to
the understanding of college student persistence. The model posits several individual and
institutional factors that contribute to the persistence of traditional undergraduate students
at four-year institutions. Based on Van Gennep’s theory on rites of passage and
Durkeim’s theory of suicide, Tinto’s (1993) model of student departure identifies student
social and academic involvement and integration as predictors of student persistence. The
more integrated a student becomes within the various college communities, the greater
their likelihood of persisting (Tinto, 1993). Researchers have modified and tested the
model for its applicability to other student populations. Of particular concern is the
adequacy of the model to explain minority and community college transfer student
persistence (Tierney, 1999).
Tierney (1999) argues that Tinto’s (1993) model of student departure does not
adequately explain the experiences of minority students. The model implies that minority
25

students must assimilate into the cultural mainstream and separate from their ethnic
culture in order to succeed at the university. For Latina(o) students who maintain a strong
sense of commitment to their family and community, the assumption of abandoning their
cultural traditions is impractical. Tierney (1999) suggests that the cultural capital and
background that students contribute to the university setting should be considered in
models of student retention and success.
Baird (2000) argued that students’ social and academic integration was
significantly influenced by campus climate. A modification of the Tinto (1993) model
was proposed based on previous studies that illustrated the influence of student
perceptions of a campus climate that is hostile, discriminatory, and alienating on social
integration (Baird, 2000).
Astin’s (1984) theory of involvement posits that a student’s involvement in
college activities contributes to their persistence, while a student’s lack of involvement
could contribute to their departure. There are five elements of Astin’s (1984) theory that
lead to positive student educational outcomes: (a) involvement as the investment of
physical and psychological energy, (b) involvement occurs on a continuum in which
involvement occurs at different times and with varying degrees of energy, (c)
involvement can be observed from both qualitative and quantitative aspects, (d) quality
and quantity of investment in an activity is proportional to the amount of learning and
development, (e) policies that increase involvement will be most effective. In other
words, the extent to which involvement occurs combined with the degree of involvement
26

that is invested will represent the level of intensity in academic outcomes. Utilizing
involvement as an indicator of student behavior is a more accurate measure of the
investment a student makes in their academic experience as opposed to the use of
psychological constructs (Astin, 1984).
In a study of transition experiences from high school to college that involved 225
students, Ory and Braskamp (1988) found that student involvement with faculty, student
activities, and peer interactions were related to student development and growth (Astin,
1984). The study focused on student experiences in three academic programs and did not
disaggregate the data by race/ethnicity, gender, or age. The level of involvement ranged
between the honors, transition, and regular students with honors students more
academically engaged with faculty and time spent in class and studying (Ory &
Braskamp, 1988). Honors students exhibited significant gains in the intellectual skills
measure with transition students demonstrating significant gains in personal/social
development and general education measures in relationship to their academic effort (Ory
& Braskamp, 1988).
Furthermore, Ory & Braskamp noted that “the strength of the relationship
between indicators of quality of effort and self-reported gains was higher for all three
groups of students than for students in Pace’s study taken from a national sample.” The
results of this study support Astin’s (1984) theoretical construct that the degree of
investment of time and effort is proportionately related to learning and development.
27

Kuh’s (2009) research has expanded the involvement construct to one of student
engagement representing quality of effort (Astin, 1984) and involvement (Tinto, 1993) in
inquiry-oriented activities. That is, students who actively engage in high impact
educational activities such as taking on a leadership position, volunteerism, and asking
questions of their faculty and peers will produce positive learning outcomes. Kuh (2001)
developed the National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE) which has been widely
used to measure student engagement using five measures: 1) level of academic challenge,
2) active and collaborative learning, 3) student-faculty interaction, 4) enriching
educational experiences, and 5) supportive campus climate. It should be noted that the
aforementioned studies have not taken into account the selectivity of the institution and
the degree of diversity on campus.
The literature on student engagement (Carini, Kuh, and Klein, 2006) is promising
in linking NSSE results with persistence and a higher grade point average. In a cross
sample of 14 four-year institutions that included over 1,000 students, Carini et al. (2006)
found that NSSE results were aligned with RAND, GRE, and SAT test results on many
learning outcome measures attesting to the validity of the NSSE in measuring student
learning outcomes and grades. The study did not disaggregate student data by ethnicity;
however, the lower ability students demonstrated the highest benefits from student
engagement activities (Carini, Kuh, and Klein, 2006).
The study found that institutional differences exist in the degree to which
institutions effectively convert student engagement into positive student outcomes. A
28

similar study (Pike & Kuh, 2005) examined NSSE test results in comparison with
Carnegie classifications which are based on institutional missions in an attempt to include
student outcomes in those classifications. Pike and Kuh (2005) found that the degree to
which institutions successfully engage their students varies widely and institutions do not
score uniformly on all measures of engagement. For example, large public research
universities demonstrated unexpectedly higher levels of student engagement with a
diverse student population, particularly through information technology (Pike & Kuh,
2005). Unfortunately, student engagement among diverse student populations was
associated with a negative interpersonal environment (Pike & Kuh, 2005) which calls
into question institutional initiatives to create a diverse learning environment. While
Hurtado (1992) found that minority students reported positive experiences at institutions
committed to diversity, Pike & Kuh’s (2005) findings raise questions about the multiple
factors impacting minority student experiences.
Researchers (Pike & Kuh, 2005; Carini, Kuh, & Klein, 2006; Hu, Kuh, & Li,
2008) have concluded that institutional and student engagement has positive benefits in
producing desirable student outcomes. In some cases, engagement takes on a
compensatory effect whereby less advantaged students exemplify greater benefits from
student engagement than more advantaged students (Hu, Kuh, & Li, 2008; Kuh, 2009).
For example, one study found that students with the lowest SAT scores received the most
benefit from student engagement than those with higher scores (Carini, Kuh, & Klein,
2006). In other cases, low performing students who were engaged in inquiry oriented
29

activities (Hu, Kuh, & Li, 2008) and African American students who studied more than
White students (Kuh, 2009) did not produce favorable college outcomes or grades. These
findings demonstrate the complex experiences of undergraduate students from various
backgrounds who attend various types of institutions which require further study.
Harper & Quaye (2008) extend engagement one step further by challenging
institutions to be proactive in engaging students in purposeful learning activities.
Researchers (Hurtado, 1992; Harper & Quaye, 2008) have also noted that students from
diverse populations including racial/ethnic minority, international, religious, gender, and
disabled students, may not take advantage of engagement opportunities if they do not feel
a sense of belonging. Engagement is not a one-size-fits-all approach to student learning.
The authors (Harper & Quaye, 2008) strongly encourage educators and practitioners to
go beyond offering student engagement opportunities to developing thoughtful,
intentional practices that create an inclusive curriculum and structured opportunities for
interaction between diverse and mainstream students. They argue that is not sufficient to
create a diverse learning environment through the recruitment of students from diverse
backgrounds and conclude that meaningful engagement opportunities must be created in
order to maximize student engagement and educational outcomes (Harper & Quaye,
2008).
Summary. Research (Milem & Berger, 1997; Carini, Kuh, & Klein, 2006; Hu,
Kuh, & Li, 2008; Harper & Quaye, 2008; Kuh, 2009) has shown that persistence in
college is influenced by the positive educational experience of students as a result of their
30

active engagement and energy devoted to their education. Traditional models such as
Tinto’s (1993) theory of student departure and Astin’s (1984) theory of student
involvement are widely used to study student persistence. Although these models are
useful in helping to understand student persistence, ensuing research (Tierney, 1999)
argues that there are limitations to their applicability to minority student populations.
Recent studies (Carini, Kuh, & Klein, 2006; Hu, Kuh, & Li, 2008; Harper & Quaye,
2008; Kuh, 2009) have expanded on the traditional models of student involvement with a
focus on active individual and institutional engagement in inquiry-based educational
activities.
Community College Transfer Students
Barriers to Transfer
Researchers (Arnold, 2001; Laanan, 2001) agree that the enrollment patterns
among community college students are complex and non-linear. Furthermore, numerous
barriers complicate the transfer process for community college students. Studies have
found (Arnold, 2001; Cuseo, 1998) that the transferability of coursework to the four-year
institution can be ambiguous and inconsistent, resulting in lost time and effort invested in
coursework that is not accepted at the receiving institution. Others (Harbin, 1997; Ornelas
& Solorzano, 2004) add that the inability to obtain transfer information in a unified,
centralized location at the community college presents a challenge in navigating the
transfer process. Students are required to gather transfer information from numerous
sources such as counselors, catalogues, friends, and teachers which can often result in
31

frustration, misinformation, and conflicting information. Rendón and Valadez (1993)
argue that these kinds of institutional inefficiencies in the dissemination of information
complicate the transfer process compounded by a lack of familiarity with the college
system in general.
The financial cost involved in attending college becomes another barrier,
particularly for minority community college students who have family responsibilities. In
their study, Rendón and Valadez (1993) identified financial security as a priority for
Latina(o) community college students that resulted in self-imposed limitations for choice
of majors and occupations. A qualitative study involving students, faculty and
administrators at six institutions was used conducted to determine how policies, practices,
and institutional culture influenced community college Latina(o) students transfer to the
four-year university (Rendón & Valadez, 1993). The study found that students chose
majors and programs they felt would expedite their placement in the labor market thus
eliminating transfer to a four-year university as an option (Rendón & Valadez, 1993).
Ornelas and Solorzano (2004) found that a lack of understanding about the
financial aid process further complicated transfer by resulting in myths about the cost of
attending four-year universities. A study of 191 Latina(o) students, 17 counselors, 12
faculty, and 6 administrators determined that community college students were unaware
of financial aid opportunities available to them at the four-year university (Ornelas &
Solorzano, 2004). This group of Latina(o) community college students had competing
32

priorities outside of school which made it difficult for them to envision attending a four-
year university considering the perceived high cost and their limited funding sources.
Harbin (1997) surveyed 85 transfer students from one community college and
found that students experienced financial difficulties after transferring to the four-year
university. The transfer students in the study reported being accustomed to working while
attending the community college, but found that their income was not sufficient to
finance their education. Harbin (1997) also found that students were challenged by a lack
of adequate funding while finding it difficult to manage the higher investment of time
demanded of them to fulfill their university coursework requirements. These examples
confirm the significant impact that financial aid can have on the ability of students to
successfully adjust to the university.
Summary. Institutional and individual factors present overwhelming hurdles for
the vast numbers of minority and first-generation college students who make up a large
percentage of community college enrollments. Researchers (Harbin, 1997; Ornelas &
Solorzano, 2004) have found that institutional failures to establish consistent transfer
agreements and the lack of transfer resources prevent community college students from
strategically developing a clear transfer plan. Individual circumstances such as family
obligations and financial constraints limit the choices available to community college
students to take advantage of the benefits afforded by a baccalaureate degree.
33

Student Adjustment
Researchers (Laanan, 1998; Davies & Casey, 1999) have compared students’
community college experiences with their university experiences to understand how
student preparation, study behaviors, and expectations at the community college
influence their adjustment at the four-year institution. Research in this area provides
mixed results about student satisfaction at the community college and university. In a
study employing focus group interviews, 88 students were asked to describe their
community and university experiences as well as their transfer experience (Davies &
Casey, 1999). Students described their experiences at the community college and
university as having both positive and negative aspects. Davies and Casey (1999) found
that some students felt more comfortable with the community college social environment,
its accessibility, individual attention received from faculty and counselors, easier classes,
and ability to be employed while attending college.
At the same time, they (Davies & Casey, 1999) noted that some students felt that
the community college did not prepare them for the university, found it easy to socialize
at the university, and felt the coursework at the community college was more difficult
than at the university. Institutional characteristics such as size, mission, faculty-student
interaction, and level of difficulty in the curriculum differed between the community
college and university. Davies and Casey (1999) found that students described their
experiences at each institution as being very different from one another, both as
gratifying and frustrating.
34

Researchers (Berger & Malaney, 2003; Harbin, 1997) found that on the one hand,
students were generally satisfied with their community college experience and the
preparation they received for transferring to a four-year institution. However, faculty was
not viewed as being instrumental in their preparation (Harbin, 1997). Berger and Malaney
(2003) noted that some students found faculty at the university more accessible and
willing to provide guidance than at the community college.
Furthermore, transfer students reported experiencing problems adjusting to the
new demands at the university. Davies and Casey (1999) found that while at the
community college, students were able to balance their coursework, employment, and
family obligations. However, they found that once students arrived at the university, they
could no longer maintain their thirty to forty hour work schedule along with their course
load; those who attempted to do so experienced a drop in grades (Davies & Casey, 1999).
The inability to maintain employment and limited financial assistance at the university
was an issue for many students.
Results were mixed about the ability of community college transfer students to
integrate socially at the university (Davies & Casey, 1999). Researchers (Davies &
Casey, 1999) found that while some students created a support network among friends
and department staff, others felt overwhelmed by the availability of social activities and
felt that engaging in them would be detrimental to their academic success. They also
found that a positive aspect of being a student at the university level was the
35

concentration on being a student as opposed to having to balance the multiple roles of
being a student, son/daughter, parent, and the like (Davies & Casey, 1999).
In a recent publication, Laanan (2004) introduced a new instrument that he
developed to explore the experiences of community college transfer students at the four-
year university. The “Laanan-Transfer Students’ Questionnaire” or L-TSQ is unique
because it goes beyond measuring academic indicators of student success. The L-TSQ
includes items that measure the psychosocial aspects of transfer student adjustment
experiences at the four-year college (Laanan, 2004). Based on Pace’s quality of effort
theory, the questionnaire taps into student behaviors and experiences at the community
college and four-year university, rendering an extraordinarily rich data source for
researchers (Laanan, 2004).
Summary. The literature on student adjustment identifies the various benefits and
challenges faced by community college transfer students at the four- year university
(Rendón & Valadez, 1993; Harbin, 1997; Berger & Malaney, 2003). The transfer process
and adjustment at the four-year university for community college students is inconsistent
and yields varying student outcomes. Furthermore, given the diverse students enrolled in
California community colleges, it is important to explore how students from different
backgrounds experience the community college environment, how it contributes to their
experience at the four-year university, and how students’ characteristics may contribute
to their transition process and their social and academic adjustment at the four-year
university.
36

Transfer Shock
Transfer shock is a phenomenon that is commonly experienced by community
college students who transfer to a four-year institution. Transfer shock has been the
explanation for the commonly observed drop in GPA during a transfer student’s first
semester (Hills, 1965). Hills suggests that students may often find that the culture of the
four-year university differs greatly from the community college they attended. As a
result, students’ academic success is adversely impacted by this experience. Harbin
(1997) surveyed 85 former community college students who transferred to a university in
Northern California. The students comprised a multiethnic sample, but the results were
not disaggregated by ethnicity (Harbin, 1997). Transfer students at four universities
experienced a drop in grades, but continued to junior standing.
In a study of 250 community college transfer students (Cejda, Kaylor, & Rewey,
1998) examined student experiences of transfer shock by major at a private, liberal arts
university. Findings supported previous studies on transfer shock with students majoring
in math, science, and professions such as business, education, and journalism experienced
a statistically significant drop in GPA (Cejda, Kaylor, & Rewey, 1998). Students in fine
arts, humanities, and the social sciences experienced an increase in GPA at the university
which was not statistically significant. The results support previous studies on transfer
student GPA by major (Cejda, Kaylor, & Rewey, 1998), but because they did not
disaggregate the data by ethnicity, gender, or age, it is unknown how these factors may be
related to transfer shock and ultimately student retention.
37

Kodama (2002) employed a conceptual framework of marginality to explain why
native and transfer commuter students may feel isolated and not valued at the four-year
university. A significant predictor of marginality within the transfer student group was
on-campus support, with female commuter transfer students experiencing the most
marginality (Kodama, 2002). Furthermore, students employed on campus were found to
experience less marginality than those employed off campus (Kodama, 2002).
Summary. Transfer shock is a limited, yet widely used concept to explain the
experience of transfer students at the four-year university (Harbin, 1997; Cejda, Kaylor,
& Rewey, 1998). However, transfer shock has not been operationalized to explain the
complexity of students’ transition and their social adjustment experiences. Moreover, the
research on transfer shock has ignored student characteristics such as ethnicity, gender,
and age and their potential impact on student’s social and academic adjustment at the
four-year university (Harbin, 1997; Kodama, 2002). Most relevant for this study,
however, is that these models assume that underrepresentation of the target students is a
condition of the campus, and that a key tension is the dissonance between the rigor they
experienced at their community college compared to what they experience at the four
year institution.
Latina(o) Community College Students
Latina(o) community college students experience many educational, social, and
economic challenges. Researchers have found that preparation (Ornelas & Solorzano,
2004), student involvement (Terenzini et al., 1994), and campus climate (Hurtado, 1992)
38

are interrelated factors that influence Latina(o) students’ adjustment experiences.
Supporting Latina(o) students through their postsecondary pathway requires an
understanding of the factors that may inhibit or derail them from reaching their academic
goals.
Academic Preparation
A significant barrier for Latina(o) community college students is academic
preparation. Latina(o) students are often at a disadvantage because they received a poor
K-12 (Ornelas & Solorzano, 2004) and/or community college (Suarez, 2003) education.
Researchers (Ornelas and Solorzano, 2004) found that faculty, counselors, and
administrators also perceive that many Latina(o) students have not been adequately
prepared for college. Suarez (2003) also found that the substandard academic preparation
that Latina(o) students receive has a detrimental effect on their college success.
Terenzini, Rendon, Upcraft, Millar, Allison, Gregg, and Jalomo (1994) argue that
minority students often anticipate the increased rigor and difficulty of the university
curriculum but are not well-equipped with the necessary tools to confront those
challenges.
Student Adjustment
Researchers (Hurtado & Carter, 1996; Nora & Rendon, 1996) have explored the
experiences of Latina(o) students at the community college and the factors that influence
their retention and success. A pivotal study captured the adjustment experiences of
Latina(o) college students that focused on student involvement, transition experience
39

from work or high school to college, and individuals who facilitated the transition process
(Terenzini et al., 1994). Terenzini, Rendon, Upcraft, Millar, Allison, Gregg, and Jalomo
(1994) found that many factors such as students’ educational background, family, peers,
encounters with faculty and staff were found to be interrelated and have a complex effect
on student experiences.
Researchers (Terenzini et al., 1994) also found that traditional students held no
reservations about the expectation to attend college; however, the social and interpersonal
adjustment was difficult for some. They confirmed that the difficulty in the adjustment
process for first-generation students was profound and contradicted cultural and family
expectations (Terenzini et al.). The study found that students whose high school friends
attended the same institution found their peers instrumental in providing support during
the transition to the college (Terenzini et al.). For non-traditional students, results
indicated that both in and out of class experiences in which they felt validated were vital
in building their self-confidence, academic ability, and sense of belonging (Terenzini et
al.).
Campus Culture
Student perceptions of campus culture at the community college and four-year
institution can impact students’ academic success. Ornelas and Solorzano (2004) argue
that the institution’s neglect of the transfer process exemplified by minimal resources was
viewed by Latina(o) students community college students as an unfavorable campus
culture. Their research found students, counselors, and administrators who were
40

interviewed at an urban community college in Los Angeles reported that the institution
was not committed to the transfer process function (Ornelas & Solorzano, 2004). The
lack of institutional commitment was demonstrated by the unsystematic manner in which
information and resources for the transfer process was made available to students,
faculty, and staff. Ornelas and Solorzano (2004) found the institution’s disinterest in
making transfer information readily available led to the perception of a campus culture
that was not responsive to students’ academic goals. They found that even more
damaging were the perceptions of faculty, counselors, and administrators of Latina(o)
student culture and background as a deficit to their educational attainment (Ornelas &
Solorzano, 2004). Lower expectations of Latina(o) students held by faculty, counselors,
and administrators led to the creation of policy that relieved the institution of
accountability to students’ educational success (Ornelas & Solorzano, 2004).
Rendón & Valadez (1993) further attribute student’s isolation and lack of
integration to faculty and staff’s lack of cultural understanding. Latina(o) community
college students entering four-year institutions are faced with a new campus culture that
is oftentimes insensitive to their needs. Researchers (Ornelas & Solorzano, 2004; Rendón
& Valadez) have found that the lack of instrumental knowledge students and their
families had about the institution, resources, and financial assistance hindered the transfer
process for Hispanic students. Others (Wawrzynski & Sedlacek, 2003) have found that
students of color benefit from having a positive campus climate that empowers students
41

by offering strong support networks, the opportunity to join campus organizations, and
the opportunity to serve one’s community.
Lastly, student perceptions of racial conflict can influence students’ sense of
belonging and willingness to interact with other racial/ethnic groups. Hurtado (1992)
analyzed national normative data to determine student perceptions of racial climate,
social self-confidence, institutional commitment to diversity, institutional emphasis on
being student-centered, and institutional resource orientation. She found that institutions
with a student-centered mission were perceived as having low racial tension (Hurtado,
1992). Among Hurtado’s (1992) findings was that an institution’s commitment to
diversity fostered a positive perception of the campus racial climate among minority
students. Conversely, the study found that perceptions of racial tensions increased when
students perceived inequalities in the treatment of specific groups (Hurtado, 1992). In
fact, over eighty-five percent of respondents disagreed that racial discrimination is not a
problem in the United States (Hurtado, 1992).
Summary. Research illustrates the multiple institutional and individual influences
that can create both and favorable and unfavorable campus climate (Hurtado, 1992). The
study of Latina(o) transfer student adjustment at the four-year university must consider
campus racial climate as a factor impacting student involvement, adjustment, and sense
of belonging. The findings from these studies (Hurtado, 1992; Ornelas & Solorzano,
2004) illuminate the importance of campus climate and institutional engagement as
factors in minority student involvement and retention which have not been explored at a
42

traditional, selective university with a diverse undergraduate student population. With
more underrepresented students transferring from community colleges to four-year
institutions research is needed to determine how they experience adjustment to the
academic rigor and involvement at the four-year university.
Transfer Adjustment of Students of Color
Few scholars have researched the transfer process and experience of ethnic
minority community college students at four-year universities. One such study explored
non-cognitive variables such as attitudes and values among 2,492 white and minority
incoming transfer students at a public four-year university. Wawrzynski and Sedlacek
(2003) found three non-cognitive variables that were significantly different among
transfer students of color: a) expectations, b) learning outcomes, and c) academic
behaviors compared to white transfer students. They found differences by race and
gender in the expectations and interests students held for themselves while attending
college.
They study also found that students of color had expectations of interacting with
faculty and students outside of class. Learning outcomes such as academic and career
goals were identified as important reasons for attending college. Wawrzynski & Sedlacek
(2003) assert that a sense of community was important for students of color demonstrated
by an interest in community service and time spent studying with other students. The
development of academic behaviors such as reading ahead for class and updating class
notes was also significant for students of color and their success in college (Wawrzynski
43

& Sedlacek, 2003). Although a diverse student sample was used for this study, the small
representation of Latina(o)s students (e.g. 6%) which prevented a more robust analysis of
student differences by ethnic group.
The adjustment experiences of transfer students has also been researched at a
four-year university using a conceptual framework that combines family attachment,
cultural issues and student adjustment, and ethnic identity. Although the student sample
was multiethnic, the generalizability of the results are limited by the focus on a
biomedical education program at a public, inner-city university in which students had
already demonstrated high academic progress, were involved in a demanding curriculum,
and lived at home with their parents (Kalsner & Pistole, 2003).
Researchers (Kalsner & Pistole, 2003) found students with greater independence
and openness to other groups adjusted to college, caused less psychological distress,
increased goal commitment and their overall adaptation to college. For male students,
emotional support from the family contributed their social adjustment and goal
commitment (Kalsner & Pistole, 2003). The researchers (Kalsner & Pistole, 2003) assert
that a strong ethnic identity also contributed to open-mindedness toward other ethnic
groups and for females, was related to increased goal commitment and ability to deal
with interpersonal experiences. Differences in males and females were found within the
separation-individuation framework. The study found that females tended to form a
network of relationships whereas males had a tendency to become autonomous from their
families (Kalsner & Pistole, 2003).
44

Conclusions
Considering that California is one of the leaders in educational practices and
Latina(o)s comprise the largest minority group in the California community college
system, little attention has been given to this group in research on the transfer process.
Increased postsecondary enrollments particularly at the community college are
encouraging. Despite the widening avenue to college access, trends have shown that
Latina(o) students do not reach the finish line in degree completion both at the
community college and four-year university. An examination of the involvement
experiences that occur in the pathway from the community college to the four-year
university is indispensable in increasing Latina(o) baccalaureates.
Institutional and individual factors create hurdles for community college transfer
students. Students have varied experiences both at the community college and university
level that impact their perceived ability and sense of belonging (Hurtado, 1992). The
transfer process is a complex one with varying degrees of successful student adjustment
at the four-year university. Research on transfer student adjustment experiences has
focused primarily on the academic adjustment at the four-year university (e.g. transfer
shock) and less on their social adjustment (Laanan, 1998). However, studies have shown
that transfer student adjustment at the four-year university involves non-academic
challenges such as socializing with peers, financing their education, and campus culture
(Hurtado, 1992; Ornelas & Solorzano, 2004). Furthermore, few studies on student
45

adjustment have focused on individual student characteristics such as ethnicity, gender,
and age (Harbin, 1997; Kodama, 2002).
The research on Latina(o) community college students portrays a myriad of
challenges faced by students including academic preparation, student adjustment, and
perceptions of campus culture and racial climate. Models of student involvement do not
adequately explain the experiences of ethnic minority community college students and
their adjustment at the four-year university. Furthermore, studies have not tested student
involvement models at selective, private universities which are becoming more diverse.
Research on the adjustment experiences of ethnic minority transfer students,
particularly Latinas(os) is lacking. Scholars have called for further research that focuses
on ethnic minority students and the factors that influence community college student
social adjustment, increased cooperation among postsecondary institutions, research on
transfer students at different institutional types (e.g. private, liberal arts), and the effect of
institutional transfer student programs and interventions on students’ social adjustment
(Harbin, 1997; Laanan, 1998; Kodama, 2002). A leading researcher (Laanan, 2001) on
community college students has recently developed an instrument to quantify the pre- and
post-transfer experiences of students at the community college and four-year university,
further attesting to the growing interest in this area of research.
Implications
There is a lack of uniformity among community colleges and four-year
universities about the transfer process. The postsecondary path from a community college
46

to a four-year university is not clear. Similarly, the enrollment patterns and goals of
community college students are as diverse as the population itself. Researchers (Laanan,
2004; Rendon, 1994) have investigated new models of community college student
persistence. The concept of transfer shock has been applied as an indicator of students’
academic adjustment at the four-year university, but falls short in explaining the complex
social adjustment experienced by transfer students, particularly minorities. Traditional
student involvement models have not been applied at selective, private universities which
are highly diverse.
Considering the growing numbers of community college students and the
diversity they bring, it is essential that postsecondary institutions be prepared to guide
them along their educational journey. More investigation is needed to grasp the social and
academic adjustment experiences of transfer students at the four-year university.
Research on the experiences of community college transfer students at four-year
universities will assist community colleges in making the transfer process clear and more
efficient. It will enable community colleges to adequately prepare students for the social
and academic adjustment they will encounter when the reach a four-year institution.
Similarly, universities will be able to utilize research on community college
student experiences to ensure a smooth transition through the university to graduation.
Understanding the difficulties students encounter in adjusting to the four-year institution
and their perceptions of campus climate can inform the work of student affairs
professionals, the services they offer, and transfer policies. Moreover, the persistence and
47

retention of all four-year students is critical, not only to student success, but also to the
subsistence of postsecondary institutions. The decline of minority enrollments will not
only impact the revenue they generate, but will impact the rich, diverse experiences of
students, faculty, and staff.
Lastly, research on community college student adjustment experiences at the four-
year institution has implications for college candidates. In light of the challenges
encountered by Latina(o) students in navigating the complex channels of the educational
system, information about how others have experienced college and transfer would be
extremely valuable. Community college students can be better informed about what the
transfer path to a four-year university holds for them and how to be adequately prepared.
Further research on community college student transfer experiences will empower
families with information about the college going process and ways they can support
their college-bound family members.
48

CHAPTER 3
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
This study sought to examine the relationship between Latina(o) transfer students’
academic and social involvement at a selective, four-year university and their persistence
in college as measured by grades. This chapter is comprised of the research questions and
a description of the research methodology. The quantitative approach and correlations
used to evaluate each of the research questions is reviewed. An overview of the sampling
procedure and population, instrumentation, and procedures for data collection and
analysis is also presented.
Research Questions
Researchers investigating the experiences of community college transfer
students have utilized both qualitative and quantitative methods. The current study
employs a quantitative method in order to increase the generalizability of the findings to
other private, selective, research universities with similar community college transfer
populations. Correlations are typically used to investigate the relationship between one
variable and several other variables (Isaac & Michael, 1995). This study examined the
relationship between two dependent variables: academic and social involvement and
seven key variables: social and academic adjustment, age, gender, race/ethnicity, major,
and grades. Figure 3 illustrates the variables and pathway associated with community
college transfer student experiences at the four-year university. The research questions
have been formulated to explore the relationships shown in the figure.

49

Figure 3: Community College Transfer Student Adjustment Pathway

50

This study focused on eight research questions that emerged from the literature
reviewed.
1. What is the relationship between students’ social involvement at the four-
year university and transfer student’s social adjustment at the four-year
university?
2. What is the relationship between students’ academic involvement at the
four-year college and transfer student’s academic adjustment?
3. What is the relationship between students’ social involvement at the four-
year university and students’ grades?
4. What is the relationship between academic involvement at the four-year
university and students’ grades?
5. What is the relationship between students’ social adjustment at the four-
year university and students’ grades?
6. What is the relationship between students’ academic adjustment at the
four-year university and students’ grades?
7. How do students differ in their social and academic adjustment at the four-
year university by age, gender, major, and/or race/ethnicity?
8. To what extent are the answers to research questions one through six
replicated in a sample comprised exclusively of Latina(o) students?
51

Hypotheses
1. It is expected that there is a positive relationship between students’ social
involvement and their social adjustment at the four-year university.
2. It is expected that there is a positive relationship between students’
academic involvement and their academic adjustment at the four-year
university.
3. It is expected that there is a positive relationship between students’ social
involvement and students’ grades at the four-year university.
4. It is expected that there is a positive relationship between academic
involvement and students’ grades at the four-year university.
5. It is expected that there is a positive relationship between students’ social
adjustment and grades.
6. It is expected that there is a positive relationship between students’
academic adjustment and grades.
Research Design
The study was a non-experimental, correlational quantitative study that utilized 98
items from the Laanan Transfer Student Questionnaire “LTS-Q” (Laanan, 2004) to
measure students’ social adjustment, academic adjustment, social involvement, academic
involvement, perceptions of the four-year university, satisfaction with the four-year
university, and 12 items to record general student demographic information (see
Appendix A for a copy of the survey). The LTS-Q contained a total of 304 items. In
52

addition to the 98 items that were used in this study, the LTS-Q was comprised of items
that measured students’ community college experiences, parental income, and academic
counseling and course learning at the four-year university. Students’ community college
experiences, parental income, and academic and course learning at the four-year
university were not within the scope of the present study; therefore, these items were
excluded from the present study. The survey items and scales that were a part of this
study including their theoretical underpinnings are described in greater detail in the
instrumentation subsection presented later in this section.
Population and Sample
Community college transfer students at one private, selective, research university
were surveyed for this study. Community college transfer students were defined as
students who took courses at a community college, two-year college, or junior college
and then transferred to the university. The university was located in Southern California
and was selected based on convenience, its location in a large, urban, metropolitan city,
and its large Latina(o) student population. The sample included all community college
transfer students who were currently enrolled in during the Spring 2010 semester.
It was estimated that an average of 750 community college students transfer to the
site of the study annually, leveraging a total population of 2,326 transfer students for the
survey population. All community college transfer students were asked to participate in
the survey to ensure a representative sample.
53

Instrumentation
Several research questions and variables emerged from the theoretical
frameworks and literature reviewed. First, the notion of transfer shock (Hills, 1965) is
useful in predicting the drop in grades during the first semester of enrollment at the four-
year university for community college transfer students. However, less is known about
the factors that may contribute to the drop in grades and overall transition experiences of
community college transfer students. Previous studies (Laanan, 1998) have identified the
need to examine the social and academic adjustment experiences of community college
students at the four-year university.
Social and academic adjustment. For community college transfer students of
color, the adjustment process is further complicated by the challenge of negotiating
between their cultural values and institutional ones (Terenzini et al. 1994). Unlike their
white counterparts, researchers (Ornelas & Solorzano, 2004; Rendon & Valadez, 1993)
have documented that Latina(o) community college transfer students face a new campus
culture that is oftentimes insensitive to their needs. Studies have shown that the ability of
college students to become well-integrated into the community will have a positive effect
on their persistence (Astin, 1984). Recent measures of transfer students’ social and
academic adjustment have been developed to explore the relationship between
community college transfer students’ college involvement or quality of effort and their
adjustment experiences (Laanan 1999; Laanan 2004).
54

In an effort to explore the factors that contribute to community college transfer
students’ transition experience to the four-year university, the social and academic
adjustment variables used in previous studies (Laanan, 1998) were central to this study.
The academic adjustment scale included four questions about the academic standards at
the four-year university: 1) adjusting to the academic standards or expectations has been
difficult, 2) student experienced a decrease in GPA during their first and second semester,
3) level of stress increased when the student started at the university, and 4) there is a
sense of competition between students at the university. The social adjustment scale
included four questions about the social environment at the four-year university: 1)
adjustment to the social environment has been difficult, 2) student is making the amount
of friends expected, 3) it was easy for the student to make friends, and 4) the student is
very involved with social activities.
Involvement. Community college transfer student involvement was also a critical
variable in teasing out factors that contribute to their transition experiences at the four-
year institution. Empirical studies on student involvement have determined that higher
levels of student involvement in the college community contribute to students’ successful
integration in college, students’ persistence and retention (Astin, 1984; Tinto, 1993;
Laanan, 1998). While Tinto’s (1993) theory of student departure has been widely used to
examine student persistence, less is known about the involvement experiences of
Latina(o) students. Specifically, the social and academic involvement for community
college transfer students of color at the four-year university were identified as central to
55

their success in college (Wawrzynski & Sedlacek, 2003). Therefore, this study has
included social and academic involvement as key variables to explore the factors that
impact the pathway for community college transfer students.
Four-point Likert scales were used to measure student academic involvement at
the four-year university with nine questions related to experiences with engaging faculty.
Social involvement was measured by eight questions about student involvement in clubs
and organizations.
Gender, age, ethnicity/race, satisfaction and perceptions. In addition, key
variables studied included gender, age, race/ethnicity, major, and grades. Additional
scales were used to develop a more complete profile of the student population being
surveyed. These scales provided data on community college transfer students’
satisfaction at the four-year university, and their perceptions of the four-year university.
Internal consistency and validity. The internal consistency and validity of the constructs
were tested in previous studies (Laanan, 2004) and are provided in Tables 1 - 4. Laanan
(2004) conducted factor analyses for each scale under the community college and
university experiences sections. High reliability scores resulted and only those scales with
factor loadings larger than .45 were used in the analysis. The following tables outline the
questions on students’ university experiences and perceptions, including their factor
loading (Laanan, 1998; Laanan, 2004). A four-point Likert-type scale was used to
measure agreement with the statements or the frequency of involvement in those
activities is included below each item scale.
56

Student Involvement/Quality of Effort. Transfer students’ social and academic
involvement was measured using quality of effort scales as presented in Table1 and Table
2. The academic involvement scale (see Table 1) was comprised of nine items focused on
engagement experiences with faculty.

57

Table 1: Factor Loading for Quality of Effort – Academic Involvement Scale
Scale: Experiences with Faculty ( α = .94)
Questions
Factor
Loading

Visited with faculty and sought their advice on class projects such as
writing assignments and research papers.

Felt comfortable approaching faculty outside class.

Talked with faculty members.

Asked my instructor for information related to a course I was taking
(grades, make-up work, assignments, etc.).

Visited informally and briefly with an instructor after class.

Made an appointment to meet with a faculty member in his/her office.

Discussed ideas for a term paper or other class project with a faculty
member.

Discussed my career plans and ambitions with a faculty member.

Asked my instructor for comments and criticisms about my work.

Four point Likert-type scale:
1) Never, 2) Occasionally, 3) Often, 4) Very Often

.81

.78

.86

.78

.79

.80

.80

.73

.78

The activities included in both the academic involvement and social involvement
scales have been found to positively affect student educational outcomes (Laanan, 1998).
Table 2 presents the eight items on student clubs and organizations that comprised the
social involvement scale.

58

Table 2: Factor Loading for Quality of Effort – Social Involvement Scale
Scale: Clubs and Organizations ( α = .90)
Questions
Factor
Loading

Held an office in a club, organization, or student government group.

Read or asked about a club, organization, or student government activity.

Attended a meeting of a club, organization, or student government
group.

Voted in a student election.

Discussed policies and issues related to campus activities and student
government.

Worked in some student organization or special project (publications,
student government, social event, etc.).

Discussed reasons for the success or lack of success of student club
meetings, activities, or events.

Met with a faculty advisor or administrator to discuss the activities of a
student organization.

Four point Likert-type scale:
1) Never, 2) Occasionally, 3) Often, 4) Very Often

.72

.75

.79

.73

.73

.84

.86

.77

Student Adjustment. For the purposes of this study, the use of the quality of effort
scales was based on the “hypothesis that there is an association between these activities
and students’ academic and social adjustment processes” at the four-year university
(Laanan, p.82). The items that comprised the social and academic adjustment scales are
presented in Table 3 and Table 4.
59

Table 3: Factor Loading for Social Adjustment Scale
Scale: Social Adjustment ( α = .69)
Questions
Factor
Loading

Adjusting to the social environment at this university has been difficult.

I am meeting (I’ve met) as many people and making as many friends as I
would like at this university.

It was easy to make friends at this university.

I am (was) very involved with social activities at this university.

Four point Likert-type scale:
1) Disagree Strongly, 2) Disagree somewhat, 3) Agree
somewhat,
4) Agree Strongly

* Item was reverse-coded prior to scaling.

-.48*

.82

.82

.61

Table 4 present the four items that comprised the academic adjustment scale.
Unlike the social adjustment scale, the academic adjustment items yielded and alpha
value above the .7 benchmark.

60

Table 4: Factor Loading for Academic Adjustment Scale
Scale: Academic Adjustment ( α = .71)
Questions
Factor
Loading

Adjusting to the academic standards or expectations has been difficult.

I experience a dip/decrease in grades (GPA) during the first and second
semester.

My level of stress increased when I started at this university.

There is a sense of competition between/among students at this
university that is not found in community colleges.

Four point Likert-type scale:
1) Disagree Strongly, 2) Disagree somewhat, 3) Agree
somewhat,
4) Agree Strongly

.76

.71

.62

.59

For this study, the alpha coefficients were recalculated based on the new
configuration of survey questions using the data collected for this study. The results of
the recalculated alpha coefficients are presented in chapter 4.
Validity. A general concern in conducting survey research is the ability to ensure
that questions will measure what they purport to measure (Isaac & Michael, 1995).
Content validity of the L-TSQ was established in a pilot study of 25 community college
transfer students at a four-year university and in a previous doctoral dissertation (Laanan,
1998).
61

Data Collection
Access to student data was requested from the university research and outcomes
office which maintains data on all incoming undergraduate students including transfer
coursework. Data was not provided to the researcher. The university research and
outcomes office managed student data and distributed the survey electronically on behalf
of the researcher.
The primary method of data collection was an online, internet-based survey using
the Qualtrics application. Paper copies of the questionnaire were available for participants
who preferred this method but none were requested. All community college transfer
students were invited to voluntarily participate in the research study. In order to preserve
the student confidentiality, an email message was sent by the university’s research and
outcomes office on May 20, 2010 to the 2,326 community college transfer students. The
email included a description of the study, assurance of confidentiality and security, an
electronic consent form, the option to enter a raffle drawing, and a link leading
respondents to the online survey. Although paper copies of the questionnaire were also
available to participants, none were requested.
Students who selected the option to enter the raffle drawing were asked to provide
their name, email address, and telephone number in order to be contacted should they be
chosen to win a prize. The raffle drawing was used as an incentive to participate in the
survey. Participation in the raffle drawing was optional with 312 participants selecting to
be entered into the drawing. Prizes consisted of an Apple iPod Nano for first prize; a
62

$100 bookstore gift certificate for second prize, and a $50 bookstore gift certificate for
third prize.
Participants were allowed a three-week period to submit their responses. Students
who did not respond after the first week were sent a second notice to participate. One of
the benefits to the online survey was that it provided participants the flexibility to
complete the survey in parts with the ability to leave the system and return at a later time
to complete the survey while saving the information that had been entered in previous
sessions. All responses remained confidential and were used in aggregate form only. Data
collected by the Qualtrics application was downloaded into Statistical Package for the
Social Science (SPSS) version 10.1.0 for analysis.
The use of technology for research purposes is increasingly becoming common
practice because of its practicality and efficiency. The collection of data via email or the
internet does not come without some challenges. The reliability and validity of web-
based questionnaires has been explored (Anderson & Kanuka, 2003). The advantages of
conducting a web-based survey versus a paper and pencil survey include lowered costs,
speediness of receiving responses, increased honesty and accuracy of responses,
elimination of data entry error, increased convenience for respondents, time saved, and
higher rates of return (Anderson & Kanuka, 2003).
As with any research design, safeguards must be taken to minimize potential
biases resulting from the use of electronic data collection methods. All students being
surveyed had access to a personal or public computer on campus. Therefore, the typical
63

e-survey response bias resulting from limited access to computers was not a factor in the
data collection (Anderson & Kanuka, 2003). The use of incentives is highly
recommended in order to encourage respondents to participate who may often delete
messages without reading them (Anderson & Kanuka, 2003). The authenticity of the
respondent was verified with a question that asked students if they were a community
college transfer student. Lastly, the convenience for respondents to return to email
messages at a later time may have resulted in procrastination. The use of attention-
grabbing subject lines has been suggested as a means for reducing this phenomenon
(Anderson & Kanuka, 2003). Additionally, a reminder was sent to respondents who did
not begin the survey within the first week of the data collection period and to respondents
who began the survey but did not return to it within one week of having entered their first
set of responses.
Data Analysis
This study used both descriptive and inferential statistics. An exploratory factor
analysis was conducted with the data to ensure that a high reliability for the scales was
achieved. Descriptive statistics and response frequencies were tabulated for all
respondents to determine significant differences and/or trends among groups. Inferential
statistics were used to examine the relationship between the independent and dependent
variables by groups such as age, gender, race and ethnicity. Independent t-tests were used
to determine differences in responses by ethnicity and gender among variables such as
level of student involvement and students’ academic and social adjustment.
64

Correlations were conducted to examine the relationship among the key and
dependent variables stated in each of the eight research questions.
Limitations
The nature of research inevitably creates limitations that must be taken into
account in the interpretation and utility of the research findings. Following are the
limitations of this study and their implications:
1. This study is limited by the institution type as a top-ranked, selective research
university which yielded a student sample that was highly academically successful.
Community college transfer students entering the selective university may not
represent the traditional transfer student who experiences challenges in the transition
from a two-year college to a four-year university.
2. The study yielded a 22% response rate making it difficult to evaluate and generalize
the research findings. Given the total community college transfer population of 2,236,
a response rate of 50% or more is necessary to provide a representative sample.
3. Over half of the respondents were of traditional college age which would not be
expected for community college transfer students. Community college transfer
students tend to be older with additional responsibilities such as child care and
providing financial support to their family which create barriers to their academic
success.
4. This study is limited by the subjects who agreed to participate voluntarily.
65

5. The generalizability of the results of this study is limited to the samples and the
selective, private research university that were a part of this study.
6. This study is limited to the number of subjects surveyed and the amount of time
available to conduct the study.
7. The validity of this study is limited to the reliability of the instruments used.
Summary
This chapter provides an overview of the methodology guiding the study
including the research questions, research design, population and sample,
instrumentation, data collection procedures, data analysis, and limitations of the study. To
ensure the appropriate processes and protocols were followed involving the human
subjects research involved in this study, the researcher sought and received approval from
the university’s Institutional Review Board (UP IRB#10-00112) on April 27, 2010.
Approval from the Institutional Review Board ensured human subjects’ confidentiality
and protection from unethical or harmful practices through the implementation of
approved research protocols.

66

CHAPTER 4
DATA AND RESULTS
This chapter provides a comprehensive summary of key variable reliability
scores, respondent demographics, data analysis and results in response to the research
questions focusing on the relationship between students’ social and academic adjustment
and grades and involvement as well as the examination of the differences among
students’ social and academic adjustment by age, gender, major, and race/ethnicity. In
order to examine how Latina(o) community college transfer students faired on these
measures, a separate analysis was conducted on the sample comprised exclusively of the
Latina(o) students. Data were analyzed using the Statistical Package for the Social
Science (SPSS) version 10.1.0. Correlation statistics were used to respond to the seven
research questions.
Sample Characteristics
The on-line survey was distributed via email to 2,326 students. A total of 517
students responded to the on-line survey yielding a 22% response rate. Respondents’
data were secure and confidentiality of all data was maintained as only the researcher and
the university administrator from the research and outcomes office had access to the data.
Furthermore, with the university administrator as the primary sender of the email, the
researcher did not have access to trace responses back to the respondents’ email
addresses including those responses for the raffle drawing. Responses were monitored by
67

the researcher with a password protected log in to the Qualtrics online application on a
regular basis to check for response rates and response bias.
Race/Ethnicity. The tables that follow provide a demographic profile of the
respondents represented by five variables including: 1) race/ethnicity, 2) age, 3) gender,
4) major, and 5) grades. Table 5 represents the race and ethnicity reported by the study
sample. Due to the small sample size of some groups such as African-American,
American Indian/Alaska Native, Vietnamese/Vietnamese-American, East
Indian/Pakistani, Japanese/Japanese-American and Pacific Islander, they were combined
into a single group of “Other.” The groups for Mexican/Mexican-American/Chicano and
Other Spanish-American/Latino were also combined to produce a larger cohort for
comparison purposes. In addition, there were 110 students who did not respond to the
question on race and ethnicity. Of the students who responded to this question, the
majority were White/Caucasian representing 41.3% of the sample followed by
Chinese/Chinese-American at 18.9%, and Mexican/Mexican-American/Chicano and
Other Spanish-American/Latino at 14.5%.

68

Table 5: Respondent Distribution by Racial/Ethnic Identification
Race/Ethnicity Category Frequency Percent

Valid Mexican/Mexican-American/Chicano
and Other Spanish-American/Latino
Filipino/Filipino-American
Chinese/Chinese-American
Korean/Korean-American
White/Caucasian
Other
Total
Missing System
Total

75
15
77
38
168
34
407
110
517

14.5
2.9
14.9
7.4
32.5
6.6
78.7
21.3
100.0

Age. Table 6 provides respondents’ ages reported in the survey. Respondents
were asked to provide their age in an open-ended question which resulted in a broad age
range from 15 to 50 years of age spread out among 25 different age groups. The broad
distribution of age groups did not provide the strength required for each category to be
used in a correlation. Therefore, the age ranges in Table 6 were selected based on sample
frequencies that would provide the strength in each age category to conduct the necessary
correlations to test the research questions and hypotheses. A total of 450 respondents
provided their age with 67 missing responses.
69

The age ranges of the study sample did not represent the institution’s
undergraduate student demographics. For example, students under the age of 21
comprised 24% of respondents which is much lower than the 64% of undergraduate
students under the age of 21 at the institution. This may be due to the fact that community
college students in general tend to be older with an average age of 29 compared to
traditional undergraduate students with an age range of 18 – 24 (Mullin, 2011).
Table 6: Respondent Distribution by Age

Gender. Table 7 demonstrates the gender breakdown of the study sample. A
total of 465 responses were collected for this question with 52 non-responses. There was
an equal distribution of males and females who participated in the survey. In terms of
gender, the study sample closely resembled the institution’s general undergraduate
community college transfer student population. A chi-square test was conducted which
Age Category Frequency Percent

Valid 15-20 years of age
21 years of age
22 years of age
23 years of age
24-50 years of age
Total
Missing System
Total
124
112
75
43
96
450
67
517
24.0
21.7
14.5
8.3
18.6
87.0
13.0
100.0
70

verified that there was no significant difference, X
2
=(1,2790)=2.13, p<.144, between the
respondent and total survey population. This finding confirmed that the distribution of the
two groups was equal by gender.
Table 7: Respondent Distribution by Gender

Major. Table 8 describes the distribution of students across five consolidated
categories of majors available at the institution. Students were given 11 major options
from which to choose. Due to the low response rate for several of the major options,
responses were re-coded into a new scale based on the university’s five major categories.
In order to determine if the respondent population accurately represented the
undergraduate community college transfer population at the institution, a chi-square test
was conducted. The findings yielded a significant result, X
2
(4,2700)=159, P<.001, which
indicated that there was an unequal distribution of respondents among the five majors by
the two sample groups. The greatest disparity in distribution of major was in the
community college transfer student population which was disproportionately represented
in the social sciences major with 45% of students enrolled in the major. However, the
Gender Frequency Percent

Valid Male
Female
Total
Missing System
Total
234
231
465
52
517
45.3
44.7
89.9
10.1
100.0
71

major most represented by 28% of the sample group was in business followed by 23% in
the arts and humanities (see Table 8).
Table 8: Respondent Distribution by Major
Major Category Frequency Percent
Valid Arts and Humanities
Social Sciences
Natural Sciences
Engineering
Business
Total
Missing System
Total
119
44
34
33
145
375
135
517
23.0
8.5
6.6
6.4
28
72.5
26.1
100.0

Reliability Analysis of Key Variables
This study involved four scales to measure key constructs: 1) academic
adjustment (four items), 2) social adjustment (four items), 3) academic involvement (nine
items), and 4) social involvement (eight items). The reliability and homogeneity among
items measuring the four constructs was tested using the calculation of Cronbach’s alphas
for each factor as well as test stability (Laanan, 1998). The reliability statistics calculated
for three of the four constructs yielded scores above a .7 coefficient alpha which was
consistent with those found in previous reliability tests (Laanan, 1998). The academic
72

adjustment variable yielded an alpha reliability score of .627. Table 9 provides a
summary of Cronbach’s alphas for the four key constructs used in this study.
Table 9: Descriptive Statistics for Key Variables
Dependent Variable N Means SD Cronbach’s
Alpha

Academic Adjustment
Social Adjustment
Academic Involvement
Social Involvement
386
386
402
399
2.9275
2.5702
2.4150
1.8119

.65890
.69550
.66028
.72021
.627
.701
.920
.900

Academic Adjustment. The academic adjustment construct has been used to
explore the relationship between community college transfer student college involvement
as measured by quality of effort and their adjustment experiences (Laanan, 1998; Laanan,
2004). Academic adjustment was measured using a four-point Likert scale with four
items as noted in Table 10. Although the reliability for the academic adjustment variable
was somewhat weak, the correlations yielded a significant relationship with students’
major which will be discussed later in this chapter. Additionally, Pallant (2005) notes that
smaller scales with fewer than 10 items tend to yield smaller alpha values. As a result of
the significant correlations that emerged, the academic adjustment scale was included in
the study.

73

Table 10: Reliability Coefficients for Academic Adjustment
Scale: Academic Adjustment ( α = .627)
Questions
Factor
Loading

Adjusting to the academic standards or expectations has been difficult.

I experience a dip/decrease in grades (GPA) during the first and second
semester.

My level of stress increased when I started at this university.

There is a sense of competition between/among students at this
university that is not found in community colleges.

Four point Likert-type scale:
1) Disagree Strongly, 2) Disagree somewhat, 3) Agree
somewhat,
4) Agree Strongly

.498

.551

.535

.635

Social Adjustment. Similar to academic adjustment, social adjustment has also
been examined to explore the relationship between community college transfer student
college involvement as measured by quality of effort and their adjustment experiences at
the four-year university (Laanan, 1998; Laanan, 2004). Table 11 provides the factor
loading and alpha coefficient for each of the four questions that comprise the social
adjustment scale. A cumulative alpha coefficient of .701 resulted from the analyses. A
four-point Likert scale was used with both the academic adjustment scale and the social
adjustment scale.

74

Table 11: Reliability Coefficients for Social Adjustment
Scale: Social Adjustment ( α = .701)
Questions
Factor
Loading

Adjusting to the social environment at this university has been difficult.

I am meeting (I’ve met) as many people and making as many friends as I
would like at this university.

It was easy to make friends at this university.

I am (was) very involved with social activities at this university.

Four point Likert-type scale:
1) Disagree Strongly, 2) Disagree somewhat, 3) Agree
somewhat,
4) Agree Strongly

.737

.507

.562

.707

Academic Involvement. Empirical studies on student involvement have
determined that higher levels of involvement are associated with successfully integrating
into the four-year university and with student persistence (Astin, 1984; Tinto, 1993).
Previous studies have confirmed that the social and academic involvement activities
positively affect community college transfer students’ educational outcomes (Laanan,
1998). The academic involvement scale was the largest of the four scales with nine items
as shown in Table 12. The cumulative alpha coefficient of .920 was the highest value
obtained from the four key constructs.

75

Table 12: Reliability Coefficients for Academic Involvement
Scale: Experiences with Faculty – Quality of Effort ( α = .920)
Questions
Factor
Loading

Visited with faculty and sought their advice on class projects such as
writing assignments and research papers.

Felt comfortable approaching faculty outside class.

Talked with faculty members.

Asked my instructor for information related to a course I was taking
(grades, make-up work, assignments, etc.).

Visited informally and briefly with an instructor after class.

Made an appointment to meet with a faculty member in his/her office.

Discussed ideas for a term paper or other class project with a faculty
member.

Discussed my career plans and ambitions with a faculty member.

Asked my instructor for comments and criticisms about my work.

Four point Likert-type scale:
2) Never, 2) Occasionally, 3) Often, 4) Very Often

.913

.911

.908

.912

.912

.909

.906

.914

.910

Social Involvement. As with academic involvement, social involvement is also
associated with students’ successful integration into the four-year university and with
student persistence (Astin, 1984; Tinto, 1993). Table 13 outlines the eight items that
comprise the social involvement scale along with their factor loading and alpha
76

coefficient. The cumulative alpha coefficient for this scale was .900. A four-point Likert
scale was also used for these items.
Table 13: Reliability Coefficients for Social Involvement
Scale: Clubs and Organizations – Quality of Effort ( α = .900)
Questions
Factor
Loading

Held an office in a club, organization, or student government group.

Read or asked about a club, organization, or student government activity.

Attended a meeting of a club, organization, or student government
group.

Voted in a student election.

Discussed policies and issues related to campus activities and student
government.

Worked in some student organization or special project (publications,
student government, social event, etc.).

Discussed reasons for the success or lack of success of student club
meetings, activities, or events.

Met with a faculty advisor or administrator to discuss the activities of a
student organization.

Four point Likert-type scale:
2) Never, 2) Occasionally, 3) Often, 4) Very Often

.893

.888

.885

.896

.884

.880

.879

.892

Results for Total Sample
Correlation analyses were conducted to respond to the first six research questions.
A factorial analysis of variance (ANOVA) was conducted to assess research question
77

seven which examined students’ social and academic adjustment by age, gender, major
and race/ethnicity. In response to the last research question, correlation analyses and a
factorial analysis of variance (ANOVA) were also conducted for the sample comprised
exclusively of the 75 Latina(o) students. Descriptive statistics for the correlations for the
entire sample are provided in Table 15. Due to the limitations of the study such as the
sample size, unusually high gpa, and younger age average for this group, the reported
results provide descriptive statistics for the sample group only and cannot be generalized
to other community college transfer student populations.
Correlations for five of the eight research questions pertaining to the entire
response sample produced a Cronbach’s Alpha coefficient at or below the p<.05 level
being used for this study as noted in Table 14. Similar findings resulted from the analysis
of the Latina(o) student sample. A review of the correlation results follows organized by
research question with a separate section for the last research question addressing the
Latina(o) subsample.

Table 14: Descriptive Statistics for Key Variables
Item
Mean Std. Deviation N

Social Involvement 1.8119 .72021 399
Academic Involvement 2.4150 .66028 402
Social Adjustment 2.5702 .69550 386
Academic Adjustment 2.9275 .65890 386
GPA 3.2447 .43074 334
78

Table 15: Correlation Results for Key Variables
*p<.05. **p<.001.
The first research question stated: “What is the relationship between transfer
students’ social involvement at the four-year university and their social adjustment at the
four-year university?” As shown in Table 15, the correlation between social involvement
and social adjustment was significant, r(382)=.429, p=.001. This finding suggests that the
community college transfer students in this sample who demonstrated higher levels of
involvement in clubs and organizations at the four-year university would also
demonstrate higher levels of adjustment with the social environment including making
friends at the four-year university. The hypothesis that a positive relationship exists
between students’ social involvement and their social adjustment at the four-year
university was supported by the data.
Item Social
Involvement
Academic
Involvement
Social
Adjustment
Academic
Adjustment GPA

Social Involvement
Pearson Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed)

Academic Involvement
Pearson Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed)

Social Adjustment
Pearson Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed)

Academic Adjustment
Pearson Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed)

GPA
Pearson Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed)

1

.362
.001

.429**
.001

-.086
.093

.104
.059

.362**
.001

1

.267**
.001

.127*
.013

.215**
.001

.429**
.001

.267**
.001

1

.193**
.001

.055
.330

-.086
.093

.127*
.013

.193**
.001

1

.313**
.001

.104
.059
.215**
.001

.055
.330

.313**
.001

1
79

The second research question stated: “What is the relationship between transfer
students’ academic involvement at the four-year university and their academic
adjustment? The data in Table 15 indicate a significant positive relationship between
students’ academic involvement and academic adjustment, r(384)=.127, p=.013,
suggesting that the community college transfer students in this sample who engaged
frequently with faculty outside of class at the four-year university demonstrated a higher
level of adjustment with the academic standards at the four-year university. The
hypothesis that a positive relationship exists between students’ academic involvement
and their academic adjustment at the four-year university was supported by the data.
The third research question stated: “What is the relationship between transfer
students’ social involvement at the four-year university and their grades? The data in
Table 15 indicate there was no significant finding. According to the data, community
college transfer student involvement in activities related to student clubs and
organizations at the four-year university was not associated with students’ gpa at the
four-year university. The hypothesis that there was a positive relationship between social
involvement and students’ grades was not supported.
The fourth research question stated: “What is the relationship between transfer
students’ academic involvement at the four-year university and their grades?” The data in
Table 15 indicate the correlation was significant, r(332)=.215, p=.001, supporting Astin’s
(1984) theory of involvement which posits that students’ quality and quantity of
investment in an activity is proportional to the amount of learning and development.
80

Therefore, the community college transfer students in this study who engaged with
faculty to seek advice, asked for feedback on class assignments, visited with them after
class, met with faculty during office hours, and discussed career plans with faculty
experienced a higher GPA than those that did not engage faculty. The hypothesis that
there was a positive relationship between academic involvement and students’ grades at
the four-year university was supported.
The fifth research question stated: “What is the relationship between transfer
students’ social adjustment at the four-year university and their grades?” As can be seen
in Table 15, there was no significant correlation. This finding indicates that adjusting to
the social environment, being very involved with university social activities, and making
friends as expected (Laanan, 1998) did not play a role in the academic achievement for
students in this study as measured by grades. The hypothesis that there was a positive
relationship between students’ social adjustment and grades was not supported.
The sixth research question stated: “What is the relationship between transfer
students’ academic adjustment at the four-year university and their grades?” According to
the data in Table 15, there was a positive significant relationship between these variables,
r(317)=.313, p=.001. This finding supports the notion that the community college transfer
students in this study who were better able to adjust to the academic rigor of the four-year
university would also have better grades (Laanan, 1998). The hypothesis that there was a
positive relationship between students’ academic adjustment and grades was supported.
81

Factorial Analysis of Variance
A test of between-subjects effects was conducted to test the last research question:
“How do students differ in their social and academic adjustment at the four-year
university by age, gender, major, and/or race/ethnicity?” Factorial analysis of variance
was used to test the relationship between two key variables: social and academic
adjustment and four independent variables: age, race/ethnicity, major, and gender. The
results of these analyses are summarized in the tables below.
The first part of the seventh research question examined the relationship between
social adjustment and community college transfer students’ age, gender, and major. The
results are summarized in Table 16. There was no significant relationship between social
adjustment and community college transfer students’ age, race/ethnicity, major, and
gender according to the data.

82

Table 16: Tests of Between-Subjects Effects for Social Adjustment
Source Type III Sum of
Squares
Df Mean Square F Sig.

Corrected Model 10.736
a
14 .767 1.583 .083
Intercept 752.816 1 752.816 1554.177 .000
Age 3.703 4 .926 1.911 .109
Race/Ethnicity 3.048 5 .610 1.259 .282
Major 1.671 4 .418 .862 .487
Gender .063 1 .063 .130 .719
Error 140.955 291 .484
Total 2155.250 306

Corrected Total 151.691 305
a. R Squared = .071 (Adjusted R Squared = .026)

The second part of the seventh research question examined the relationship
between academic adjustment and community college transfer students’ age, gender, and
major. The results are summarized in Table 17. There was a significant relationship
between community college transfer students’ academic adjustment and major, F(4,
291)=4.104, p=.003. This finding suggests that the students in this study within particular
majors demonstrated higher levels of academic adjustment which will be further
explained with Table 18. There was no significant effect between students academic
adjustment and age, gender, or race/ethnicity.

83

Table 17: Tests of Between-Subjects Effects for Academic Adjustment
Source Type III Sum of
Squares
Df Mean Square F Sig.

Corrected Model 9.334
a
14 .667 1.631 .070
Intercept 469.782 1 469.782 1149.207 .000
Age .799 4 .200 .489 .744
Race/Ethnicity 3.033 5 .607 1.484 .195
Major 6.711 4 1.678 4.104 .003
Gender .084 1 .084 .205 .651
Error 118.957 291 .409
Total 1419.181 306
Corrected Total 128.291 305
a. R Squared = .073 (Adjusted R Squared = .028)

The description of means for each major is provided in Table 18. The analysis of
the relationship between community college transfer students’ academic adjustment and
major indicates that students in the business major were better adjusted to the academic
rigors of the four-year university than students in the other four major groups. The majors
are ordered by enrollment starting with the lowest enrollment in arts and humanities and
the most popular major, business, listed last.

84

Table 18: Estimated Marginal Means for Academic Adjustment and Major
Major Mean Std. Error

ime
nsio
n1
Arts and Humanities 2.822 .072
Engineering 2.890 .135
Social Sciences 2.976 .123
Natural Sciences 3.048 .124
Business 3.194 .073

The data for the complete sample yielded significant correlations for four of the
six research questions. The relationships represented by these findings are illustrated in
Figure 4. With the caveat that the response rate of 22% was low, the relationships found
among this sample support the larger literature. These findings support the literature on
the importance of involvement and adjustment in community college transfer students’
college pathway and their grades.

85

Figure 4: Community College Transfer Student Adjustment Pathway Correlations for All Respondents

Note. Significant relationships at the p<.05 or lower are denoted with a “+”.
86

In order to examine the community college transfer student pathway for Latina(o)
students, a subsample was taken from the response group to examine involvement and
adjustment experiences compared to their Non-Latina(o) counterparts. The results of the
data analysis for the eight research question follow in the next section.
The internal consistency of the four key constructs being studied was verified
using the Cronbach’s alpha coefficient as was done previously with the whole respondent
sample. While there are differing perspectives about the proper alpha value, the most
common value is .7 (Pallant, 2005). However, for scales with fewer than 10 items, it is
common to find alpha values as low as .5 (Pallant, 2005). The reliability of the scales for
two of the four key constructs met the .7 alpha benchmark with the exception of the
academic and social adjustment scales which yielded an alpha value of .503 and .664
respectively (see Table 24).
Table 19: Reliability Statistics for Key Variables for the Latina(o) Group
Dependent Variable N Means SD Cronbach’s
Alpha

Academic Adjustment
Social Adjustment
Academic Involvement
Social Involvement
60
60
65
65
1.9792
2.5333
2.4342
1.8519

.64979
.68807
.60436
.72041
.503
.664
.889
.893

The final research question examined how Latina(o) community college transfer
students at a private, select four-year university fared in their social and academic
87

adjustment experiences. The question stated: “To what extent are the answers to research
questions one through six replicated in a sample comprised exclusively of Latina(o)
students?” The results of the correlation analyses are reported in Table 25. The results of
the final research question in which questions one through six from the total sample were
applied to the Latina(o) sample are provided below.
The first research question was supported by the data for the Latina(o) community
college transfer sample group. There was a significant relationship between Latina(o)
students’ social involvement and social adjustment, r(60)=.483, p=.001. This finding
supports Astin’s (1984) theory of student involvement and student engagement theory
(Kuh, 2009) to explain the educational outcomes for this sample of Latina(o) community
college transfer students.
A significant relationship was found between Latina(o) academic involvement
and social adjustment, r(60)=.412, p=.001. Similar to the first research question, this
finding supports Astin’s (1984) theory of student involvement and student engagement
theory (Kuh, 2009) to explain the educational attainment for this group of Latina(o)
community college transfer students. Previous studies have found that ethnic minority
community college transfer students tend to experience difficulty adjusting to the social
environment of the four-year university compared to their white counterparts. (Laanan,
1998). Ethnic minority community college transfer students have also been found to
engage with faculty less often than their white counterparts (Laanan, 1998). Others
(Harper and Quaye, 2009) have found that institutions must actively engage
88

underrepresented students in inquiry-based learning activities in order for them to have a
positive learning experience and desirable college outcomes.
The sixth research question was supported by the data. There was a significant
relationship between the academic adjustment of this group of Latina(o) community
college transfer students and grades, r(51)=.408, p=.003. This finding supports previous
studies (Laanan, 1998) that found community college transfer students’ academic
adjustment played a significant role in their educational attainment. Kuh 2010
The findings from the correlation analyses indicate that Latina(o) and Non-
Latina(o) community college transfer students have similar experiences with their social
and academic involvement, social and academic adjustment, and grades at the four-year
university. While not all of the relationships in the community college transfer student
adjustment pathway where statistically significant for the Latina(o) sample group, the
magnitude of the Pearson Correlation values for their pathways resemble those of their
Non-Latina(o) counterparts. The correlation results are presented in Table 25.

89

Table 20: Latina(o) and Non-Latina(o) Student Sample Group Correlation Results for Key Variables

Variable
Social
Involvement
Academic
Involvement
Social
Adjustment
Academic
Adjustment
GPA
Latino Non-
Latino
Latino Non-
Latino
Latino Non-
Latino
Latino Non-
Latino
Latino Non-
Latino

Social Involvement
Academic Involvement
Social Adjustment
Academic Adjustment
GPA

1
.254**
.483*
-.034
.099

1
.382*
.419*
-.122**
.068
.254**
1
.412*
.029
.172

.382*
1
.250*
.169**
.205*
.483*
.412*
1
.139
.255

.419*
.250*
1
.192*
*
.015
-.034
.029
.139
1
.408**

-.122**
.169**
.192**
1
.278*

.099
.172
.255
.408**
1

.068
.205*
.015
.278*
1
*p<.01, **p<.05
90

Results for Latina(o) Sample
The Latina(o) subsample taken from the total respondent group yielded a group
of 75 community college transfer students which accounted for 15% of the total
respondent group. The results presented here provide a description of the sample only.
Due to the small sample size which may alter the results, these findings cannot be
generalized across similar student populations. Therefore, the following findings apply
only to the Latina(o) sample studied. Descriptive statistics were completed for age,
gender, and major to generate a profile of the Latina(o) sample group. There were
differences in two demographic areas between the Latina(o) sample group and the non-
Latina(o) group in terms of age and major. The following tables provide the frequencies
and percentages for both groups along each of the three variables. Additionally, chi-
square calculations were run to determine if there were any statistically significant
differences between the representativeness of the Latina(o) group with the Non-Latina(o)
group. Those results are also presented.
Age. The Latina(o) sample group was older than the non-Latina(o) group.
Latina(o) respondents were highly represented in the 25 – 50 age group by 36%
compared to the largest percentage of the non-Latina(o) group represented by 27%
between 15-20 years of age. Table 19 illustrates the distribution of age for both the
Latina(o) and Non-Latina(o) groups.

91

Table 21: Latina(o) and Non-Latina(o) Respondent Distribution by Age
Age Category Frequency Percent
Latina(o) Non-Latina(o) Latina(o) Non-Latina(o)

Valid 15-20 years of
age
21 years of age
22 years of age
23 years of age
24-50 years of age
Total
Missing System
Total

11
14
12
7
27
71
4
75

90
84
55
30
62
321
11
332

14.7
18.7
16.0
9.3
36.0
94.7
5.3
100.0

27.1
25.3
16.6
9.0
18.7
96.7
3.3
100.0

Gender. The gender distribution of the Latina(o) and Non-Latina(o) groups is
provided in Table 20. As shown, the two populations were equally represented by gender.
A chi-square test was conducted to verify that the two groups were equally distributed in
this category. The results indicated that there was no significance, X
2
=(1,404)=.451,
p<.832, which confirmed that the two groups were equally distributed by gender.

92

Table 22: Latina(o) and Non-Latina(o) Sample Distribution by Gender
Gender Frequency Percent
Latina(o) Non-Latina(o) Latina(o) Non-Latina(o)

Valid Male
Female
Total
Missing System
Total

40
35
75
0
75

171
158
329
3
332

53.3
46.7
100.0
0
100.0

45.3
44.7
89.9
10.1
100.0

Major. A striking difference between the Latina(o) and Non-Latina(o) groups was
found in the distribution by major. The Latina(o) sample had no representation in the
natural sciences major. Additionally, the Latina(o) sample was predominantly
represented in the arts and humanities major with almost 43% of respondents enrolled in
the major compared to 80% of their non-Latino peers enrolled in the business major (see
Table 21). A chi-square test yielded a significant difference, X
2
=(4,345)=27.71, p<.001,
between the Latina(o) and Non-Latina(o) group which confirmed that the two groups
were not equally distributed across the five major categories. It should also be noted that
21% of the Latina(o) group and 20% of the Non-Latina(o) did not respond to this
question as noted by the missing system quantities in Table 21.

93

Table 23: Latina(o) and Non-Latina(o) Respondent Distribution by Major
Major Category Frequency Percent
Latina(o) Non-Latina(o) Latina(o) Non-Latina(o)

Valid Arts &
Humanities
Social Sciences
Natural Sciences
Engineering
Business
Total
Missing System
Total

32
4
0
9
14
59
16
75

77
38
30
20
121
286
71
357

42.7
5.3
0
12.0
18.7
78.7
21.3
100.0

21.6
10.6
8.4
5.6
33.9
80.1
19.9
100.0

Similar to the analyses conducted for the whole respondent group, reliability
coefficients for the four key constructs used in the study were calculated. Table 22
provides the descriptive statistics including mean, standard deviation, and number of
respondents for the four constructs including gpa. The standard deviations for both
groups along the four key contructs and gpa were fairly low which implied that there was
no significant difference between Latino and Non-Latino students.

94

Table 24: Descriptive Statistics for Key Variables for Latina(o) and Non-Latina(o)
Groups

In order to reveal any statistically significant differences between the two groups
on the involvement, adjustment, and gpa measures, independent samples t-tests were
conducted. According to the t-test results, there were no significant differences found for
the two groups across the five variables. The means and standard deviations for both the
Latina(o) and Non-Latina(o) group on all measures are presented in Table 23.

Item
Mean Standard Deviation N
Latina(o) Non-
Latina(o)
Latina(o) Non-
Latina(o)
Latina(o) Non-
Latina(o)

Social Involvement 1.8519 1.8037 .72041 .71445 65 300
Academic Involvement 2.4342 2.4121 .60436 .65487 65 302
Social Adjustment 2.5333 2.5755 .68807 .71072 60 296
Academic Adjustment 1.9792 2.8919 .64979 .65670 60 296
GPA 3.1654 3.2627 .40842 .42817 56 252
95

Table 25: Independent-Samples T-test for Key Variables for Latina(o) and Non-Latina(o)
Group

Note. Standard Deviations appear in parentheses below means.
Sample Group
Latina(o) Non-Latina(o) t Df

Social Involvement 1.85
(.7204)
1.80
(.7145)
.493 363
Academic Involvement 2.43
(.6044)
2.41
(.6549)
.250 365
Social Adjustment 2.53
(.6881)
2.56
(.7107)
-.421 354
Academic Adjustment 3.02
(.6498)
2.89
(.6567)
1.389 354
GPA 3.17
(.4084)
3.26
(.4282)
-1.551 306
96

Latina(o) Sample Group Factorial Analysis of Variance
A test of between-subjects effects was conducted to examine how community
college transfer students differ in their social and academic adjustment at the four-year
university. Factorial analysis of variance was used to test the relationship between two
key variables: social and academic adjustment and four independent variables: age,
major, and gender for both groups. The results of these analyses are summarized in
Tables 26 and 27 with the results for the Latina(o) and Non-Latina(o) presented side by
side for comparison purposes.
In response to the question about how students differ in their social and academic
adjustment at the four-year university a test of between subjects effects was conducted by
the following three dependent variables: age, gender, and major. The test of between
subjects effects produced no significant differences between the dependent variables and
social adjustment. The results are presented in Table 26. According to the data, there was
no significant difference found for social adjustment by age, gender, or major for the
Latina(o) group nor the Non-Latina(o) group.

Table 26: Tests of Between-Subjects Effects for Latina(o) and Non-Latina(o) Student Social Adjustment
Source Type III Sum of Squares Df Mean Square F Sig.
Latino
Non-
Latino
Latino
Non-
Latino
Latino
Non-
Latino
Latino
Non-
Latino
Latino
Non-
Latino
Corrected
Model
4.424
a
9.667
b
8 13 .553 .744 1.124 1.536 .366 .105
Intercept 191.073 565.040 1 1 191.073 565.040 388.409 1167.370 .000 .000
Age 2.508 3.145 4 4 .627 .786 1.274 1.624 .294 .169
Major 2.609 1.717 3 4 .870 .429 1.768 .887 .167 .472
Gender .219 .003 1 1 .219 .003 .445 .006 .508 .938
Error 22.137 115.199 45 238 .492 .484
Total 362.813 1792.438 54 252

Corrected
Total
26.561 124.866 53 251
a. R Squared = .167 (Adjusted R Squared = .0185) b. R Squared = .041 (Adjusted R Squared = .008)
97
98

The results of the test of between subjects effects in Table 27 indicate that there is
no difference in the relationship between students’ academic adjustment and age and
gender among Latina(o) and Non-Latina(o) community college transfer students at the
four-year university. There is a significant relationship between academic adjustment and
major for both Latina(o), F(3,45)=4.481, p=.008, and Non-Latina(o) students,
F(4,261)=2.694, p=.031. This finding indicates that both the Latina(o) and Non-Latina(o)
community college transfer students in this sample have similar enrollment patterns and
that a positive relationship exists between type of major and academic adjustment.

Table 27: Tests of Between-Subjects Effects for Latina(o) and Non-Latina(o) Student Academic Adjustment
Source
Type III Sum of
Squares
Df Mean Square F Sig.
Latino
Non-
Latino
Latino
Non-
Latino
Latino
Non-
Latino
Latino
Non-
Latino
Latino
Non-
Latino
Corrected
Model
7.075
a
5.187
b
8 9 .884 .576 2.459 1.378 .027 .198
Intercept 277.910 1300.808 1 1 277.910 1300.808 772.867 3110.436 .000 .000
Age .512 .541 4 4 .128 .135 .356 .323 .838 .862
Major 4.834 4.507 3 4 1.611 1.127 4.481 2.694 .008 .031
Gender .577 .486 1 1 .577 .486 1.606 1.162 .212 .282
Error 16.181 109.152 45 261 .360 .418
Total
519.813 2396.931 54 271
Corrected
Total
23.256 114.339 53 270
a. R Squared = .284 (Adjusted R Squared = .155) b. R Squared = .045 (Adjusted R Squared = .012)
99
100

The descriptions of the Latina(o) and Non-Latina(o) sample groups estimated
means for major with relationship to academic adjustment are provided in Table 28 and
Table 29. The analysis of the relationship between community college transfer students’
academic adjustment and major indicates within this sample that both Latina(o) (see
Table 28) and Non-Latina(o) (see Table 29) students enrolled in the business major were
better adjusted to the academic rigors of the four-year university than students in the
other four majors. One difference between the Latina(o) and Non-Latina(o) samples
groups was the lack of representation of Latina(o) students in the natural sciences major
as shown in Table 28.
Table 28: Estimated Marginal Means for Latina(o) Sample Academic Adjustment and
Major

Major Mean Std. Error

ime
nsio
n1
Social Sciences 2.584 .323
Arts and Humanities 2.869 .129
Engineering 2.894 .223
Business 3.591 .191
101

Table 29: Estimated Marginal Means for Non-Latina(o) Sample Academic Adjustment
and Major

Major Mean Std. Error

ime
nsio
n1
Arts and Humanities 2.724 .077
Engineering 2.866 .110
Natural Sciences 2.963 .122
Social Sciences 2.846 .154
Business 3.039 .064

Summary
Due to the limitations of the study sample including low response rate, higher
than expected grades, and more traditionally aged community college students, the
findings are descriptive for the study sample only. No suggestion of generalizability in
the following discussion is intended. Analysis of the complete data set yielded a positive,
significant correlation between social involvement and social adjustment, r(382)=.429,
p=.001 for the first research question. This finding suggests that the community college
transfer students in this study who were involved with clubs and organizations at the
four-year university also demonstrated a higher level of adjustment to the social
environment of the four-year university. The results for the second research question
indicated a positive relationship between students’ academic involvement and academic
adjustment, r(384)=.127, p=.013, suggesting that the community college transfer students
in this study who engaged with faculty also had a healthy experience adjusting to the
102

academic rigors of the four-year university. The data supported the fourth research
question which examined the relationship between academic involvement and student
grades, r(332)=.215, p=.001. There was a positive significant relationship between
students’ academic adjustment and grades, r(317)=.313, p=.001, which supports the
notion that community college transfer students who are better able to adjust to the
academic rigor of the four-year university will also have better grades (Laanan, 1998).
The data indicated a significant effect between students’ academic adjustments and
major, F(4, 291)=4.104, p=.003. However, no significant effect was found between
student’s academic adjustment and age, gender, or race/ethnicity.
The grades, social and academic involvement, and social and academic
adjustment of Latina(o) community college transfer students were examined to determine
if their experiences resembled the pathway for Non-Latino students. This study found
that the Latina(o) and Non-Latino students shared similar experiences at the four-year
university. Data for both Latina(o) and Non-Latino students yielded significant
relationships between social involvement and social adjustment, academic involvement
and social adjustment, and academic adjustment and grades. The relationship between the
findings described in this chapter and the literature including implications for practice
and recommendations for future research are discussed in chapter 5.

103

CHAPTER 5
DISCUSSION AND IMPLICATIONS
The purpose of this study was to determine the relationship between four key
composite variables: 1) social involvement, 2) academic involvement, 3) social
adjustment, and 4) academic adjustment and five dependent variables: 1) age, 2) gender,
3) race/ethnicity, 4) major, and 5) grades to explore the adjustment pathway for
community college transfer students at a highly selective, and ethnically diverse
university. The study used the same analysis to examine differences in the experiences
between a sub-sample of Latina(o) community college transfer students and the whole
community college transfer student sample at the same four-year university. This chapter
organizes the findings of the study in 2 sections: 1) data analysis of the Latina(o) sample
and the total sample including a discussion of how the findings correspond to existing
literature with recommendations for future research and 2) implications for practice.
Data Analysis and Recommendations for Future Research
The findings of this study are descriptive of the study sample and must be used
with caution because of research limitations such as a 22% response rate, the atypical
traditional age of the community college students, and the unexpectedly high student
grades. With that said, the results of the study raise some interesting questions. Those
results, the questions they trigger, and suggestions for exploring those questions are
discussed in this section beginning with a summary of the adjustment correlations
104

Correlations were calculated to respond to the first six research questions. Figure
5 illustrates the results of the correlations calculated to test the relationship between the
key variables for both the Latina(o) subsample and the total sample. For the whole
sample, a positive, significant relationship between all variables was found with the
exception of social involvement and grades as well as social adjustment and grades. The
findings were not as supportive for the Latina(o) sample which is discussed in the next
section

105

Figure 5: Latina(o) and Total Group Involvement Pathway Correlations

Note. Significant relationships for the Latina(o) group are denoted with a “+”. Significant relationships for the total group are
denoted with a “+”.
106

Findings for Total Sample Involvement
The data presented in this study suggest that the community college transfer
student involvement pathway may be a credible model for the total sample. When we
review the findings for this group, we find that they support the pathway for eight of the
ten relationships between community college transfer student involvement and
adjustment at the four-year university derived from the literature on student involvement
(Astin, 1984) and adjustment (Laanan, 1998). The data yielded eight positive, significant
relationships between social and academic involvement, social and academic adjustment,
and grades. The pathway confirms that social and academic involvement were
significantly related to students’ social and academic adjustment.
These findings confirm that, within this sample, community college transfer
students’ academic involvement, as defined by frequent engagement with faculty such as
seeking advice, meeting during office hours, discussing career plans, and seeking
feedback on their course work, was positively related with adjusting to the academic
standards at the four-year university, not experiencing a dip in their grades during the
first semester, not experiencing increased stress, and not experiencing competitiveness
among their peers at the university. These findings correspond to previous research
(Astin, 1984) that found community college transfer student time and effort devoted to
academic activities in and outside of the classroom had a positive relationship with
student adjustment (Laanan, 1998; Laanan, 2004).
107

The positive, significant relationship between academic involvement and grades
found for the total sample demonstrates that students who interacted frequently with
faculty both in and outside of the classroom also had high grades. This finding
corresponds to the literature on student involvement (Astin, 1984; Tinto, 1993) and
student engagement (Pike & Kuh, 2005; Kuh 2009) which asserts that students who are
highly engaged in educational activities will have higher grades, increased retention, and
better overall educational outcomes.
For the respondents in this study, social involvement appeared to be of lesser
importance than academic involvement in relationship to grades. However, it is not
uncommon for students to prioritize their time and effort on activities that will result in
academic achievement, particularly for community college students who are learning to
adjust to the increased demands of the four-year institution (Davies & Casey, 1999).
One important finding was the significant relationship between academic
adjustment and grades for students in both the Latina(o) subsample and the total sample.
While involvement was not correlated with student grades, community college student
adjustment is positively related to grades. Previous research (Wawrzynski & Sedlacek,
2003) found that a sense of community and academic behaviors such as studying,
preparing for class, and revising notes was important to the success of transfer students of
color.
One of the findings did not support the research on community college students.
Faculty accessibility and willingness to provide guidance have been found to produce
108

positive outcomes for community college transfer students (Berger & Melaney, 2003;
Kuh 2009; Harper & Quaye, 2009). However, this finding did not hold true within the
Latina(o) subsample which will be discussed in the next section.
Findings for Latina(o) Sample Involvement
The data did not strongly support the involvement pathway for community
college transfer students at the four-year university for the Latina(o) subsample. For this
group, the data analysis confirmed only four positive, significant relationships. There was
a positive, significant relationship between social and academic involvement and social
adjustment as well as academic adjustment and grades. There was no significant
relationship between social or academic involvement and grades as hypothesized. This
lack of significance could be due to several factors – sample size, atypical high academic
ability, campus context, use of involvement construct to explain student engagement –
discussed next.
First, the Latina(o) subsample was comprised of 75 respondents. The small
sample size may not have had the statistical strength to generate significant relationships
for all of the constructs in the model. A larger sample size from multiple institutions is
required to produce reliable correlations that are also generalizable across institutional
types.
Second, there was little variance in the standard deviations among the Latina(o)
subsample and total sample for gpa as well as overall high gpa’s, above a 3.1, for both
groups (see Table 22). This finding points to the need for studies to utilize different
109

institutional types with diverse student samples. The sample for this study was limited
because students were drawn from a highly selective and diverse private research
university that maintains high academic admissions standards. This may have resulted in
a student population with a disproportionately higher gpa, and the atypical age
distribution. For this group, the data did not support the notion of transfer shock (Hills,
1965) in which students experience a drop in grades after transferring to the four-year
university. Thus, the notion of transfer shock may not have been an issue for this group.
Also, student involvement studies (Astin, 1984; Tinto, 1993) have based their
research mostly on traditional institutions with traditional students. This study was
conducted at a traditional institution with a highly diverse student population. For
example, over half of the undergraduates are non-White represented by 22% Asian, 14%
Hispanic, 11% International, and 4% Black. Studies that have a significantly diverse
sample – including age and race/ethnicity – will generate data that can be disaggregated
to explore how students from varying backgrounds experience transfer.
These findings demonstrate the need for future research on community college
transfer students that includes a larger, diverse sample taken from diverse universities and
colleges. It may be that “adjustment” is a more useful construct than “involvement” when
understanding underrepresented transfer students’ adaptation to and success in four year
institutions. Perhaps adaptation occurs more readily when there is a high degree of
commonality or “fit” between the student’s community college experience and their four
year institution in the areas of academic rigor and diversity. Including measures of
110

institutional selectivity could help test if the degree of “academic fit” transfer students
experience matters to their success. Measures of institutional characteristics, such as the
degree of racial diversity and institutional racial climate, could help test the degree to
which “climate fit” or familiarity has an impact on student adjustment, and ultimately
their academic success (Pike & Kuh, 2005; Horn & Berger, 2004).
Institutional characteristics such as those described above were not within the
scope of this study, however, how they interact with student engagement will contribute
to the literature on Latino(a) community college transfer. For example, Horn and Berger
(2004) found that private institutions have a higher retention and graduation rate than
public institutions. Variances among measures of institutional engagement have also been
found in which student engagement is implemented differently across institutional types
(Pike & Kuh, 2005). Thus, studies on institutional engagement have found that students
at some institutions reported high levels of diverse student engagement with a positive
interpersonal environment while at other institutions the type of engagement produced
the perception of a negative interpersonal environment.
It may also be the case that the proposed relationship pathways between
involvement and grades did not produce the expected results because the involvement
construct did not adequately capture the students’ experiences. For decades, involvement
(Astin, 1984; Tinto, 1993) has been used as the standard to study persistence.
Involvement is typically measured by the amount of physical and psychological energy
that a student devotes to their educational experience.
111

The student engagement construct measures inquiry-based activities versus
participation which was measured by the involvement construct. Researchers (Pike &
Kuh, 2005; Carini, Kuh, & Klein, 2006; Kuh, 2009) argue the student engagement
framework delves deeper and provides greater explanatory power of students’ classroom
experiences that contribute to positive educational outcomes than does involvement
theory (Astin, 1984). Student engagement is described as “the time and effort students
devote to activities that are empirically linked to desired outcomes of college and what
institutions do to induce students to participate in these activities” (Kuh, 2009, p. 683).
Also, Kuh (2009) points out there may be differences in the degree to which at-risk
students, who are disproportionately students of color, benefit compared to others. Unlike
the student involvement construct (Astin, 1984) which focuses on out of classroom
activities, the student engagement construct (Pike & Kuh, 2005; Kuh, 2009) focuses on
classroom experiences may better explain the experiences of underrepresented students.
In this study, the traditional theory of student involvement (Astin, 1984; Tinto, 1993) did
not hold true for the Latina(o) group. The student engagement (Kuh, 2009) construct may
provide a better explanation for this sample and their high grades. Further research in this
area will assist in constructing effective models of student engagement that can be used
widely to increase the quality of students’ educational experiences.
Findings for Student Adjustment
Besides student involvement, this study also explored the differences between
students’ social and academic adjustment at the four-year university by age, gender, and
112

major for both the Latina(o) subsample and the total sample. The data did not produce
significant findings for all but one of the variables for both sample groups. Academic
adjustment and major yielded a significant effect. Students majoring in business
experienced a higher level of academic adjustment than students in the arts and
humanities, social sciences, natural sciences, and engineering majors. Tinto (1997) found
that students who belong to cohorts or learning communities will have increased
academic outcomes than their counterparts whose program does not involve them in a
student cohort. It could be that business students who are required to engage in many
group projects as part of the undergraduate curriculum are benefitting from positive
academic adjustment experience.
This finding should be further explored through studies that employ varying
forms of research methods. This was a non-experimental, quantitative study that used
correlations to test the relationship between student involvement and adjustment and their
impact on grades. While quantitative studies are necessary to test these relationships on a
macro level, future studies should consider employing qualitative methods to provide in-
depth accounts of student involvement and engagement experiences at the individual
level. There is a critical need for empirical studies to better understand the personal
experiences of the booming minority student college population. Student stories can
focus research by identifying the nuances of student educational experiences such as
differences in the impact of curriculum by major that quantitative studies do not capture.
Qualitative studies assist researchers in developing themes about minority experiences to
113

serve as the focal point for quantitative studies. This study found that academic
adjustment was significantly associated with student grades for both groups. This finding
is contrary to previous studies (Laanan, 1998) which found that minority students
experienced a dip in grades and tended to feel overwhelmed by the academic standards at
the four-year university than their white counterparts. As previously mentioned, this
finding may be skewed due to the atypical high achieving group which may have resulted
in findings that deviate from previous research (Laanan, 1998) that found transfer
students struggled with academic adjustment. The importance of expanding research
studies to include varying institutional types can help to explore if transfer shock (Hills,
1965) is still an issue today, whether emerging constructs such as student engagement
(Kuh, 2009) better explain student experiences, or whether higher education institutions
are becoming more attuned to this student population with programming that supports a
seamless transition to the four-year university.
A significant relationship was found between Latina(o) community college
transfer student social adjustment and social involvement. Student integration and
adjustment has been associated with involvement in student clubs and organizations
(Tinto, 1993). However, the student engagement construct also considers institutional
policies, programming, and curriculum that engage all students (Kuh, 2005; Harper &
Quaye, 2009). It is important to note that for students of color, the level of institutional
quality in terms of the availability of thoughtful, inclusive, and high-impact engagement
114

opportunities is a key factor in how they perceive the inclusiveness and quality of those
experiences (Harper & Quaye, 2009).
The students in this sample exhibited high levels of integration and adjustment
through measures of participation in activities with their peers which may also help to
explain their sustained academic success. Future studies should explore these
relationships further using the student engagement framework to uncover the degree of
engagement by the university as well as that of the students whic may better explain the
involvement behaviors of Latina(o) community college students.
What if future studies found no relationship between student engagement and
student adjustment, particularly for Latina(o) students who have been understudied?
Perhaps students from less privileged backgrounds succeed in spite of institutional
challenges. As previously mentioned, qualitative methods would be key in providing the
necessary in-depth, focused research to generate the factors promoting school success for
Latina(o) community college transfer students. Future studies should include student
motivation to explore these questions.
Moreover, researchers (Dowd, Sawatzky, & Korn, 2011) argue that the higher
education research agenda must focus on the development of alternative measures of
student intercultural effort to accurately explain minority student experiences. In their
analysis of student involvement and engagement measures and constructs, they criticize
the lack of attention given to the effort exerted by underrepresented students to counteract
racially biased practices (Dowd, Sawatzky, & Korn, 2011). Current constructs do not
115

account for the impact of institutional racially biased practices on students’ sense of
belonging and validation of self worth (Dowd, Sawatzky, & Korn, 2011). Therefore,
student involvement and engagement constructs alone will not provide a complete
understanding of minority student experiences. Empirical evidence based on new student
engagement measures and constructs is essential to inform institutional practices that are
culturally validating for all students and to understand the complexity of barriers to the
educational attainment of underrepresented students.
Of final note, the alpha values for one of the constructs were below the
universally accepted .7 standard. The reliability tests produced an alpha coefficient of
.627 for the academic adjustment scale. There is the possibility that the social adjustment
items are not measuring the intended constructs, thus affecting the outcomes of the
statistical analyses.
Implications for Practice
Because of the sample size and response rate the results of the study are limited in
their application. The discussion on implications for practice will be restricted to
implications for the study site. The discussion is also limited to the specific groups
included in the study.
This study yielded a significant correlation between academic involvement and
student grades suggesting that models of student involvement (Astin, 1984; Tinto, 1993)
and the framework on student engagement (Kuh, 2009) hold true in positing that a
students’ investment of time and effort in their educational experience will produce
116

positive educational outcomes. Due to the limitations of the study there is hesitancy in
providing detailed recommendations based on the current findings, particularly for the
Latina(o) sample.
The limited findings with the Latina(o) sample demonstrate the need for
researchers and higher education administrators to disaggregate student data to identify
whether student academic achievement is comparable across all ethnicities. This study
suggests that, at this institution, not all transfer students experience college in the same
way as demonstrated by the fit of the transfer pathway with the total sample but less so
with the Latina(o) sample. The disaggregation of student data will enable institutional
leaders to determine how different student groups experience college as well as where to
focus their efforts to change institutional policies, make curriculum changes, and/or
enhance student programming to ensure all students achieve their academic goals.
Furthermore, this study illustrates that at this institution, there is some value to
involvement activities for some students. The results of the total sample indicated that
frequent engagement with faculty such as seeking advice, meeting during office hours,
and discussing career plans are having a positive effect on student adjustment to the
academic rigors of the institution. Administrators at this institution are encouraged to
continue providing these types of involvement activities for their students.
At the same time, administrators are cautioned that these activities may not be
producing the same results for Latina(o) students as noted by the lack of significance in
the involvement pathway. Due to the small sample size of this group, it is unknown if,
117

Latina(o) students are receiving the same benefits from being involved in those academic
activities or to what degree they are engaging in those activities. Researchers (Cole,
2008) have found that minority student-faculty interactions can lead to positive academic
outcomes when faculty provide constructive criticism combined with faculty support and
encouragement. However, negative feedback from faculty without encouragement can
exacerbate feelings of alienation and damage students’ self worth (Cole, 2008). These are
areas of further inquiry for institutional administrators.
This study illustrates the need for private, highly diverse selective institutions of
higher education with a diverse student population to be committed to providing students
with opportunities that address the needs of a diverse student body. At the institution
under study, the results found that not all students were experiencing the same benefits
from engagement in academic and social involvement activities. Institutions should not
assume that diversity alone will generate desired student outcomes (Harper & Quaye,
2009). Purposeful programmatic and curricular offerings including training faculty to
handle the difficult conversations around diversity such as discrimination that arise in
classes with a curriculum on diversity is a key institutional responsibility. Practitioners
who are knowledgeable about students needs with the ability to uncover systemic barriers
to minority student success are also a factor of an engaged institution (Bensimon, 2007).
Consequently, institutions of higher education will have to depart from traditional student
programming and curriculum to matriculate their students and increase the low
graduation rates of Latina(o) students.
118

Conclusion
With the growing diversity and multifaceted characteristics of students in higher
education, colleges and universities are being challenged to reevaluate their teaching,
research, curriculum, and programming practices. It is estimated that minorities will
comprise 40% of undergraduate enrollments in the next two decades (Cole, 1997).
Latinas(os) are disproportionately represented at community colleges. In 2000,
Latinas(os) accounted for 28% of community college enrollments with over 50% in the
Los Angeles Community College system. Latinas(os) over the age of 25 demonstrate low
graduation rates with 1 in 10 Latinas(os) completing a college degree compared with 1 in
4 whites and 1 in 6 blacks (NCES, 2003).
There is a growing body of literature (Rendon & Valadez, 1993; Wawrzynski &
Sedlacek, 2003; Ornelas & Solorzano, 2004; Laanan, 2004) on Latina(o) community
college students. However, less is known about their post-transfer experiences and
educational outcomes. This study found that traditional theoretical frameworks on student
involvement and engagement did not adequately explain the relationship between
Latina(o) student involvement and engagement and their educational outcomes. With the
quickly changing landscape for colleges which are becoming increasingly diverse, new
theoretical frameworks are needed to explore Latina(o) student experiences at diverse
four-year institutions. While diversity is encouraged to enrich student college
experiences, diversity alone is not sufficient to positively impact educational and learning
119

outcomes. Institutions must be intentional in their efforts to provide quality engagement
opportunities for diverse students that provide positive interpersonal interactions.
This study contributed to the literature on Latina(o) community college transfer
students at this highly selective, highly diverse four-year university by exploring post-
transfer experiences. While the findings are limited, the study raised important questions
for consideration in future research studies about the institutional context, quality student
and institutional engagement practices, and the importance of responsibly fostering
diversity.

120

REFERENCES
Anderson, T., & Kanuka, H. (2003). E-Research: Methods, strategies, and issues. Boston,
MA: Pearson Education.

Arnold, J. C. (2001). Student transfer between Oregon community colleges and Oregon
university systems institutions. New Directions for Community Colleges, 114, 45-
59.

Astin, A. W. (1984). Student involvement: A developmental theory for higher education.
Journal of College Student Personnel, 297-308.

Baird, L. L. (2000). College climate and the Tinto model. In J. M. Braxton (Ed.),
Reworking the Student Departure Puzzle. (pp. 62-80). Nashville. TN: Vanderbilt
University Press.

Berger, J. B., & Malaney, G. D. (2003). Assessing the transition of transfer students from
community colleges to a university. NASPA Journal, 40(4), 1-23.

Bensimon, E. M. (2007). The underestimated significance of practitioner knowledge in
the scholarship on student success. The Review of Higher Education, 30(4), 441-
469.

Bensimon, E. M., & Dowd, A. C. (2009). Dimensions of the transfer choice gap:
Experiences of Latina and Latino student who navigated transfer pathways.
Harvard Education Review, 79(4), 632-659.

Carini, R. M., Kuh, G. D., & Klein, S. P. (2006). Student engagement and student
learning: Testing the linkages. Research in Higher Education, 47(1), 1-32.

Cejda, B. D., Kaylor, A. J., & Rewey, K. L. (1998). Transfer shock in an academic
discipline: The relationship between students’ majors and their academic
performance. Community College Review, 26(3), 1-14.

Cole, D. (2007). Do interracial interactions matter? An examination of student-faculty
contact and intellectual self-concept. Journal of Higher Education, 78(3), 249-
281.

Cole, D. (2008). Constructive criticism: The role of student-faculty interactions on
African American and Hispanic students’ educational gains. Journal of College
Student Development, 49(6), 587-605.

121

CPEC (2002) Performance indicators of California higher education, 2001. (Report No.
02-7). Sacramento. CA: California Postsecondary Education Commission.

Cuseo, J. B. (1998). The transfer transition: A summary of key issues, target areas, and
tactics for reform. Rancho Palos Verdes. CA: Marymount College. (ERIC
Document Reproduction Service No. ED 425 771)

Davies, T.G., & Casey, K. (1999). Transfer student experiences: Comparing their
academic and social lives at the community college and university. College
Student Journal, 33(1), 60-72

Dowd, A. C., Sawatzky, M, & Korn, R. (2011). Theoretical foundations and a research
agenda to validate measures of intercultural effort. Review of Higher Education,
35(1), 17-44.

Eggleston, L. E., & Laanan, F. S. (2001). Making the transition to the senior institution.
In F. S. Laanan (ed.). Transfer students: Trends and issues. New Directions for
Community Colleges, 114, 87-97. San Francisco. CA: Jossey-Bass.

Gandara, P. (1997). Over the ivy walls. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.

Fry, R. (2002). Latinos in higher education: Many enroll, too few graduate. Washington,
DC: Pew Hispanic Center.

Hagedorn, L. S., & Castro, C. R. (1999). Paradoxes: California’s experience with reverse
transfer students. New Directions for Community Colleges, 106, 15-26.

Hagedorn, L. S., & Cepeda, R. M. (2003). An investigation of critical mass: The role of
Latino representation in the retention of urban community college students.
Harvard Civil Rights Project.

Harbin, C.E. (1997). A Survey of transfer students at four-year institutions serving a
California community college. Community College Review, 25(2), 21-38.

Harper, S. R., & Quaye, S. J. (2009). Student engagement in higher education:
Theoretical perspectives and practical approaches for diverse populations. New
York, NY: Routledge.

Hawkins, V. M. & Larabee, H. J. (2005). Engaging racial/ethnic minority students in out-
of-class activities on predominantly white campuses. In Harper, S. R. & Quaye, S.
J. Student engagement in higher education: Theoretical perspectives and
practical approaches for diverse populations. New York, NY: Routledge.
122

Helm, E. G., Sedlacek, W. E., & Prieto, D. O. (1998). The relationship between attitudes
toward diversity and overall satisfaction of university students by race. Journal of
College Counseling, 1(2), 111-120.

Hills, J.R. (1965). Transfer shock: The academic performance of the junior college
transfer. Journal of Experimental Education, 33(3), 201-216.

Horn, L., and Berger, R. (2004). College persistence on the rise? Changes in 5-year
degree completion and postsecondary persistence rates between 1994 and 2000.
NCES 2005-156. U.S. Department of Education, Washington, DC.

Hu, S., Kuh, G. D., & Li, S. (2008). The effects of engagement in inquiry-oriented
activities on student learning and personal development. Innovative Higher
Education, 33, 71-81.

Hurtado, S. (1992). The campus racial climate: Contexts of conflict. Journal of Higher
Education, 63(5), 539-569.

Hurtado, S., & Carter, D. F. (1996). Latino students’ sense of belonging in the college
community: Rethinking the concept of integration on campus. In F. K. State et al.
(Eds.), College students: The evolving nature of research. (pp. 123-133),
Needham Heights. MA: Simon & Schuster.

Isaac, S., & Michael, W. (1995). Handbook in research and evaluation: A collection of
principles, methods, and strategies useful in the planning, design, and evaluation
of studies in education and the behavioral sciences. San Diego, CA: Robert R.
Knapp.

Jasinksi, J. L. (2000). Beyond high school: An examination of Hispanic educational
attainment. Social Science Quarterly, 81, 276-290.

Johnson, H. (2009). Educating California choices for the future. San Francisco, CA:
Public Policy Institute of California.

Kalsner, L., & Pistole, M. C. (2003). College adjustment in a multiethnic sample:
Attachment, separation-individuation, and ethnic identity. Journal of College
Student Development, 44(1), 92-109.

123

Kelly, A. P., Schneider, M., & Carey, K. (2010). Rising to the challenge: Hispanic
college graduation rates as a national priority. American Enterprise Institute for
Public Policy Research. Retrieved from
http://search.proquest.com/docview/758117823?accountid=14749;
http://www.aei.org/docLib/Rising-to-the-Challenge.pdf

Kodama, C. M. (2002). Marginality of transfer commuter students. NASPA Journal,
39(3), 233-50.

Kozeracki, C. A. (2001). Studying transfer students: Designs and methodological
challenges. New Directions for Community Colleges, 114, 61-75.

Kuh, G. D. (2001). The national survey of student engagement: Conceptual framework
and overview of psychometric properties. Indiana Postsecondary Research and
Planning. Retreived from
http://nsse.iub.edu/pdf/psychometric_framework_2002.pdf

Kuh, G. D. (2009). What student affairs professionals need to know about student
engagement. Journal of College Student Development, 50(6), 683-706.

Laanan, F. S. (1998). Beyond transfer shock: A study of students’ college experiences
and adjustment processes at UCLA. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Graduate
School of Education and Information Studies, University of California, Los
Angeles.

Laanan, F. S. (2001). Transfer student adjustment. New Directions for Community
Colleges, 114, 5-13.

Laanan, F. S. (2004). Studying transfer students: Part I: Instrument design and
implications. Community College Journal of Research and Practice, 28, 31-351.

Milem, J., & Berger, J. (1997). A modified model of college student persistence:
Exploring the relationship between Astin’s theory of involvement and Tinto’s
theory of student departure. Journal of College Student Development, 38, 387-
400.

Mullin, C. M. (2011). A sound investment: The community college dividend (Policy
Brief 2011-01PBL). Washington, DC: American Association of Community
Colleges.

124

Ornelas, A., & Solorzano, D. G. (2004). Transfer conditions of Latina/o community
college students: A single institution case study. Community College Journal of
Research and Practice, 28, 233-248.

Ory, J. C., & Braskamp, L. A. (1988). Involvement and Growth of Students in Three
Academic Programs. Research in Higher Education, 28(2), 116-129

Pike, G. R. & Kuh, G. D. (2005). A typology of student engagement for American
colleges and universities. Research in Higher Education, 46(2), 185-209.

Napoli, A., & Wortman, P. (1998). Psychosocial factors related to retention and early
departure of two-year community college students. Research in Higher
Education, 39(4), 419-455.

NCES (2003). Status and trends in the education of Hispanics, NCES 2003-008.

Nora, A., & Rendón, L. I., (1996). Hispanic student retention in community colleges:
Reconciling access with outcomes. In C. Turner et al. (Eds.), Racial and ethnic
diversity in higher education. (pp. 269-280), ASHE-ERIC Reader Series.

Pallant, J. (2005). SPSS survival manual: A step by step guide to data analysis using
SPSS for Windows. Buckingham, PA: Open University Press.

Rendón, L. I., Jalomo, R.E., & Nora, A. (2000). Theoretical considerations in the study
of minority student retention. In Braxton, J. (Ed.), Rethinking the student
departure puzzle: New theory and research on college student retention.
Nashville, TN: Vanderbilt University Press.

Rendón, L. I., & Valadez, J. R. (1993). Qualitative indicators of Hispanic student
transfer. Community College Review, 20(4), 27-37.

Suarez, A. (2003). Forward transfer: Strengthening the educational pipeline for Latino
community college students. Community College Journal of Research and
Practice, 27(2), 95-118.

Swail, W. S., Redd, K. E., & Perna, L. W. (2003). Retaining minority students in higher
education: A framework for success. ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Report:
Volume 30, Number 2.

Terenzini, P. T., Rendón, L. I., Upcraft, M. L., Millar, S. B., Allison, K. W., Gregg, P. L.,
& Jalomo, R. (1994). The transition to college: Diverse students, diverse stories.
Research in Higher Education, 35(1), 57-73.
125

Tierney, W. G. (1999). Models of minority college-going and retention: Cultural integrity
versus cultural suicide. Journal of Negro Education, 68(1), 80-91.

Tinto, V. (1993). Leaving college: Rethinking the causes and cures of student attrition.
Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

U.S. Census Bureau. (2002). Census 2000 supplementary survey: Hispanic origin.
Retrieved from
http://www.census.gov/c2ss/www/Methodology/Definitions/Hispanic.htm

Wawrzynski, M. R., & Sedlacek, W. E. (2003). Race and gender differences in the
transfer student experience. Journal of College Student Development, 44(1), 489-
501.

126

APPENDIX A: SURVEY INSTRUMENT EMAIL AND CONSENT

University of Southern California
Rossier School of Education

Community College Transfer Student Adjustment Experiences at a Selective,
Private Four-Year University

Much of the research on student persistence and retention has focused on traditional
undergraduate college students. This study seeks to examine how community college
transfer students’ involvement in clubs, social activities, and interactions with
faculty influence students' social and academic adjustment at the four-year
university. The knowledge gained by this study will: 1) contribute to the literature on
student persistence and retention, 2) enable community colleges and universities to better
serve transfer students, and 3) help students prepare for their transition to the four-year
college. All community college transfer students are being asked to complete this survey
to help us better understand their experiences at USC.

You are being asked to take the next 15 minutes to complete the on-line survey below.
Your responses are extremely valuable and will be remain completely confidential. Data
will be analyzed at the group level only. No individual information will be
reported. Please complete the survey no later than Friday, May 21, 2010.

Once you complete the survey you will be given the opportunity to enter into a raffle
drawing to win one of the following gifts: 1) Nano iPod (valued at $125), 2) a $100 gift
certificate to the university bookstore, or 3) a $50 gift certificate to the university
bookstore. The researchers will randomly select three winners from respondents. Winners
will be notified within a week after the survey deadline.

There will be no identifiable information obtained in connection with this study. Your
name, address or other identifiable information will not be provided to the researchers.
Emails provided to enter the raffle will be collected by the Office of Research Student
Outcomes and kept confidential.

For more information about this study contact:

Carolina Castillo
(323) 365-9214
ccastill@usc.edu

127

For more information about the university's research process:

University Park IRB, Office of the Vice Provost for Research Advancement, Stonier
Hall, Room 224a, Los Angeles, CA 90089-1146, (213) 821-5272 or upirb@usc.edu

Did you transfer from a community college, two-year institution, or junior college to
USC?

Yes
No

128

APPENDIX B: SURVEY INSTRUMENT
USC Transfer Student Questionnaire

Background Information

1. Are you a community college transfer student (e.g. transferred to USC from a two-year college, junior
college, community college)? Yes No

2. Year/Semester you transferred to USC?
Spring 2007 Fall 2007
Spring 2008 Fall 2008
Spring 2009 Fall 2009

3. Age _________ (years)

4. What is your racial or ethnic identification?
African-American/Black
Mexican/Mexican-American/Chicano
Other Spanish-American/Latino (e.g. Cuban, Puerto Rican, Central American, South American)
American Indian/Alaska Native
Filipino/Filipino-American
Vietnamese/Vietnamese-American
Chinese/Chinese-American
East Indian/Pakistani
Japanese/Japanese-American
Korean/Korean-American
Pacific Islander
White/Caucasian
Other:_____________________

5. Gender
Male
Female

6. During the time at USC, about how many hours a week do (did) you usually spend working on a job for
pay?
None, I don’t have a job 16 - 20 hours
1 – 10 hours 21- 30 hours
11 – 15 hours more than 30 hours
Check Astin’s construct for involvement

7. Place of residence (during academic year)
residence hall or other university housing
fraternity or sorority house
private apartment or room within walking distance of the university
house, apartment, etc. away from the campus
with my parents or relatives

8. While you were growing up, mark the job that best describes your parent’s major occupation (Mark one in
each column)?
Mother
Father
Retired .................................................................................................................... .....................
Day laborer (cleaning, construction, farm, factory, etc.) .......................................... .....................
129

Worker or hourly employee (service, hotel, hospital,
agriculture, truck driver, clerical, retail sales and service,
laundry or maintenance, etc.) ............................................................................... .....................
Factory worker (manufacturing, warehousing, shipping,
Operations, telephone operator, etc.) ................................................................... .....................
Skilled tradesman (machinist, plumber, tile setter,
Electrician, auto mechanic, nurse, secretary, chef,
Technician) ........................................................................................................... .....................
Supervisor or manager (professional) ..................................................................... .....................
Small business owner (retail, construction, service, etc.) ........................................ .....................
Professional, white collar (sales, finance, teaching,
Consulting, engineer, accounting, doctor, lawyer, etc.)......................................... .....................
Housework (taking care of children or home) ......................................................... .....................
Unemployed or on welfare ...................................................................................... .....................
Do not know ............................................................................................................ .....................

9. Are you a first generation college student? Yes No

10. What is the highest academic degree that you plan to complete?
Bachelor’s MD, DDS, DO or DVM
Master’s LLB or JD (Law)
Ph.D. or Ed.D. Other

11. When do you intend to graduate from USC?

Spring 2009 Fall 2009
Spring 2010 Fall 2010
Spring 2011 Fall 2011
Spring 2012 Fall 2012

USC Experience

The purpose of this section is to obtain information about your current (or past) experiences at USC.

12. Which of the following comes closest to describing your major field of study?
Arts (art, music, theater, etc.)
Biological Sciences (biology, biochemistry, botany, zoology, etc.)
Computer Science
Engineering
Humanities (literature, history, philosophy, etc.)
Physical Sciences (physics, chemistry, mathematics, astronomy, earth science, etc.)
Foreign Language (French, Spanish, etc.)
Area Studies (Latin American Studies, Asian Studies, African Studies, Chicano Studies,etc.)
Interdepartmental majors (women’s studies, etc.)
Other, what?_________________________________________

13. What is the most important reason for attending THIS UNIVERSITY? (Mark ONLY ONE answer).
To obtain a bachelor’s degree
To gain skills necessary to enter a new job or occupation
To pursue graduate or professional school
To satisfy a personal interest (cultural, social)

130

14. What was your USC GPA for the following semesters?

Year: 2007 2008 2009
Semester: Spring Summer Fall Spring Summer Fall Spring Summer Fall
GPA:

15. Did you attend a USC Summer Transfer Orientation?

16. Did you attend a USC Transfer Information Session?

College Activities at USC

In your experience at USC, abut how often did you do each of the following? Indicate your response by filling
in ONE of the spaces to the left of each statement.

1 = Never
2 = Occasionally
3 = Often
4 = Very Often

17. Experiences with Faculty
1 2 3 4
Visited with faculty and sought their advice on class projects such as writing assignments and
research projects.
Felt comfortable approaching faculty outside of class.
Talked with faculty member
Asked my instructor for information related to a course I was taking (grades, make-up work,
assignments, etc.)
Visited informally and briefly with an instructor after class.
Made an appointment to meet with a faculty member in his/her office.
Discussed ideas for a term paper or other class project with a faculty member.
Discussed my career plans and ambitions with a faculty member.
Asked my instructor for comments and criticisms about my work.
Had coffee, cokes, or snacks with a faculty member.
Worked with a faculty member on a research project.
Discussed personal problems or concerns with a faculty member.
Attended academic workshops on campus.
Utilized services offered by the Placement and Career Planning Center.
Utilized tutorial services.
Purchased lecture notes to use as additional study guides for class.
Utilized services offered by Writing Center.
Participated in the Undergraduate Student Research Symposium.
Participated in a paid/non-paid internship.

18. Clubs and Organizations
1 2 3 4
Held an office in a club, organization, or student government.
Looked in the student newspaper for notices about campus events and student organizations.
Attended a program or event put on by a student group.
Read or asked about a club, organization, or student government activity.
Attended a meeting of a club, organization, or student government group.
Voted in a student election.
Discussed policies and issues related to campus activities and student government.
Worked in some student organization or special project (publications, student government,
social event, etc.)
131

Discussed reasons for the success or lack of success of student club meetings, activities, or
events.
Met with a faculty advisor or administrator to discuss the activities of a student organization.
Participated in an athletic event.
Participated in intramural sports.
Participated in recreation classes.
Utilized services offered by Campus Ombudsman.
Visited and obtained information from the Center for Women and Men.

The following are statements about your general perceptions, adjustment process, and opinions about your
overall satisfaction at USC. Please indicate the extent to which you agree or disagree. (Mark ONE for each
item).

1 = Disagree strongly
2 = Disagree somewhat
3 = Agree somewhat
4 = Agree strongly

19. General Perceptions of USC – Found in Laanan’s predictive model only

1 2 3 4 (Perceptions of Faculty)
Faculty are difficult to approach.
Faculty tend to be inaccessible to students.
Faculty tend to be more interested in their research than spending time with undergraduates.
Professors are strongly interested in the academic development of undergraduates.

(Stigma as a Transfer Student)
Because I was a “community college transfer,” most students tend to underestimate my
abilities.
Because I was a “community college transfer,” most faculty tend to underestimate my abilities.
There is a stigma at USC among student for having started at a community college.

(Competition and Survival Culture)
Generally, students are more concerned about “getting the grade” instead of learning the
material.
There is a competitive nature among students at USC.
Many students feel like they do not “fit in” on this campus.
Most students are treated like “numbers in a book.”

(Satisfaction about USC)

I feel the course I have taken have been interesting and worthwhile.
USC is an intellectually stimulating and often exciting place to be.
I would recommend to other transfer students to come to USC.
If I could start over again, I would to the same university I am now attending.

(Other)
I mostly go to the Teaching Assistant for help in a class versus faculty.
It was difficult learning the “red-tape” at USC when I started.
Student services are responsive t student needs.
If students expect to benefit from what USC has to offer, they have to take the initiative.

20. Adjustment Process

1 2 3 4 (Academic Adjustment)
Adjusting to the academic standards or expectations has been difficult.
132

I experience a dip/decrease in grades (GPA) during the first and second semester.
My level of stress increased when I started at USC.
There is a sense of competition between/among students at USC that is not found in
community colleges.

(Psychological Adjustment)
I often feel (felt) overwhelmed by the size of the student body.
The large classes intimidate me.
It is difficult to find my way around campus.
Upon transferring I felt alienated at USC.

(Social Adjustment)
Adjusting to the social environment at USC has been difficult.
I am meeting (I’ve met) as many people and making as many friends as I would like at USC.
I am (was) very involved with social activities at USC.
It was easy to make friends at USC.

(Other)
I feel (felt) most comfortable spending time with friends that I made at the 2-year college I
attended.
I feel (felt) most comfortable making friends with transfer students than non-transfer students.

Please rate your satisfaction on each of the aspects of campus life listed below.

1 = Dissatisfied
2 = Neutral
3 = Satisfied
4 = Very Satisfied

21. College Satisfaction – Could not found in Laanan’s variables

1 2 3 4
Sense of belonging at USC.
Decision to transfer to USC.
Overall quality of instruction.
Sense of community on campus.
Academic advising.
Career counseling and advising.
Student housing.
Courses in your major field.
Financial aid services.
Amount of contact with faculty.
Opportunities for community service.
Job placement services for students.
Campus health services.
Class size.
Interaction with other students.
Ethnic/racial diversity of the faculty.
Leadership opportunities
Recreational facilities.
Overall college experience.

Abstract (if available)

Abstract This dissertation tested the constructs of academic and social involvement and adjustment on grades as a pathway to explain community college transfer student experiences beyond the concept of transfer shock. The study contributes to the growing body of literature on Latina(o) community college transfer student experiences with the application of conventional theories of student involvement at a traditional, highly diverse institution. The presence of transfer shock was examined as well as the degree to which the community college transfer student involvement model helped to explain student persistence, as defined by GPA. It was hypothesized that Latina(o) student involvement in social and academic activities would positively contribute to persistence. Factorial analysis of variance was used to test the relationship between two key variables: social and academic involvement and four independent variables: race/ethnicity, age, major, and gender. The analyses focused on seven research questions that examined the relationship between these variables and were conducted with two groups: the total sample of 517 students and a sub-sample of 75 Latina(o) students. The results of the study confirmed that the community college transfer student involvement pathway worked for the large sample. However, the pathway was not a good fit for explaining Latina(o) student involvement experiences. The student engagement construct is reviewed as a better fit for studying underrepresented transfer students’ higher education experiences. Limitations of the study are discussed including implications for practice and recommendations for future research.

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

Community college transfer student involvement experiences at a selective, private four-year university

PDF

The academic integration and retention of Latino community college transfer students at a highly selective private four-year institution

PDF

Persistence among low income community college students

PDF

Three essays on the high school to community college STEM pathway

PDF

The relationship between academic capitalism and student culture at two four-year higher education institutions

PDF

Student engagement experiences of African American males at a California community college

PDF

How do non-tenure track faculty interact with Latino and Latina students in gatekeeper math courses at an urban community college?

PDF

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

PDF

Relationships between a community college student’s sense of belonging and student services engagement with completion of transfer gateway courses and persistence

PDF

Oppression of remedial reading community college students and their academic success rates: student perspectives of the unquantified challenges faced

PDF

Supporting the transition and academic success of transfer students at a large research university

PDF

Exploring the undergraduate Latina/o experience: a case study of academically successful students at a research institution

PDF

African American engineering students at River City Community College: Factors that improve transfer to four-year engineering degree programs

PDF

Factors affecting the success of older community college students

PDF

Correlations among selected demographic variables, counseling utilization, and intent to transfer

PDF

Latino male community college students' persistence to transfer

PDF

The barriers and facilitators of academic success for Black male students at a community college: a gap analysis

PDF

Community college education for the incarcerated: the provision of access, persistence and social capital

PDF

Evaluating the effects of diversity courses and student diversity experiences on undergraduate students' democratic values at a private urban research institution

PDF

Concept mapping of the sources of perceived impact on community college students' identity development: a students' perspective

Asset Metadata

Creator Castillo, Carolina (author)

Core Title Community college transfer student involvement experiences at a selective, private four-year university

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Education (Leadership)

Publication Date 11/22/2011

Defense Date 11/01/2011

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

Tag community college transfer,Higher education,latino community college student,OAI-PMH Harvest

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Sundt, Melora A. (committee chair), Kezar, Adrianna J. (committee member), Melguizo, Tatiana (committee member)

Creator Email ccastill@usc.edu,xkna@hotmail.com

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c3-211253

Unique identifier UC11291396

Identifier usctheses-c3-211253 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier etd-CastilloCa-430-1.pdf

Dmrecord 211253

Document Type Dissertation

Rights Castillo, Carolina

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