Close
About
FAQ
Home
Collections
Login
USC Login
Register
0
Selected
Invert selection
Deselect all
Deselect all
Click here to refresh results
Click here to refresh results
USC
/
Digital Library
/
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
/
What motivational factors influence community college students' tendency to seek help from the writing center?
(USC Thesis Other)
What motivational factors influence community college students' tendency to seek help from the writing center?
PDF
Download
Share
Open document
Flip pages
Contact Us
Contact Us
Copy asset link
Request this asset
Transcript (if available)
Content
WHAT MOTIVATIONAL FACTORS
INFLUENCE COMMUNITY COLLEGE STUDENTS’ TENDENCY TO
SEEK HELP FROM THE WRITING CENTER?
by
Leonor Vazquez
________________________________________________________
A Dissertation Presented to the
FACULTY OF THE ROSSIER SCHOOL OF EDUCATION
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
In Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree of
DOCTOR OF EDUCATION
August 2008
Copyright 2008 Leonor Vazquez
ii
DEDICATION
For my sons Matthew Alexander and Michael Anthony,
who inspired me to take on this challenge
and who were my source of motivation everyday.
You teach me what life is all about and make me stronger.
I love you.
iii
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
I want to thank Dr. Myron Dembo, my chairperson, for his guidance and patience;
my dissertation committee Dr. Deborah diCesare and Dr. Ginger Clark; and Scott
Weigand at The Writing Center.
I would like to extend my deepest gratitude to my parents Raul and Leonor Vazquez,
my brothers and sister and Anthony Caceres, for all their time, support and
understanding.
iv
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Dedication ii
Acknowledgements iii
List of Tables vi
Abstract vii
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION 1
Purpose of the Study 9
Importance of the Study 10
Primary Research Questions 12
Secondary Research Questions 12
Definition of Terms 13
Organization of the Study 14
CHAPTER 2: REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE 16
Academic Support Systems 16
Help Seeking Attitudes 21
Motivational Factors Attributed to Help Seeking Behaviors 26
Self-Efficacy 27
Self-Efficacy in Academic Settings 28
Self-Efficacy and Help Seeking 29
Self-Efficacy and Writing 30
Summary 32
Task Values (Expectancy) 32
Task Value and Help Seeking 33
Task Values in Academic Settings 34
Task Values and Writing 35
Summary 36
Goal Orientation 37
Goal Orientation and Writing 39
Goal Orientation and Help Seeking 40
Perceived Classroom Goal Structure 42
Summary 43
General Conclusion 43
v
CHAPTER 3: METHODS 45
Participants 46
Setting 47
Instruments 48
Procedure 53
Data Analysis 55
CHAPTER 4: RESULTS 57
Quantitative Findings 59
Intercorrelations 55
Primary Research Question 1 65
Primary Research Question 2 67
Qualitative Findings 68
Secondary Research Question 1 68
Secondary Research Question 2 70
Secondary Research Question 3 71
Interviews 72
Summary 73
CHAPTER 5: DISCUSSISON 75
Relationship between Help Seeking and Motivational Variables 75
Relationship between Help Seeking and Achievement 78
Student Perceptions of Writing Center Tutoring Services 79
Student Expectations of Writing Center Tutoring Services 80
Barriers Related to Help-Seeking 81
Limitations 83
Recommendations 84
REFERENCES 90
APPENDICES
A. Recruitment Speech 98
B. Informed Consent 99
C. Survey Instrument 104
D. Recruitment Speech for Writing Center 111
E. Informed Consent for Writing Center 112
F. Writing Center Interview Questions 117
vi
LIST OF TABLES
1. Descriptive Statistics and Estimates of Internal-Consistency
Reliability 58
2. Means, Standard Deviations, and Pearson Product
Correlations for Measured Variables 61
3. Regression Analysis Predicting Help-Seeking Behaviors
from Cumulative GPA, Task Value: Interest, and
Writing Self-Efficacy 64
i vi
ABSTRACT
The purpose of this research study was to understand help-seeking tendencies
in community college students by investigating motivational factors that are likely to
influence help-seeking from academic support services. Specifically, this study
examined the relationship between students’ perceptions of academic support
services, their academic achievement, and their resulting help-seeking behaviors. A
sample of 238 community college students completed a 53-item survey assessing
their perceptions of their classroom’s goal structure; their task value; their writing
self-efficacy; and their help-seeking tendencies. Specifically, this study looked at the
writing center which is an academic support service provided at their community
college. Furthermore, the survey included four open-ended items to assess students’
experiences with this support service. In addition to survey responses, qualitative
data was gathered from students who volunteered to participate in focus groups.
Results of this study showed that there was no linear relationship between the hours
that students spent in the writing center and their grade point average. The reason
there was no relationship between grade point average and help seeking has to do
with the fact that so many students did not seek help via the writing center.
Contrary to expectations, quantitative analysis indicated that the only motivational
variables which significantly predicted help seeking tendencies were classroom
performance-avoidance goal structure and task value: interest. Specifically results
demonstrate positive correlations between task value: interest and help seeking.
Results also revealed a negative correlation between writing self-efficacy and help
seeking.
1
CHAPTER 1
Introduction
The competency of a community college is partly determined by the equity of
its students' educational achievements (LAVC Scorecard Project, 2002). California
community colleges, however, are experiencing a surge of under prepared students
enrolling into their institutions. Despite the fact that a majority of students are
unprepared in many fundamental skills including English, many go on to graduate
high school and attend college. Community colleges are known for enrolling
students who are much less academically prepared than those of other postsecondary
institutions (Lee & Frank, 1990). Thus, college enrollment has increased by 38%
from the 1990s to 2003 and that number continues to rise (NCES, 2005). As
postsecondary enrollments increase, the number of under-prepared students grows
proportionately. This is creating an achievement gap and therefore a need for
institutions to develop academic support centers to assist these students (Patthey-
Chavez, Thomas- Spiegel & Dillon, 1998; Xu, Hartman, Uribe & Mencke, 2001;
Perin & Charron, 2003; Hawley & Harris, 2005; CCSSE, 2006). A 2002 community
college Diversity Scorecard Project, which collected success rate data of different
groups of students, found incongruities among success rates in English.
The Scorecard report implies that English is a course subject that poses an
obstacle for some students. More specifically, the 2002 scorecard report provides
information which demonstrates that there is a gap in English achievement among
community college students. To assist in closing these gaps, the community college
2
system provides various sources of academic support to students who are willing to
seek the help.
Students who need assistance with college-level courses can be identified
before they start school. Most students take an initial assessment before entering
community college. This assessment, which looks at a student' s readiness for
college-level work, focuses on math and English language skills in reading and
writing. Scores on this initial assessment usually determine whether students should
enroll in college-level courses or in developmental education (remedial coursework).
There has been extensive research on how initial assessment scores determine
academic placement and if low-scoring students actually attend developmental
education classes (Perin, 2002, 2004; Perin & Charron, 2003). Perin (2002) for
example, looked at literacy education after high school and community college
remedial programs and found that between 30 and 90% of incoming freshmen
require remedial reading or writing courses but only about 41% of these students
actually register for developmental education
Although most community colleges assess the basic skills of all incoming
students (U.S. Department of Education, 2003), most of these institutions do not
necessarily practice mandatory placement in remedial classes for their low-scoring
students (McCabe, 2000; Perin, 2005). According to a study by Perin and Charron
(2003), which looked at trends in community college assessment and at placement
3
approaches; many two-year institutions exempt their students from developmental
education even if the student tested low in reading and writing. Another college was
found to allow low-scoring students to register for college credit classes as the
institution did not have the necessary developmental sections. Thus, students who
are testing at a remediation level are enrolling in college-level classes without the
basic skills they need to complete these classes successfully. These actions
demonstrate how an achievement gap can exist as developmental education
placement is not mandated in community colleges.
Los Angeles Valley College, however, is one community college that does
provide remedial courses for those students who have tested low in English. Still,
according to their scorecard report (2002), there is an achievement gap that exists.
To assist in closing this achievement gap in English, the community college system
provides academic support via writing labs on various college campuses. Extensive
research has looked into the contribution of tutoring to the development of writing
skills in post secondary institutions (Patthey-Chavez, Thomas- Spiegel & Dillon,
1998; Perrin & Charron, 2003; Perin, 2004).
Findings reveal that most academic support services do indeed assist students
in obtaining the basic skills needed to meet the demands of college-level work, as
long as the student is willing to seek the help (Powell, 1997; Gribbons & Dixon,
2001; Hendricksen, Yang, Love & Hall, 2005). In fact one study, which looked at the
impact of tutoring on student success, found that 70 to 77% of community college
students who received academic support were more successful when compared to
4
61% of students who did not receive any tutoring (Gribbons & Dixon, 2001). These
results are important as they support the notion that tutoring services improve
academic success. At this point it would probably be safe to hypothesize that the
causal effect of low-scoring students seeking help, in order to improve their
academic life, would be a decrease in the achievement gap. Yet, research still shows
that not all students who need academic assistance seek the necessary help
(Karabenick & Knapp, 1991; Treisman, 1992; Alexitch, 2002; Noel-Levitz, 2006;
Finkelstein, 2006). So then we must ask, who are the students that do seek help and
why?
Before attempting to answer the above question, it is imperative to
understand the complex process of help seeking. In many ways, help seeking is
comparable to a learning strategy in that it can assist with skill acquisition. First,
students must become aware of their need for assistance. Perin and Charron (2003)
who interviewed developmental education instructors, found that some students
truly are not aware that they lack the necessary skills for college-level course work.
Thus, this realization is difficult as sometimes it means admitting inadequacy which
may threaten a student’s self-worth. Secondly, students must be able to figure out
what kind of help to seek (Kempler & Linnenbrink, 2006). According to Kempler
and Linnenbrink, (2006), self-regulated learners, those who use various learning
techniques, tend to seek autonomous help which assists them in understanding the
material. On the other hand, performance-oriented learners, those who are more
concerned about social comparisons, will engage in completion of their work just so
5
they will not appear incapable to their classmates (Butler, 2006). Seeking the
necessary help is the final step in the process (Karabenick & Newman, 2006).
According to the literature, it appears that individual student characteristics impact
this process to seeking help (Karabenick, 2001; Kempler & Linnenbrink, 2006) .
Motivation is viewed as a characteristic that reflects an individual' s values
regarding his/her goals (Ryan & Pintrich, 1997; Gribbons & Dixon, 2001;
Bembenutty, 2002; Karabenick & Newman, 2006). Some students view help
seeking as a method to gaining a better understanding of the subject matter.
Typically these students also see help as a learning resource (Karabenick, 2001,
2003; Ryan & Pintrich, 1997). Other students may seek help in order to avoid
working things out on their own (Kempler & Linnenbrink, 2006). In addition,
studies indicate that students who seek help are driven by motivational factors
(Newman, 1998; Gribbons & Dixon, 2001; Bembenutty, 2002; Karabenick &
Newman, 2006).
Three major motivational factors that influence help seeking behaviors are
goal orientation, expectancy-values and self-efficacy beliefs (Karabenick, 2001,
2002; Karabenick & Newman, 2006; Printrich & Schunk, 2002). According to
Wigfield and Eccles (2000), one perspective on motivation is expectancy value,
which they posit can be explained by the beliefs that an individual has about how
well they will perform. In other words, expectancies are assumed to directly
6
influence one’s effort and achievement choices. Furthermore, expectancies are
assumed to be influenced by an individual’s goals and the perceived difficulty of the
assigned activities. Therefore, a student’s active choice to seek help depends on how
difficult they perceive the assigned task to be. Research on motivation postulates
that the relationship between motivation and learning is reciprocal (Pintrich &
Schunk, 2002). In other words, motivation influences learning and learning
influences one’s level of motivation. The above motivational constructs will be
examined in relation to community college students and their help seeking behaviors.
In order to examine the motivational constructs that have been identified as
possibly influencing help seeking, this next section will be divided into three
subsections. The first section will look at the construct of goal orientation and its
contribution to achievement. The second section will look at the concept of
expectancy value as it applies to academic support; specifically tutoring. The third
section will address self-efficacy and its relationship to help seeking behaviors.
Goal Orientation
There is an agreement in the field of educational psychology of a strong link
between academic achievement and motivation. Many students may be motivated to
achieve but for different reasons. Additionally, students can have different goal
orientations; mastery goal orientation or performance goal orientation. Mastery goal
orientation is more related to academic success and thus the one that this paper will
focus on. Performance goal orientation is wanting to do better than others.
7
According to social cognitive theory, motivation for academic achievement is a goal
directed behavior which is instigated by a student' s aspiration to gain a desired result.
(Pintrich & Schunk, 2002). In other words, motivation is viewed as a concept that is
learned and guided by the outcome expectancies.
(Expectancy) Task Value
Expectancy values are strong predictors of active choice and thus of
academic performance (Wigfield & Eccles, 2000; Pintrich & Schunk, 2002).
Additionally, there are different constructs to help us understand the way in which
motivation can influence one' s choice (Wigfield & Eccles, 2000). Research shows
that expectancy components are highly correlated with task value as students have
been found to value tasks at which they expect to succeed (Eccles & Wigfield,
1995). Pintrich and Schunk (2002), also ascertain that students’ expectancies
determine their achievement once they have made an active choice. Active choice is
making a decision to perform a task in the face of alternatives. According to social
cognitive theory, students that are involved in their academic development are
capable of forming successful situations depending on their actions (Bandura, 1977).
In other words, if students make the active choice to seek help, then it could be
expected that they will be somewhat more successful than those who do not.
Additionally, social cognitive theorists maintain that a student' s self-beliefs are what
guide his/her actions. Thus making the active choice to get help may many times
depend on a student’s self-efficacy beliefs.
8
Self-Efficacy Beliefs
Self-Efficacy beliefs, which are how a student judges his or her academic
capabilities, are also found to be related to that individual’s goal directed behaviors
(Wigfield & Eccles, 2000; Pintrich and Schunk, 2002). These beliefs provide
students with the premise for human motivation as their actions have been found to
be related to their beliefs (Pajares, Usher, & Johnson, in review 2007). Additionally,
Pajares (2003) maintains that an individual' s self-efficacy beliefs do predict his/her
academic performance. In other words, students may be more motivated to take
action and seek help if they believe that this will actually lead to their expected
outcomes. Thus one' s self-efficacy beliefs affect their choice of activities. Students
with high self-efficacy tend to choose difficult tasks, utilize more learning strategies
and exert more effort (Pintrich & Schunk, 2002). In other words, students with high
self-efficacy beliefs are more likely to seek help than less self-efficacious students.
In sum, there have been a number of studies that have found that a person' s
values and beliefs are related to his/her choice in activities and, more importantly, to
their individual academic performance (Wigfield & Eccles, 2000). The above section
has described the major motivational factors that have been identified as related to
why some students seek help. One important factor that contributes to success in
community college coursework is the ability to seek assistance when it is indicated.
So then we must ask, why are students who need help not seeking guidance?
9
Purpose
The purposes of this study are to understand why certain students, who need
help, do not seek it and to examine whether help seeking leads to academic
achievement. According to a National Research study (Noel-Levitz, 2006), which
looked at receptivity to assistance, only 38.9% of beginning college students
responded that they agreed they would like to receive tutoring in one or more of
their courses. Furthermore, 43.2% of students at two-year institutions agreed that
they would like to receive some individual help in improving their writing skills.
Moreover, this study yielded results which demonstrate that there are large numbers
of academically under prepared students enrolling in colleges.
More specifically, the participants in the proposed study will be students who
attend a writing lab for tutoring services at a community college in southern
California. The tutoring services provided on this campus are all free of charge to
both part-time and full-time students. More and more, the diversity of the
community college population is changing and these institutions have had to find
ways to respond to these changes with what is allocated to them (Xu, Hartman, Uribe
& Mencke, 2001). According to the current literature, as more and more under
prepared students enroll, colleges must create developmental education programs to
assist and support these students (Perin, 2005; Xu, et.al., 2001).
10
Importance of the Study
This study will provide an understanding of the factors that contribute to help
seeking behaviors in a large, urban, community college campus. As we know,
success in English and math is considerably important for transferring from a two-
year institution to a four-year institution. Students who want to transfer must pass
certain required courses; English being one of them.
More specifically, English achievement is important to consider because
research has demonstrated that success in English classes is a strong predictor of a
college student' s ability to complete their studies (Dillon, Patthey-Chavez, Thomas-
Speigel, 2000). According to a report entitled From Remediation to Acceleration,
Raising the Bar in Developmental Education (National Center for Education
Statistics,1995), almost all community colleges offer remedial courses, more
specifically; 78% of post secondary institutions offer remedial courses in writing.
This is when tutoring programs become an option for improving achievement. In
fact research demonstrates that students who engage in tutoring outperform students
who do not (Hendriksen et. al, 2005; Gribbons & Dixon, 2001). Hendriksen et al. for
example, found that 75% of tutored students passed their courses as compared to
71% of non-tutored students. Additionally, this same study found that tutored
students had a grade point average score of 2.78 as compared to 2.64 for non-tutored
students. These findings suggest the tutoring does indeed help to improve academic
achievement.
11
In addition to improving academic achievement, studies show that students,
who seek help via tutoring, demonstrate increased retention rates and better attitudes
toward schoolwork (Gribbons & Dixon, 2001; Robinson, Schofield, & Steers-
Wentzell, 2005). Tutoring becomes important to look at as the need for
developmental education rises and tutorial programs become an essential part of a
community college campus. As alluded to in the literature, without programs that
provide academic skills and instructions to support students, post secondary access
would weaken (Perin, 2005).
It seems logical to conclude that when individuals seek help via a tutoring
lab, they are attempting to regulate their behavior in order to meet their learning
goals. Self-regulation, according to the social cognitive view, stresses the importance
of goal setting and self-efficacy beliefs when accomplishing an activity (Eccles &
Wigfield, 2002). According to Eccles and Wigfield (2002), once students begin an
activity, they should be responsive to their behavior and its outcomes so that they
may monitor what they do. In other words, if students monitor their academic
behavior, they are more likely to perform better.
The goal of this study will be two-fold. First, it is important that community
college educators understand the motivational factors that influence help seeking
behaviors in students. Secondly, these results will offer guidance that community
college academic support programs can utilize in order to enhance educational
outcomes for their students.
12
There are many studies that have investigated the help seeking process in
academic environments, yet; the majority of these studies have focused on
elementary school aged learners. Very few investigations have assessed help
seeking behaviors in community college students who utilize tutoring as their choice
of academic support. More specifically, the primary questions for this study are:
Primary Research Questions
1. Are self-efficacy beliefs, task values, and students’ perceptions of their
classroom goal structure factors that influence help seeking behaviors in
community college students?
2. Does help seeking lead to higher academic achievement?
Secondary Research Questions
The questions that will guide this study are as follows:
1. What do students, who seek assistance with writing, expect from the
tutoring services provided?
2. What are students’ perceptions of the tutoring services provided and how
do these perceptions influence their behavior?
3. What are the barriers related to these students seeking help?
All of these research questions are worth attention, as the answers to these could
impact several aspects of community college academic support programs. The use
of academic support could assist community college students to be successful in their
college-level courses and thus, begin to close the achievement gap.
13
Definitions
Help Seeking-- a strategy utilized by individuals who want to solve a problem in
order to reach a desired goal.
Tutoring-- Academic support via instruction or guidance; assistance with course
work to help students gain proficiency as appropriate. Tutoring may be conducted in
small groups or one-on-one and may include peer-assisted learning or assistance
from non-professionals or older college students. In this proposed study, all tutoring
that will be referred to is free of charge and voluntary.
Developmental Education-- Developmental education consists of remedial
coursework that reflects drill-and-practice methods. Programs may include,
supplemental instruction,. In addition there is much evidence that these content
based courses enhance student performance in their linked course (NCES, 1995).
Goal Orientation--Goal orientation is a learner’s beliefs about their own
performance which leads to that individual’s manner of engaging in achievement
tasks. One’s goal orientation is important as it influences that individual’s
motivational outcomes. The proposed study will focus on two types of goal
orientation; mastery-goal orientation and performance goal-orientation. Mastery-goal
14
orientation is described as wanting to master tasks or to learn new skills for self-
improvement. Performance- goal is described as a goal in order to appear smart to
others and have them believe that one is competent. It is learning the material just to
complete the task.
Task Value-- In expectancy value theory, task values are the subjective beliefs about
reasons why an individual engages in a specific task (Pintrich & Schunk, 2002).
The previous section defined the motivational factors that will be examined
in the literature review. Studies that looked at these factors will be discussed and
related to help seeking behaviors in community college students.
Organization of the Study
This paper is divided into five chapters. Chapter 1 provides a general outlook
of the issues related to help seeking, tutoring, and developmental education. The
purpose of this study was articulated, and the importance was specified. Research
questions were listed in relevance of motivational constructs initially examined and
particular definitions related to the study were identified.
Chapter 2 is a literature review that will focus on help seeking in the
community college environment; specifically how academic support systems impact
help seeking behavior. It will address what we know about tutoring and help
seeking. This literature review will also discuss goal orientation, expectancy value
and self-efficacy and how these constructs are related to help seeking. Relevant
studies will be examined in order to assist in the connection of these motivational
factors to help seeking behaviors.
15
Chapter 3 will describe the methodology. It will include the procedures
utilized in this study and the data analysis. It will also include a description of the
participants and the setting. Additionally, there will be a description of the
instruments utilized to collect the data necessary to examine the variables.
Chapter 4 will discuss the results yielded by this study. Chapter 5 will
present conclusions of the proposed study. It will also include implications and
recommendations for future research.
16
CHAPTER 2
Literature Review
This literature review will begin with an analysis of academic support
systems and how they relate to help seeking behaviors for community college
students. Secondly, the literature reviewed will focus on self-efficacy and task value.
Finally, perceived goal orientation and academic achievement will be reviewed.
This literature review will then conclude with an exploration of how these
motivational constructs relate to help seeking behaviors.
Articles used in the composition of this literature review were gathered by a
resource search of online databases from Eric, ProQuest and PsychINFO. Secondary
sources that were cited in this review were obtained by search of the following
keywords: community college, help seeking, English tutoring, higher education, and
achievement gap and goal orientation.
Academic Support Systems
A significant body of literature on tutoring in community colleges was
reviewed in order to examine academic support systems. California community
colleges have implemented academic support programs in order to help students
develop the necessary skills for their academic success. One example of this type of
intervention program is a learning center. There are many studies that have
examined the different types of learning assistance centers, including the services
17
they provide and their influence on help seeking behaviors (Kennedy, Sheckley,
Barry, Kehrhahn & Marijka, 2000; Finkelstein, 2002; Perin, 2004; Hendriksen,
Yang, Love & Hall, 2005 Griswold, 2006).
Perin (2004), for example, conducted a qualitative case study of 15 academic
support centers in community colleges across the country. She found that these
specialized skill labs are significant to learning. In other words, tutoring centers do
impact learning in a positive manner. The reason for this is that these learning
assistance centers determine the degree of support or instruction that students receive
and thus increase a student’s preparedness for college-level course work. According
to the literature, most of the assistance provided by these academic support centers
was found to be in the form of tutoring (Kennedy, Sheckley, Barry, Kehrhahn &
Marijka, 2000; Finkelstein, 2002; Perin, 2004; Hendriksen, et. al, 2005 Griswold,
2006). Tutoring was defined in these studies as support to students to assist them in
obtaining basic skills proficiency.
Although tutoring normally involves assistance with homework and
teaching study skills (Powell, 1997), some centers were found to provide extra
services such as workshops and remedial courses. Despite the types and levels of
service, there continues to be speculation about the effectiveness of many
community college academic support programs and how they attract students who
are seeking help. Finkelstein (2002), who developed interventions for at-risk students
in a New York City community college, looked at academic support programs and
their success. This study found that there are seven components that must be taken
18
into consideration when designing an effective academic support program to
attract students who are seeking help. They are as follows:
1. Listen to students.
2. Be proactive in program design.
3. Recruit effective faculty.
4. Help students feel they are recognized.
5. Provide opportunities for students to help each other.
6. Evaluate the program' s impact.
7. Be creative about implementing new services.
According to Finkelstein (2002), these components are essential to the design of an
effective academic support program Still, as the literature demonstrates, although
there may be community colleges that offer well-designed support services, students
do not take advantage of them (Finkelstein, 2002; Perin, 2004). According to
Finkelstein (2002), if all of the seven components above are in place, students will
feel more comfortable with utilizing these support centers when seeking help.
Furthermore, there is research that leads us to believe that students who are
most in need of assistance are not necessarily the ones asking for help or are not
seeking assistance when they need it (Ryan, Gheen & Midgley, 1998, Finkelstein,
2002). Because of this, Finkelstein (2002) mentions the importance for community
college tutoring centers to get to know which students seek help and why they are
seeking it. He also believes that it is important for support centers to find out how
students perceive the assistance that they are providing them with.
19
Like Finkelstein (2002), Hendriksen, et al. (2005), found that it is important
that academic learning centers continuously evaluate their program' s impact and ask
themselves how help seeking students perceive their services. Evaluation of an
academic support program becomes essential to knowing what works and in order to
improve that program' s services.
According to Hendriksen, et al (2005), the success of an academic support
system is measured by how well their staff assists students to reach their academic
goals; not necessarily on what the students will be capable of doing after having
attended their center. Hendriksen, et al. (2005), who looked at the effects of a
tutoring academic support program in a community college, confirmed that the
center was indeed meeting its objectives. These researchers conducted a quasi-
experimental study to find out if their students were truly learning. They found that
80% of the students that sought help through their center finished their courses
compared to 86% of those that were not tutored through their learning center. In
other words, students who seek assistance with their schoolwork appear to be more
likely to remain in the class and finish their course of study as opposed to
withdrawing from a class because they do not understand the material being covered.
In addition, these researchers utilized self-reports to assess progress of students' self-
awareness and self-confidence levels and found that 80% of the students reported
that they felt that tutoring had helped them increase their scores.
Weissman, Bulakowski, and Jumisko (1997), who also evaluated developmental
education programs in community colleges and whose program evaluation measures
20
were borrowed by Hendriksen et al. (2005), found that a program' s effectiveness is
evident in the following four outcomes.
1. The students’ successful completion of remedial courses.
2. A student’s progression from remedial coursework to college-level course
work.
3. A student' s successful completion of regular college courses.
4. A student' s persistence in finishing their education.
They conducted interviews of learning center staff and found that tutors believe that
student motivation increases when the students receiving tutoring succeed in their
remedial course-work. These researchers’ conclusions are in agreement with
Finkelstein’s (2002) belief that academic support programs should be designed to
assist students in achieving their academic goals and that learning assistance centers
must continuously monitor and assess their programs as this is critical to the delivery
of their services. The results of this research indicated that there should be a
requirement for students, who are under prepared in writing and reading, to enroll in
developmental education courses.
College of the Canyons, a community college in the Santa Clarita
Community College District, also assessed the impact of tutoring services on student
success. This study found that math and English courses were the subjects with
which students most often seek help. This same study by Gribbons and Dixon
(2001), also analyzed data from the California Community College Chancellor' s
Office which focused on tutoring services. Results of this study showed that students
21
who were tutored outperformed their counterparts who were not. This was without
regard to how much tutoring these students received. This research also found that
there was a connection between student’s motivation level and academic
achievement. These results imply that students who receive tutoring are more likely
to succeed; yet, what was not clear was if students who attended tutoring were
voluntarily seeking help or if their instructors had required that they attend the
tutoring lab. Because this study concludes that the differences in student success
could be attributed to motivational factors, then we can safely assume this suggests
that students were voluntarily seeking assistance. It is, however, important to
consider whether tutoring was required or voluntary as this would make a difference.
The above section summarized the literature reviewed on academic support
systems in community colleges and how these centers can impact help seeking
behaviors. Although all of these investigations agreed about the necessary qualities
of a successful academic support program, many of these studies mainly looked at
perceptions of the staff at these support programs and a few perceptions of some
students who seek their services. They have failed to mention student achievement
gains. The next section will discuss help seeking attitudes in community college
students and how these can contribute to educational gains.
Help Seeking Attitudes
Research demonstrates that although help seeking is considered an
instrumental learning strategy (Nelson-Le Gall & Jones, 1990) seeking help is one of
22
the last resorts utilized by students in order to reach their desired goal (Karabenick &
Knapp, 1988; Sheu & Sedlacek, 2002). For example, Alexitch (2002) found that
some students wait until their professor approaches him/her regarding academic
concerns before he/she seeks help. In other words, it appears that there are students
who may struggle with a course’s content for a long time before they decide to seek
help. The other option is that sometimes a student may just lower his/her aspirations
(Alexitch, 2002) An example of this would be a student who decides to drop a course
that he/she is having trouble with instead of seeking assistance. From the literature
reviewed, it appears that seeking help is guided by a student’s attitude toward the
whole help seeking process (Treisman, 1992; Sheu & Sedlacek, 2002; Alexitch,
2002).
Alexitch (2002) conducted a study which looked at help seeking attitudes in
conjunction with educational orientation, academic performance and gender. This
study attempted to find out whether these factors predicted a preference for advice
sought from a professor. This is important as professors are usually seen as the first
source of help for students (Knapp & Karabenick, 1988). There were 361 first-year
college students who were asked to complete three different scales. Help seeking
behaviors were measured by a 19-item scale. Correlations of the variables yielded
results that were in agreement with the hypothesis; a student’s learning orientation,
academic performance and gender are all closely related to that student’s help
seeking attitude and thus their help seeking behaviors. In other words, this study
demonstrates that help seeking attitudes are indeed connected to academic
23
performance and that students’ self-efficacy beliefs affect their help seeking
tendencies. Additionally, students who reported that they would be less likely to seek
help, were all the low academic performing students.
These results are consistent with other similar research (Karabenick &
Knapp, 1991; Treisman, 1992; Noel-Levitz, 2006; Finkelstein, 2006) which has
found that academically competent students are more likely to seek help. In terms of
the gender factor, this study also found that females were more likely to seek help
than their male counterparts. These findings are also consistent with Wright (2003)
who found that male students are less likely to fall into the category of help seekers
due to cultural expectations.
Sheu and Sedlacek (2002), who studied 2,661 college students, found
that various racial groups differ in their attitudes toward help seeking and in their
coping strategies. These researchers surveyed White, African-American and Asian
American students online during a summer orientation at an Eastern university. This
multicultural study found that African-American students were more likely to have a
positive attitude regarding seeking help, than other racial groups. These researchers
further broke down help seeking into areas such as professional help, study skills
training and counseling. Still African American students surpassed their White and
Asian-American peers in terms of their positive attitudes for seeking out help
resources.
24
Likewise, Treisman (1992) looked at minority students in college, but used a
different methodology for his study. First, he had teacher assistants interview
successful and unsuccessful students in their sections. Then they interviewed the
families of these students. He also spent many hours videotaping these students on
exactly what they did when faced with a problem. He wanted to try to understand
the process these students used to solve their problems when they needed help.
These interviews were unsuccessful as reportedly, after four months, this
researcher still did not have a good understanding of the help seeking process of
these minority students. He did find that there were racial differences in attitudes
on help seeking. Contrary to Sheu and Sedlacek’s (2002) study, Treisman’s (1992)
investigation discovered that Asian, specifically Chinese, students sought help
from one another as opposed to African American students who usually worked
alone on their assignments. This inquiry also found that minority students did not
utilize the support services that were put in place to assist them as they associated
"help" only with students who were in remedial programs.
The literature suggests that students who do not seek help believe they are
well prepared and therefore, do not relate to academic support. It is apparent that not
only were the methodologies for these studies very different, but the outcomes in
attitude differences were also contradictory. These inconsistent findings can be
attributed to the different assumptions by the investigators.
25
Treisman (1992) started his investigations with a few widely-held beliefs
about different groups of students. For one, he was under the impression that some
minority students are not as motivated as other groups of minority students,
specifically, that Latino or African-American students are not as motivated as Asian
students. Treisman (1992) thought that students who were receiving the higher
scores were the increasingly motivated learners. Secondly, this study started out with
the notion that minority students were coming into college without being adequately
prepared and thus the reason for the gap. The third assumption that guided this
research was that minority students came from families that did not understand
higher education, therefore they lacked support.
Sheu and Sedlacek’s (2002) findings were inconsistent from the other studies
for two reasons. First, the participants were students who attended a summer
orientation program. These participants may not necessarily be the best nor most
accurate sample of a college’s population as the sample size was not random nor
perhaps large enough. The reliability of the study was further complicated by the
methodology which consisted of an on-line surveying of students. This method has
natural limitations as investigating across cultures includes issues of race differences
(Wright, 2003).
Not until recently, has help seeking been acknowledged as an integral part of
learning. The above section has reviewed important attitudes and aspects regarding
help seeking in learning environments. The next section will examine three
26
motivational factors attributed to help seeking and discuss their relationship to this
learning strategy.
Motivational factors attributed to help seeking behaviors
There is considerable research on the help seeking behaviors of elementary
and secondary students. Although the vast majority of the research in the area of help
seeking is based on K-12 students (Ryan & Printrich, 2005; Karabenick & Newman,
2006), there are a few studies that have targeted students in higher education. There
is even less research on the role of help seeking behaviors among community college
student. These studies will be reviewed in terms of their relation to motivation as
motivation has been positively linked to the process of seeking help and to the
choices students make in order to achieve their goals (Clark, 2000; Pintrich &
Schunk, 2002). Still, even though the studies reviewed have looked at help seeking
behaviors in college students, they have not really focused on motivational factors
specifically in the academic sector of English tutoring.
Researchers have found that motivation has a powerful influence on success
(Gardner, 2001).The three motivational factors to influence help seeking behaviors
that will be discussed are self-efficacy, expectancy values, and students’ perceptions
of their classroom goal structures. Among these three motivational factors there
exists a strong link. As very recent research demonstrates, a student’s self-efficacy
beliefs determine that student’s motivation for how to write or even if to write
(Pajares, 2006). Additionally, researchers believe that students’ self-efficacy beliefs
27
determine how successful those students will be in their writing skills (Pajares,
2003, 2006).
Very little attention has been devoted to the research of how motivational
factors affect academic achievement for community college students, specifically in
the area of writing. This is surprising, considering that writing is very fundamental
to academic success in higher education (Dillion, et. al, 2000). Developmental
education students continue to fall behind in their English classes (LAVC scorecard,
2006) and still there is very little investigation to provide answers as to why these
students are not seeking the assistance they need in order to succeed.
Self-Efficacy
Self-efficacy is linked to motivation. If a person does not believe that their
behavior will lead them to their desired goal, then they will be less inclined to persist
in trying to reach that goal. According to Bandura (1997), students’ self-efficacy
beliefs develop from their own previous experiences; from observing others perform;
from the feedback they receive and from their emotional reactions to a specific task.
Perceived self-efficacy facilitates goal-setting, effort investment and
persistence in the face of obstacles (Schwarzer, 1992). When addressing self-efficacy
theory, it is important that a clear distinction be made between self-efficacy and self-
esteem. Additionally, motivation research has demonstrated the importance of
understanding the difference between these two variables in academic settings
(Linnenbrink & Pintrich, 2003). Self-efficacy beliefs are defined as an individual' s
perception of their performance abilities and self-esteem is defined as more of an
28
affective reaction and evaluation of one' s self (Pintrich & Schunk, 2002), such as
feeling bad about not being able to write well. An individual' s perception of his or
her academic competence is very task specific and therefore not the same as self-
esteem. According to Pintrich & Schunk (2002), academic environments would fare
better if they promoted their students' self-efficacy beliefs of competence instead of
these individuals' self-esteem.
Self-efficacy is related to academic motivation and learning in that an
individual' s beliefs about his or her capabilities is what predicts that individual' s level
of motivation (Zimmerman, 2000). Bandura, who is extensively cited in regards to
self-efficacy, produced research on this variable and on expectancies in reading and
writing achievement and found that self-efficacy is an important predictor of
motivation (Zimmerman, 2000). According to the literature on self-efficacy, this
motivational variable influences the types of academic activities that an individual
engages in, that individual' s persistence, and their effort (Pajares, 1996; Zimmerman,
2000; Linnenbrink & Pintrich, 2003; Walker, 2003). Bandura and Locke (2003) who
studied the properties of self-efficacy beliefs, report that an individual' s self-efficacy-
beliefs are closely related to that individual' s goal orientation and thus both beliefs
and goals have been shown to increase motivation and performance.
Self-Efficacy in Academic Settings
Self-efficacy beliefs contribute a great deal to motivation in learning
environments. Pajares (1996) has written that previous achievements are usually not
valid predictors of future attainment because a student’s behaviors are guided by his
29
or her belief of the abilities they posses. These perceptions of one' s capabilities as a
student, affects scholastic choices and behaviors in various ways. For one, students
more easily engage in activities in which they believe they will do well and avoid
tasks if they feel they may fail (Pajares, 1996; Pintrich & Schunk, 2002).
Additionally, a student' s persistence and effort toward a specific activity is
determined by that individual' s self-efficacy beliefs. Self-efficacious students are
typically seen as those individuals who demonstrate interest in their academic
assignments and persistence even when faced with challenges (Linnenbrink &
Pintrich, 2003). In other words, the more self-efficacious students are, the more they
are likely to persist in attaining their goals. On the other hand, low self-efficacious
students tend to believe that assignments are more difficult than they really are and
thus they doubt their ability to complete the assigned tasks. These students are
typically seen as those individuals less likely to persevere.
Self -Efficacy and Help Seeking
Self-efficacy is related to help seeking and studies have revealed that students
who are considered self-efficacious, are those that are more likely to seek help
(Karabenick & Knapp, 1991). On the other hand, students with low self-efficacy
beliefs are not as likely to seek assistance when they need it. In addition, these low
efficacious students may think that they are not capable of completing an activity and
thus they may choose not to even try it. Still, the literature suggests that these low
efficacious students may indeed be very motivated individuals. These students are
just more motivated to protect their self-worth by not attempting an activity that they
30
may fail at. Instead, these individuals tend to engage in activities that may be
somewhat easier for them so that in this manner they are still able to conserve their
confidence and self worth (Pintrich & Schunk, 2002). As is evident, self-efficacy
beliefs can be very powerful in terms of predicting an individual' s performance.
Additionally, research has demonstrated that many college students report the
realization that they could have fared better if they would have sought help with their
schoolwork (Karabenick & Knapp, 1988).
Self-Efficacy and Writing
According to Walker (2003) however, self efficacy is more about an
individual' s specific beliefs regarding their capabilities; such as writing or reading
abilities. From this author we learn how self-efficacy in reading and writing can be
construed as an academic achievement cycle of motivation. The cycle starts with
self-efficacious students, as they have been identified as more likely to seek help in
order to achieve their goals. Because these self efficacious students tend to persist at
challenging activities, they are more likely to be successful in completing these
tasks. Thus their success is what motivates them to continue to work hard and
attempt any other challenging activities. This in turn is said to increase their
performance. And so the cycle starts over as these students, who have succeeded,
have now increased their self efficacy beliefs and now may be even more motivated
to continue to seek help in order to continue to attain achievement. Walker (2003)
further postulates that when students see themselves as successful in their English
assignments, such as in writing a poem or reading a novel, they choose to engage
31
more in the learning of that specific subject. Thus, she believes that self-efficacy
many times refers to specific events based on an individual' s goals. Although Walker
tied this cycle into the specific learning environment of English reading and writing,
it would be safe to contend that this cycle would work in any situation based on a
student' s goals and their beliefs that their own effort has produced the successful
outcome.
Walker’s view is consistent with Bandura’s (cited in Pajares, 1996; also in
Pajares, Hartley & Valiente, 2001) warning to researchers that self-efficacy beliefs
should only be predicted depending on the task being analyzed. In other words,
there must be specificity when assessing self-efficacy to determine academic
outcomes. According to Bandura, in order to more appropriately measure the
motivational variable of self efficacy, educational research should identify a critical
task when assessing this variable. This is mostly because perceptions of self-efficacy
are considered specific to a particular task such as writing (Pajares, 1996). Under this
premise, Pajares et al. (2001) conducted research to investigate how two common
scales, which measured self-efficacy beliefs in writing, differed. Their findings
concurred with Bandura' s recommendation that guidelines must be followed when
assessing self efficacy beliefs about writing. This becomes important as reliability of
self-efficacy beliefs can assist teachers and counselors by providing them with more
accurate results about a student' s actual perceptions of his or her writing skills and
capabilities. Thus these perceptions may be able to predict an individual' s level of
motivation in the academic setting.
32
Furthermore, Pajares’ (2007) most recent publication addresses the properties
of a scale which assess writing self-efficacy. Pajares’ study analyzed the writing self-
efficacy of 1,258 students and found that the Writing Self-Efficacy Scale (Pajares &
Valiante, 1999) worked out for each of the academic levels evaluated. The validity of
these scales was measured by comparing the scores with those from other scales used
to measure writing motivation. Additionally, this study’s results support previous
research which found that self-efficacy decreased as students transitioned to higher
grades. The results of this study also support the continued use of the Writing Self-
Efficacy Scale.
Summary
The literature reviewed on self-efficacy has provided us with an
understanding of the power this variable can have over student learning. Many
studies have examined self-efficacy particularly in terms of motivational engagement
(Linnenbrink & Pintrich, 2003; Schunk, 2003). Some research has examined the
relationship between self-efficacy and help seeking in academic settings. Still, very
few have looked at the relationship of this variable explicitly in relation to reading
and writing (Pajares, 2003; Walker, 2003). The next section will discuss expectancy
values, specifically task value, and its role in learning environments.
(Expectancy)Task Values
Other motivational factors that are attributed to help seeking behaviors in
students are expectancy and task value (Pintrich & Schunk, 2002). Many theoretical
33
perspectives focus on expectancy beliefs and its role in academic motivation
(Pajares, 1996). Although there are other constructs under expectancy value, the one
we will focus on here is task value. In expectancy value theory, task value is
considered an internal belief of the reason for why students choose to engage in a
specific task. In other words, the value that students place on a specific task, can
determine their motivation to engage in that task. According to Pintrich and Schunk
(2002), task value is an important predictor of achievement behavior.
Currently, much of the research on task value focuses on middle to secondary
school students and their expectancies for English and Math. Research has shown
that tasks influence how students will perceive learning (Blumenfeld, 1992; Ames,
1992). Thus, these perceptions must then impact how students view their ability in
the classroom and consequently and how they achieve their classroom goals. Ames
(1992) who has also conducted various studies on classrooms and student
motivation, has found that tasks are very central to learning in academic
environments. The way in which students perceive certain tasks is apparently crucial
to the amount of time they will expend on the task. In other words, different tasks
can determine how students will engage in learning. It also appears that the amount
of value placed on a task can determine how motivated an individual will be in
accomplishing the task.
Task Values and Help Seeking
As students become motivated to reach a desired outcome they begin to
behave in ways that assist them in attaining that which they value. Thus one of these
34
behaviors for outcome expectations can be seeking help. According to Printrich and
Schunk (2002) behaviors that are perpetuated by expectations of outcomes are all
considered part of motivational processes. Expectancy-for-success beliefs, for
example, have been shown to contribute to help seeking behaviors in learning
environments (Schunk, 1991; Printrich & Schunk, 2002). Therefore, it would be
logical to assume that if a student expects to be able to complete a difficult task, that
individual is probably more willing to seek help in order to ensure that he or she does
so successfully. According to Ames (1992), students learn to value tasks when
classroom instructional demands support the use of effective learning strategies such
as help seeking.
An investigation by Karabenick and Knapp (1988), which examined
correlations of help seeking among college students, found that low performance was
related to a student’s engagement in achievement tasks. In replicating this study,
these authors found that controlling for individual differences yielded a strong link
between help seeking and learning strategies.
Task Values in Academic Settings
Research shows that an individual' s perception of tasks very much influences
their approach to certain learning activities (Ames, 1992). According to Ames, all
tasks have certain characteristics which students utilize to decide how much effort
they will exert in accomplishing that task. This is made salient in Pizzolato’s
(2006) research which explored the achievement process in high-risk college
students who were participating in an academic support program. Pizzolato
35
interviewed 28 students for one hour asking the same questions about these students'
early college experiences and the decisions they felt were important. This researcher
was also interested in understanding how these students achieved their goals.
Pizzolato’s study demonstrates that students choose tasks depending on their goals;
and because the goals differ among students, they engage in very different tasks or
activities in order to achieve these goals.
As part of the expectancy value model, task values are considered important
mediators of achievement as they stress the significance of an individual' s
perceptions and expectations for success (Pintrich & Schunk, 2002). Research has
demonstrated that a student' s motivation increases when they expect the outcome of
accomplishing a difficult task to be successful. Eccles and Wigfield (2000) for
example, consistently found that an individual' s expectancy beliefs about their ability
to succeed at a task were closely linked to an increase in test scores.
Task Values and Writing
Research on value beliefs defines them as domain specific. According to
Ames (1992), all tasks have certain characteristics which students utilize to
determine how much effort they will apply to that particular task. Additionally,
students many times use these characteristics to determine their ability to accomplish
the task. In other words, depending on how much value is placed on the task of
writing, is what determines a student' s motivation toward that activity and thus how
much effort they will expend on the assignment.
36
According to Meece and Miller (1999) engaging in writing tasks requires the
use of self regulatory processes. These authors conducted research on motivational
constructs to examine students’ quality of engagement in writing tasks. In addition,
they looked at changes in motivation for these literacy tasks. This longitudinal study
found that gender makes a difference in a student’s ability to write. They concluded
that girls placed more value on literacy related tasks than boys. These studies are
consistent with Guthrie et al. (1997) who also looked at student engagement in
literacy tasks. These researchers found that a student’s level of involvement in these
tasks reflected intrinsic motivation. Results of this study also demonstrated that
successful learners are more capable of combining these involvement motivations
with complex strategies and with self efficacy beliefs.
While these studies focused on school age children, they are important to
look at as they demonstrate how mastery performance orientation in literacy tasks
decline as students get older. Additionally Meece and Miller' s (1999) research
implies that students tend to change their reading and writing goals as they move on
to higher studies. These findings are important to the current research study as they
provide a background of students’ motivational orientations for literacy tasks.
Summary
The above section has summarized the role of task values in the academic
setting. The literature reviewed has demonstrated how this motivational construct
impacts help seeking behaviors. Research has shown how important this construct is
37
in determining a student’s choice of activity. The research also indicates that writing
self-efficacy in college students can build strongly on achievement in academic
settings and it is predictive of a student’s goal orientation and learning strategies
(Pajares, 1996).
The next section will discuss goal orientation and the achievement process. In
addition, literature on goal orientation and its impact on help seeking behaviors will
be reviewed.
Goal Orientation
Self-efficacy and task values are not the only motivational factors that
contribute to help seeking behaviors. Help seeking behavior has also been found to
be highly correlated to an individual student' s achievement goal orientation (Ryan &
Pintrich, 1997). According to Ames (1992), who has extensively studied
achievement goal orientation, there are two goals which are linked to motivational
processes and that are the most examined in academic environments. These
constructs are mastery orientation and performance orientation also known
respectively as learning-oriented and task-oriented goals. Mastery goal orientation
focuses on learning a task by using task-involved goals and self improvement
standards (Pintrich & Schunk, 2002) such as help seeking. Performance goal
orientation focuses on being better than others at a specific task such as having the
best grades (Pintrich & Schunk, 2002). These two goal orientations are further
divided into performance approach and performance avoid. Performance-approach
goal orientation is when an individual attempts to demonstrate competence by
38
outperforming his or her peers. Performance-avoidance goal orientation is an
individual’s attempt to avoid appearing less competent than his or her peers (Ames,
1992; Pintrich & Schunk, 2002).
Urdan (2004), who researched performance goals, found that performance-
avoidance and classroom performance goal structure were positively associated with
the adoption of personal performance goals. Research in the area of goal orientation
also demonstrates that when students perceive a mastery goal structure in their
learning environment, they are more likely to adopt a personal mastery goal
orientation (Urdan & Midgley, 2003). Likewise, Wolters (2004) found that personal
goal orientations and goal structures are positively correlated. Additionally, Ames
(1992) found that performance and mastery achievement goals are related to how an
individual thinks about him or herself.
As is evident by the research on goal orientation (Urdan, 2004; Turner,
Midgley, Meyer, Gheen, Anderman, Kang & Patrick, 2002; Ames, 1992), an
individual’s goal orientation derives from his or her learning environment and from
the perceived messages communicated through a teacher’s instructional strategy.
More specifically, personal goals, which are influenced by early experiences, provide
students with a lens they can utilize to interpret their classroom experiences. Besides
personal goals, there are goal structures. Classroom goal structures are the messages
conveyed in one’s learning environment which can determine how a student will
think about him or herself and about the tasks he/she will choose to engage in and
thus persist at (Ames, 1992).
39
Goal Orientation and Writing
Because college education has become fundamental to a successful career, it
is astounding to find out that approximately 30-90% of entering community college
students require remedial writing and reading (Perin, 2002). Because inadequate
literacy preparation is more common in students entering community colleges, these
institutions have been forced to provide writing labs in order to assist their students
to succeed. Expressive writing, critical thinking, and reading comprehension are all
important skills needed in order to successfully complete a degree program. When
these skills are lacking, tutoring which is usually available in academic learning
centers, is provided as an alternative to developmental education (Perin, 2002).
In education, writing has received more attention and thus more research with
students in elementary school than with college bound students. Meece and Miller
(1999), for example, looked at student achievement goals for reading and writing in
school age children. This longitudinal study which focused on student behaviors,
found that certain changes to teacher instruction can impact a student' s goals and
learning strategy use in writing. Additionally, Wolters, Yu & Pintrich (1996) found
that strategy use and performance-approach goals are positively correlated in the
domain of English. Although these studies have implied that various learning
environments encourage the utilization of learning strategies, none of them have
made it very clear as to which learning strategy students were encouraged to use.
40
Goal Orientation and Help Seeking
Many studies on achievement goal theory and help seeking have looked at
goal orientation (Arbreton, 1993; Karabenick, 2001, 2003, 2004) in order to
determine which students are more likely to seek help. Karabenick (2003), for
example, conducted a study and established that help seeking could be differentiated
by approach and avoidance patterns. Many of the studies on goal orientation and
help-seeking provide evidence that different goal oriented students seek out different
types of assistance. Mastery goal-oriented individuals, those who tend to focus more
on self-improvement, tend to seek out autonomous help or instrumental assistance.
Autonomous help allows the student to learn something he or she may be able to
apply elsewhere. On the other hand, performance goal-oriented students tend to seek
out expedient help (Karabenick, 2003) which is defined as assistance just to get the
assignment done, not necessarily to learn about the task at hand. Another alternative
is that performance-oriented individuals may just avoid seeking help altogether.
Karabenick (2004), one of the few researchers who has looked at help
seeking behaviors in college students, conducted a study which looked at perceptions
of achievement goals and help seeking in this population. The first study found that
students who sought out help did so using distinct approach patterns. These patterns
consisted of either mastery orientation approach, which places focus on
understanding tasks; mastery orientation avoidance which is described as a student' s
concern with failure; performance approach which is when students focus on being
the smartest in comparison to others, and performance avoidance which is when an
41
individual is motivated to avoid looking incompetent (Pintrich & Schunk, 2002).
This study linked help seeking characteristics with achievement goal orientations.
These findings are consistent with the work of Ames (1992), Newman (1998),
Church et al. (2001), and Schunk (2002) which have all found that performance
approach occurs when individuals focus on being superior, besting others, being the
smartest and best at tasks in comparison to their peers. These same studies found that
performance-avoiders tend to focus on avoiding inferiority, not looking stupid or
dumb in comparison to their peers.
A second study recently conducted by Karabenick (2004), which controlled
for achievement goal orientation, found that students in classrooms, that they
perceived encouraged performance-avoidance goals, had increased levels of help
seeking avoidance patterns. This particular study investigated the impact of
perceived achievement goal structure and goal orientation on help seeking patterns.
The results of these studies then indicate that a students’ perception of their class’
goal structure has a great deal of influence on their help seeking patterns.
These findings are consistent with those of Ryan, Gheen, and Midgely (1998)
who examined why some students avoid asking for help. This study also found that
help seeking patterns of avoidance were influenced by how students perceived their
classroom' s goal structure. What all of these studies have made apparent is that help
seeking patterns are associated with the student' s perception of a classroom’s goal
orientation.
42
Perceived Classroom Goal Structure
There has been much research on the relationship of goal orientation and
academic environments (Ames, 1992: Blumenfeld, 1992; Arbreton, 1993; Butler,
Orna, Neuman, 1995; Church, Elliott, & Gable, 2001; Pintrich & Schunk, 2002;
Urdan 2004; Wolters, 2004). Apparently, learning environments can determine an
individual' s perception of goals (Blumenfeld, 1992; Urdan & Midgley, 2003).
Additionally, research on classroom goal structures dictates that the manner in which
activities are designed in any classroom setting, can significantly contribute to the
type of goal students will embrace (Blumenfeld, 1992; Ames, 1992; Arbreton, 1993).
In other words, either mastery orientation goals or performance orientation goals are
validated depending on the instructional strategies of each classroom environment.
Mastery goals, for example, have been linked with challenging activities in
classrooms. In contrast, performance goals have been linked with activities that
require very little effort (Ames, 1992; Church et. al, 2001). Ames (1992) who has
extensively investigated achievement goal theory in relation to learning
environments, has discovered how various academic settings can elicit different
patterns of motivation.
Furthermore, studies that have examined classroom structures, have found
that environmental demands are not the only contributors to the type of goals
adopted (Ames, 1992). Students' perceptions of the classroom structure are found to
be just as important in determining the goal orientation the student embraces
(Church, et al., 2001).
43
Summary
Perceived goal orientation has been shown to be a factor in understanding
motivation in academic settings. The literature has examined how academic
environment structures can make a difference in how students choose to seek
assistance with school work and the type of help they seek. Research has
demonstrated how different orientation approaches are associated with different
learning patterns. More importantly, the literature has informed us about the
importance of students’ perceptions regarding classroom goal structures. We have
also learned how these perceptions can impact a student’s choice in activities and
how much they will persist at a task when faced with unforeseen challenges.
Conclusion
These investigations have provided us with two different profiles of students.
One profile consists of those high achievers who have high academic performance
coupled with high self-efficacy beliefs and which are considered to be the help
seekers. The second profile consists of students who refuse to seek help as they may
not recognize that they need it or they may feel threatened by having to admit
inadequacy and they may even avoid seeking help due to cultural pressures.
This literature review has analyzed academic support systems in relation to
help seeking for community college students. Secondly, research on help seeking
attitudes among students had been reviewed. Finally, literature on the constructs of
self-efficacy, task values and goal orientation was reviewed. This literature review
then concluded with studies that have linked these motivational constructs to help
44
seeking behaviors. This review revealed that first and foremost, more research is
needed in the area of help seeking behaviors as it relates to higher education. This
review also revealed two important points 1.) How crucial the help seeking process
can be in terms of academic achievement and 2.) How a students’ ability to ask for
help when they need it, is a necessary strategy that is valuable to the learning
process.
Chapter three will describe the methodology utilized for this research. It will
include a description of the setting and the participants involved in this research.
It will also include information on the assessment instruments utilized to collect the
data necessary to examine the different variables. Additionally, there will be a
description of the assessment procedures and a description of how the data was
analyzed.
45
CHAPTER 3
Methods
The primary purpose of this applied research study was to try to understand
why certain community college students, who need help in their English courses, do
not seek assistance. Specifically, this study examined how self-efficacy beliefs, task
values and perceived classroom goal orientation contribute to help seeking behaviors
in a large urban community college campus. According to The National Freshman
Attitudes Report (Noel-Levitz, 2006), which looked at receptivity to assistance,
only 38.9% of beginning college students who responded agreed that they would
like to receive tutoring in one or more of their courses. Furthermore, 43.2% of
students at two-year institutions agreed that they would like to receive some
individual help in improving their writing skills (Noel-Levitz, 2006).
The proposed study aimed at answering the following questions:
1. Are self-efficacy beliefs, task values, and students’ perceptions of their
classroom goal structure factors that influence help seeking behaviors in
community college students?
2. Does help seeking lead to higher academic achievement?
In addition, the proposed study sought to understand the following:
3. What do students, who seek assistance with writing, expect from the tutoring
services provided?
46
4. What are students’ perceptions of the tutoring services provided and how do
these perceptions influence their behavior?
5. What are the barriers related to these students seeking help?
To this researcher' s knowledge, there has not been a study that has tested all of
these variables together when looking at academic support for writing in
community college students.
Participants
The research strategy for this study consisted of purposeful, criterion
sampling. The participants consisted of 238 students who were enrolled in either
English 21, English 33, English 28, or English 101 courses at an urban community
college in southern California. Of the 238 students from the above courses, 156
(64.7%) were female, 78 (32.4%) were male, and 4 students did not identify their
gender. Additionally, these students identified themselves in the following race
categories: 127 (52.7%) identified as Hispanic, 46 (19.1%) as White, 23 (9.5) as
Asian, 14 (5.8%) as African American, 19 (7.9%) identified as other non-white, and
12 (5%) of students did not identify themselves in any category. This research also
included information about students from these courses who attended the writing
center in search of assistance with their course work. In other words, it was expected
that out of the 238 students, at least 1/3 would attend the writing center. Although
students from all disciplines were reported by the writing center to take full
advantage of their free tutoring services, for the purpose of this study, this research
only looked at those who were currently enrolled in English courses as the focus was
47
on why there continues to be an English achievement gap. According to writing
center reports, about 70-80% of students who utilize their services are ESL.
As the diversity of the community college population is changing and more
students who consider English their second language enroll, these institutions have
had to find ways to respond to the changes with what is allocated to them (Xu,
Hartman, Uribe & Mencke, 2001). One way to respond to the students’ needs has
been to provide academic support services via tutoring.
Setting
This particular writing center is run out of a regular-sized classroom which is
carpeted and equipped with three round tables and some chairs. As soon as students
walk in, they are required to register at a desk that is provided in front of the
classroom. Students not only sign in, they must also swipe their student
identification cards through a machine that verifies that they are actually enrolled in
the college during that particular semester. The classroom next door is also part of
the Writing Center and has been converted into a lab with computers.
This writing center currently provides one-on-one tutoring sessions on both
walk-in and by-appointment basis. They offer three different tutorial lab courses
where students can obtain .5 units for attending. In addition, they offer tutoring
conferences, writing workshops, and computerized instruction. Students are
encouraged to bring in their assigned readings, homework assignments, study
questions, and essay topics if they want assistance with those. The tutorial staff
48
assists with grammar, vocabulary and essay formatting. They also assist with setting
up research papers with correct summarizations and citations. Free computer use is
also available to students and assistance on word processing and formatting of papers
is offered.
Besides tutoring and computer services, the writing center also has a website
where they offer on-line tutoring services. This comprehensive website includes
downloadable handouts, links to reading, writing and critical thinking resources.
They also allow students to turn in their papers via e-mail and receive tailored
feedback from a writing tutor. The writing center reports that approximately 2,400
students from all disciplines visit the lab every year.
Instruments
The research for this study utilized items from a combination of instruments
in order to formulate one single questionnaire for all participants attending the
specific English classes outlined above. Items for this questionnaire were obtained
from various popular measurement scales such as the Patterns of Adaptive Learning
Strategies (P.A.L.S.) survey instrument (Midgley, Maehr, Hruda, Anderman,
Anderman, Freeman, Gheen, Kaplan, Kumar, Middleton, Nelson, Roeser & Urdan,
2000) and the Help Seeking Survey (Ryan & Hopkins, in press). In addition, some
items were selected from the Writing Skills Self-Efficacy Scales (Pajares & Valiante,
2001). In order to obtain items to measure task value, a popular measure in terms of
construct
validity was utilized; The Value Perception Survey (Condly, 1999).
49
Perceptions of Classroom Goal Structures
Perceived classroom goal orientation was measured with items from the
Patterns of Adaptive Learning Survey (P.A.L.S). Internal consistency reliability for
perceived goal orientation with this instrument has ranged from .74 to .89 (Midgley
et al., 2000). Student scales for this instrument include academic efficacy,
perception of classroom goal structure and achievement goal orientations. The
P.A.L.S. instrument has been found to be appropriate for measuring and making
inferences about learning constructs across grade levels from elementary to college
(Ross, Shannon, Salisbury-Glennon, & Guarino, 2002). The format of all items on
the P.A.L.S. instrument uses a five-point Likert-type scale, anchored at 1 (not at all
true), 3 (somewhat true), and 5 (very true) (see Appendix C. for content).
The next section will provide examples of the nine survey items that were
used in this study, and their reliability as reported by Midgley et al. (2000).
Perceived Classroom Mastery Goal Orientation
The perception of classroom mastery goal orientation scale was comprised of
three items. Sample items included, "In our class, learning new ideas and concepts is
very important," "In our class, it is important to understand the work, not just
memorize it," and “In our class, really understanding the material is the main goal.”
The internal consistency reliability (coefficient alpha) for the personal performance
avoidance scales scores was found to be .76. These items are shown in full in
Appendix C.
50
Perceived Classroom Performance-Approach Goal Orientation
The perception of performance-approach goal orientation scale was
comprised of three items. These items included "In our class, it is important to get
high scores on tests,” "In our class, getting right answers is very important," and “In
our class, getting good grades is the main goal.” The internal consistency reliability
(coefficient alpha) for the personal performance-avoidance scales scores was found
to be .70. These items are shown in full in Appendix C.
Perceived Classroom Performance-Avoidance Goal Orientation
The perception of classroom performance-avoidance goal orientation was
also comprised of three items. Sample items included "In our class, it is important
not to look dumb," “In our class, one of the main goals is to avoid looking like you
can’t do the work,” and “In our class, is important not to do worse than other
students." The internal consistency reliability (coefficient alpha) for the personal
performance-avoidance scales scores was found to be .83. These items are shown in
full in Appendix C.
Help Seeking Behavior Patterns
Survey items that were used to analyze participants' help seeking behavior
patterns and attitudes were adapted from Ryan and Hopkins (in press) survey
instrument. Items assessed participants' adaptive and maladaptive (avoidant) help
seeking behaviors. The adaptive help seeking scale was comprised of six items.
51
Sample items for the adaptive help seeking scale included, "If I need help with my
English work in this class, I ask questions so the person will provide enough
information so I can figure it out myself" and "If I get stuck on a difficult English
problem, I ask someone for just enough help so that I can keep working through it."
The internal consistency reliability (coefficient alpha) for the adaptive help seeking
scale scores was found to be .72 (Ryan & Shim, 2005).
The avoidance help-seeking scale was comprised of six items. Sample items
for the avoidance help-seeking scale included, "I usually don' t ask for help with my
work in this class, even if the work is too hard to do on my own" and "When I don' t
understand my English work in this class, I often guess instead of asking someone
for help." The internal consistency reliability (coefficient alpha) for the avoidance
help seeking scale scores was found to be .80 (Ryan & Shim, 2005). These items are
shown in full in Appendix C.
Task Value
According to Eccles and Wigfield (1995), there are three parts to task value
and all can be measured with the Task Value Instrument. This instrument asks
participants to respond to questions on a 5-point Likert scoring scale with answers
ranging from not at all to very much; very boring to very interesting; and strongly
disagree to strongly agree. Some questions included items such as "How important is
it to you to get a good grade in this course?" and "How interesting do you consider
52
the subject matter of this course to be?" The internal consistency reliability for this
instrument ranges from .52 to .84. (Condly, 1999).
Writing Self-Efficacy
Self-efficacy is the belief that one can perform any new or difficult task and
thus consequently it facilitates effort investment and persistence despite challenges
faced (Schwartz, 1992). In the area of writing, researchers have confirmed that
students' confidence in their writing skills is related both to writing competence and
to academic motivation variables such as achievement goals, writing competence and
the perceived value of writing (Pajares & Johnson, 1994; Pajares, Miller, & Johnson,
1999; Pajares & Valiante, 1997).
There are two ways to measure writing self efficacy. One method involves
assessing students' confidence that they possess specific writing skills. These items
assess ability to perform grammar usage, composition, and mechanical writing skills
such as punctuation and organizing sentences into paragraphs. Another method of
measuring students’ writing self efficacy beliefs is to use questions that ask students
to provide a rating of their confidence that they can earn either an A, B, C, or D in
their English class at the end of the term. These confidence judgments will then be
compared with the students' actual final grade. Reliability indexes for writing skills
self-efficacy scales have ranged from .85 for elementary school students to .95 for
college students (Pajares, 2003).
53
In addition to the aforementioned items, locally developed items were
included to obtain information on whether or not participants sought help with the
class. Specifically, items measured if participants use the college’s writing lab for
tutoring assistance with the course. An open-ended item, developed by the
researcher, was also included to gather information about student expectations for
assistance from the tutoring lab. For example, participants were asked, “Have you
gotten the kind of help you needed when you have attended the writing lab? If no,
why do you think it has not helped you? If yes, to what degree where your
expectations met?” This question was preceded by a question asking participants to
indicate if they have ever used the writing center for tutoring services. Participants
were also asked to provide the reason for which they sought assistance from the lab.
Procedures
In the middle of the fall 2007 semester, this researcher arranged with English
instructors to visit several sections of English 33, English 21, English 28, and
English 101 classes. A large sample size (N=238) and course sections (N=15) was
needed in order to reduce instructor effects, since part of the purpose of this study is
to assess participants’ perception of their classroom’s goal structure and how that
perception influences their help-seeking behaviors in the course. At this time, this
researcher informed students about the research, and its purpose. They were notified
that their participation would be voluntary. That same day, their consents were
obtained with IRB forms and they were then invited to fill out a 53-item
questionnaire which took up to approximately 30 minutes.
54
In an attempt to get their most honest opinions, students were informed that
all their answers would remain confidential. Additionally, students were informed
that their responses would be held in the strictest professional confidence; that their
instructors would not have access to the information they provided on the survey and
that their answers would not influence the grade they would receive in that course.
Students were also informed that they could still participate even if they did not grant
permission for their final scores, demographic data, writing lab attendance, or final
grade to be viewed as part of this study. Finally, students were asked to place both
their questionnaires and consent forms in a box at the back of the room when they
were done; even if they decided not to participate.
In addition to help-seeking behaviors being assessed through a survey
instrument, participants’ help-seeking behaviors were further validated with data
collected from the college’s writing center. This data included attendance records of
students who frequented the lab in search of tutoring. This researcher also conducted
interviews of students attending the center. There were a total of 23 students
interviewed. The students recruited for participation were those currently taking
English courses for the fall 2007 semester.
This qualitative data gathering assisted in answering the secondary research
questions proposed. Writing center observations were conducted everyday toward
the end of the semester. On Fridays the lab only sees students with appointments yet,
some walk-in appointments were available if students were willing to wait. This
researcher took note of those students who came in to seek help on their own and the
55
process required to get assistance. Finally, achievement was measured by each
student' s final course grade at the end of the semester which was obtained from their
English course instructors.
Data Analysis
For the quantitative data, a descriptive analysis of standard deviations and
means was computed utilizing SPSS for each item. Additionally internal consistency
reliability was computed on the survey items. Finally, in order to determine the
percentage of variance accounted by self-efficacy, task value, and perceived
classroom goal structure, a regression analysis was conducted. Means, standard
deviations, and correlations among scores on survey items and scales were
computed. Internal consistency reliability using Cronbach’s alpha was computed for
scores on survey items corresponding to various scales.
For the qualitative data that was collected, there was a content analysis
performed in order to see what themes or categories were being projected through
open-ended questions asked of some students in attendance at the lab. Thus, this
enabled this researcher to make generalizations.
Data collected through observations in the writing center was also utilized to
configure a triangulation and thus to validate findings about students’ expectations
for assistance. The validity and the confidence in findings were ascertained by first
looking at the central concepts and then trying to configure a triangulation. The
sources of data consisted of students in the aforementioned English courses, students
attending the writing center and data collected through observations. What transpired
56
in the writing center was important to note as it built an in-depth description of how
things happened in this particular setting and thus how it may have affected student
behaviors.
The triangulation of these sources provided important information about
students’ expectations for assistance through academic support systems. The
triangulation process also provided perceptions of the tutoring services available in
the writing center and possible barriers to help seeking.
The results of this research will be discussed in Chapter 4. Chapter 5 will
include a discussion for future research and implications.
57
CHAPTER 4
Results
This chapter presents both the quantitative and qualitative results of this study
including descriptive analyses and correlations to answer the following research
questions: 1) Are self-efficacy beliefs, task values, and students’ perceptions of their
classroom goal structure factors that influence help seeking behaviors in community
college students? 2) Does help seeking lead to higher academic achievement?
Additionally, the following three guiding questions were posed:
1) What do students, who seek assistance with writing, expect from the tutoring
services provided?
2) What are students’ perceptions of the tutoring services provided and how do
these perceptions influence their behavior?
3) What are the barriers related to these students seeking help?
Quantitative Findings
A summary of the means and standard deviations of the perceived classroom
goal structures (mastery, performance-approach, performance-avoidance); help-
seeking behaviors (adaptive, avoidance); task values (important, interest, utility) and
writing self-efficacy are listed in Table 1. Internal consistency reliability using
Cronbach’s alpha was computed for scores on these motivational variables. These
scores are listed in table 1. Descriptive statistics are for a sample size of 238
students.
58
Table 1
Descriptive Statistics and Estimates of Internal-Consistency Reliability
(CoefficientAlpha)
_ Variable M SD Reliability
1. Class Mastery Goal Structure 4.45 0.71 0.75
2. Class Performance-Approach Goal Structure 3.89 0.86 0.73
3. Class Performance-Avoidance Goal Structure 2.34 1.18 0.85
4. Adaptive Help-Seeking 3.75 0.73 0.69
5. Help-Seeking Avoidance 2.07 0.92 0.83
6. Task Value: Important 4.5 0.52 0.6
7. Task Value: Interest 3.81 0.96 0.89
8. Task Value: Utility 4.08 0.91 0.81
9. Writing Self-Efficacy 7.15 1.77 0.97
10. Age 23.52 7.77 --
11. Units Completed 17.24 16.56 --
12. Cumulative GPA 2.32 1.09 --
13. English Course Grade 2.56 1.18 --
14. One-on-One Visits 6.04 6.94 --
15. Workshops 1.00 .000 --
16. Total Writing Center Attendance Hours 1.24 6.41 --
59 Intercorrelations
A regression analysis, which contained all of the correlations, was conducted.
This multiple regression analysis looked at the relationship between the nine
independent variables which included classroom goal structure, help seeking, task
value, and writing self-efficacy and the dependent variable which was the total
number of hours students spent in the writing center. This research study also
looked at the number of times students sought help, their grade point average, and
their final course grade in their English class. Help seeking was measured by the
frequency of student attendance to the writing center.
As presented in Table 2, results showed that the variable of task value:
interest had the highest correlation to the number of hours spent in the writing
center. In other words, it appears that the more a student valued the task of writing,
the more likely they were to seek help through the writing center. This analysis also
showed a slight negative correlation between help seeking avoidance and task value:
important (-.48, p<.01); task value: interest (-.43, p<.01); and task value: utility
(-.35, p<.01). This sample population yielded results of a positive correlation
between classroom mastery goal structure and adaptive help seeking
(r = .399, p < .001).
These findings indicate that students who perceive their classroom goal
structure to be mastery-goal oriented are more likely to demonstrate adaptive help
seeking behaviors. Another significant correlation emerged between classroom
performance-approach goal structure and adaptive help seeking (r = .168, p < .001).
These results imply that students who perceive their classroom goal structure as
60
being performance-approach oriented are also likely to demonstrate adaptive help-
seeking behaviors.
Additionally, results for this sample yielded no correlation between
classroom performance-approach goal structure and avoidant help seeking
(r = 0.001, p > .05). Negative correlations emerged between classroom mastery goal
structure and task value: utility (r = -.345, p < .001) and between classroom mastery
goal structure and help-seeking avoidance (r = -.252, p < .001). Based on the
literature reviewed, this is expected because those who possess adaptive help seeking
behaviors have been found to be among the students who tend to seek help (Church,
Elliot, & Gable, 2001).
Even more significant was the finding of a negative correlation that emerged
between task value: important and help seeking avoidance (r = -.477. p < .001) as
this essentially indicates that students who do not seek help with their writing
assignments are most often those who do not value this task as being very important.
Finally, as hypothesized, a positive correlation was found between help-seeking
avoidance and classroom performance-avoidance goal structure (r = .274, p < .01).
This indicates that participants who perceived their classroom goal structure to be
performance-avoidance are the students who avoided seeking help when they needed
it. In other words, students who wanted to avoid appearing less competent than their
peers, may have avoided seeking assistance from the writing center out of fear that
others would think that their help seeking indicated a lack of competency.
61
Table 2
Means, Standard Deviations, and Pearson Product Correlations for Measured Variables (N=238)__________________________
Variable M SD 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
1. WCH 1.24 6.4 -- .018 .096 .154 .120 -.026 .014 .148 .122 .108* -.068
2. GS1 4.45 .709 -- .270 -.113 .399 -.252 .408 .383 .370 .197*** .028
3. GS2 3.89 .855 -- .358 .168 .001 .174 .225 .155*** .015*** -.066
4. GS3 2.33 1.17 -- .145 .274 -.131*** -.034*** -.076** -.052* -.092
5. HS1 3.75 .732 -- -.143 .319 .301*** .316 .075 .039
6. HS2 2.07 .916 -- -.477 -.431** -.345 -.347*** -.242
7. TV1 4.5 .522 -- .565 .492** .327*** .178
8. TV2 3.81 .959 -- .575*** .324*** .032
9. TV3 4.07 .909 -- .214*** .068
10. WSE 7.15 1.77 -- .067
11. ECG 2.56 1.18 --
Note: WCH = writing center total hours; GS1 = classroom mastery goal structure; GS2 = classroom performance-approach goal structure;
GS3 = classroom performance-avoidance goal structure; HS1 = adaptive help-seeking; HS2 = help-seeking avoidance; TV1 = task value:
importance; TV2 = task value: interest TV3 = task value: utility; WSE = Writing Self-Efficacy; ECG = English course grade
* p < .05; ** p < .01; *** p < .001
62
The next analysis conducted was a stepwise analysis/stepwise regression.
This means that the computer was left to decide which variables had the highest
levels of significance and those were the variables that got entered first in the
equation. These are also the variables that usually contribute the most amounts to the
prediction of the dependent variable (total writing center hours). The magnitude of
this relationship between the dependent variable and the predictor variables were
obtained. The results of this analysis are presented in Table 3.
Of the nine motivational variables entered into the equation, only two were
found to be statistically significant. These two consisted of classroom performance
avoidance goal structure and task value: interest. Results from the this regression
analysis indicated that, when classroom performance avoidance goal structure was
entered first into the equation, it demonstrated a regression score of .154 Fchange
(5.700) = .018, p < .001, which explains the relationship between classroom
performance avoidance goal structure and the amount of time spent in the writing
center. The amount of variation in the number of hours spent in the writing center
that can be accounted for by this variable, classroom performance-avoidance, came
out to 2.4%. This means that 2.4% of 100 % of variation can be accounted for by
this variable. In other words, the reason for this analysis was to determine the
amount of variation in total hours of help seeking that could accounted for by each
motivational variable.
63
When the second variable, task value: interest, was entered into the equation,
the R square increased to 4.7% which is less than 5%. Thus all variants in hours
spent in the writing center can be accounted for by these two predictor variables
only; classroom performance avoidance goal structure and task value: interest.
In other words, these results showed that participants who indicated higher task
value: interest (intrinsic interest in the content), were students who were more likely
to seek help via the writing center.
64
Table 3
Regression Analysis for Variables Predicting Help-Seeking
Variable R
2
B t
Step 1 .002
Cumulative GPA .275 .045 .671
Step 2 .027
Cumulative GPA .310 .051 .765
Classroom Performance-Avoidance .886 .159* 2.396
Goal Structure
Step 3 .053
Cumulative GPA .250 .041 .622
Classroom Performance-Avoidance .927 .167 2.530
Goal Structure
Task Value: Interest 1.108 .159* 2.409
Note. * p < .05; ** p < .01; *** p < .001
65
Primary Research Question 1
In reference to primary research question one: Are self-efficacy beliefs, task
value and students’ perceptions of their classroom goal structure, factors that
influence help seeking behaviors in community college students? Research results
for this population sample indicate that all three factors influence help-seeking
behaviors but to different degrees. This study found that, in particular, classroom
performance-avoidance goal structure and task value: interest were the two factors
that made the most significant difference in influencing help-seeking behaviors. An
explanation for this relationship between avoidance goal structure and help seeking
would require that we look into the type of help that was sought. In other words, a
possible explanation could be that students, who want to avoid appearing inept, may
utilize maladaptive help seeking strategies that assists them in getting the answers
right away but with no real understanding of the information. In this manner, they
avoid looking dumb as they will have finished the assignment sooner.
Still, results also showed that only 10.8% of the students surveyed reported to
have taken advantage of any one-on-one tutoring at the writing center. This means
that out of the 238 surveyed students, enrolled in English courses at this community
college, only 26 of them utilized the free tutoring services provided by the writing
center. Thus 89% of the students who filled out the questionnaire never used the
writing center services for assistance with their English coursework during the fall
66
2007 semester. One student did report a group visit to the writing center and two
students reported to have attended a workshop at the writing center. In addition, one
student reported to have attended the computer center once, however; use of
computers in the center is not considered a help-seeking behavior.
The mean number of hours that students use the writing center came out to
1.24. According to a Pearson Product correlation, classroom performance avoidance
goal structure was the variable that most highly correlated with the hours students
spent in the writing center (r = .154, p < .001) and task value: interest closely
followed behind
(r = .148, p < .001). These findings indicate that students, who perceive writing to
be a valuable task, are the students who will likely spend time at the writing center.
Furthermore, results demonstrate that that there is a less than 5% of variance in
writing center attendance which can be accounted for by a student’s perception of
classroom performance avoidance goal structure. More specifically, this means that
help seeking patterns of avoidance were influenced by how students perceived their
classroom’s goal structure. It is possible that because of the fear of being considered
incompetent, there is an increase in help-seeking avoidance which results in less
utilization of academic support centers on campus where one may run into a
classmate.
67
Primary Research Question 2
Does help seeking lead to higher academic achievement? A multiple
regression analysis was conducted in order to determine the strength of the
relationship when controlling for grade point average. Results of this analysis
showed that there is no relationship between achievement in English courses, for this
sample population, and help seeking in terms of total hours spent in the writing
center. In other words, if a student’s grade point average was high it could also be
attributed to that student’s intellectual ability, not necessarily to the fact that he/she
attended the writing center. In the same manner, the difference in grades should not
be solely attributed to the fact that most of these students did not attend the writing
center. Furthermore, results also show that 89.2% of students did not seek any kind
of help from the writing center. Thus results do not demonstrate any linear
relationship between help-seeking via the writing center and grade point average for
this sample of community college students.
Additionally, of the 10.8% of students who did report using the writing
center, 9.8% used it because it was made mandatory by their instructor; 14.7% used
it to get extra points in their class; 20.6% of students sought help via the writing
center because an instructor suggested it; 11.8% used the writing center services
because another student told them about it; and 43.1% claimed to have utilized
writing center services for “other” reasons. It must be noted that the “other”
68
category also may have been checked off by students if they never attended the
writing center (see Appendix C, p.5).
Qualitative Findings
Qualitative data on four open-ended questions was collected and analyzed in
order to see what themes or categories regarding help-seeking behaviors were being
projected to help answer our secondary research questions. Specifically, students
were asked if they used the writing center and about their experiences at the center
when they did seek help. The questions, provided on the questionnaires, were as
follows: If you did not seek help from the writing center, during this course, please
tell us why you did not seek help; When you attended the writing center, what type
of assistance did you expect to receive?; What type of assistance did you actually
receive from the writing center?; and What is the reason you think students do not
take advantage of the free services the writing center has to offer?
Secondary Research Question 1
What do students, who seek assistance with writing, expect from the tutoring
services provided? Students who have attended the writing center commented that
they would like to have received assistance right away. Some students said that they
do not have the time to wait for a tutor to free up therefore; because of the wait time
they do not seek help at the center more often. Other students also mentioned that
they do not have time to wait because they have to go to work. These answers
indicate that students expect immediate assistance.
69
Students also reported that they expect to be assisted by “a good, nice person,”
“someone that could help me,” “someone to help me to get a better understanding
with the assignment,” and “someone who knows the subject.” Furthermore, students
wrote that they expect “help with proof reading,” “help with grammar,” “help
writing essays.” The majority of students also responded that they expect to learn to
“be better at writing.” It appears that many of the students surveyed, have
expectations that are in line with the services the writing center offers. Still, other
students commented “I expected someone to correct my paper not just give me
advice,” or “I expected someone to give me answers to what I needed,” and “I
expected more help, but they do not even read your work, you read it. As they are
student, they do not see all your mistakes.”
These comments indicate that some of these students who seek assistance via
the writing center can be considered maladaptive help seekers. In other words, they
feel that if someone gives them the answers without themselves putting in any
mental effort on their part, then they are getting appropriate assistance. In order to
understand the answers provided for this question, it was necessary to put it into
perspective in terms of the actual services that the writing center provides. The
writing center works directly with the students through the stages of the writing
process; students soon come to realize that the center does not provide just drop-off
editing services. In other words, when a student’s expectations do not line up with
services the center provides, then we can expect for them to come away with a
negative perspective of that support system.
70
Secondary Research Question 2
What are students’ perceptions of the tutoring services provided and how do
these perceptions influence their behavior? Responses regarding students’
perceptions indicated that academic support systems, such as the writing center,
carry a negative stigma. This is supported by the fact that many students reported
that they did not seek help from the center because they were “embarrassed” to go.
One student even went as far as commenting “I am not ESL” when she answered
why she has not attended the writing center. Another student commented “I was born
in the United States.” These comments indicate that students felt that only those who
do not speak English fluently are those who need to seek help with their writing
assignments. This is in line with research which found that students avoid seeking
help due to competency concerns (Butler, 1998; Ryan, Pintrich & Midgely, 2001).
Thus this influences whether they will attend the center or not.
Additionally, even students who have sought help via the writing center may
share the same negative perspective of the center depending on the type of help they
sought. In other words, if students walked in expecting to get immediate answers for
their homework assignments (maladaptive help-seeking), they may have been
disappointed as that is not in line with how the center works. For example, some
students reported to have gone in to get “help with homework” but quickly found
that they were not given the answers to the questions. Instead, they were asked to
read their own work and then were assisted with answering their own questions.
71
Secondary Research Question 3
What are the barriers related to these students seeking help?
Results from the responses to the open-ended questions indicate that one of the most
common barriers related to help seeking is this negative perspective that academic
support systems carry. This was evident in students’ comments, when asked why
they did not seek help, or why they think other students do not seek help, some wrote
the following: students “are scared because they think they will be labeled as
dumb,” “I would be nervous.” Others reported that they would not know what to say,
or would not know how to ask for help when at the writing center. Some mentioned
“fear” or “shyness in asking for help” as keeping them from visiting the center.
Still, the number one reason for not seeking help was “I do not need it.” “I
will go when I feel I need help,” and “I will go when my teacher tells me I need to.”
Previous research on academic help-seeking has found that help-avoidance tends to
increase during adolescence (Ryan & Midgely, 1998) possibly because autonomy
also increases with age (Butler, 1998) so then seeking help would be perceived as a
dependent behavior and thus not something this population may want to be
associated with.
In line with this research, and just as important, is the large percentage of
responses which indicated that there is high self-efficacy among these students
72
taking English courses. This was evident by the comments such as “I do not attend
the writing center because I do not feel I need it,” or “I can figure it out on my own.”
Others commented, “I don’t need it for this class,” “Don’t feel it would help me,” or
“I am doing good.”
Another common response, that can be construed as a barrier was “I didn’t
know about the center until now.” Other responses included: “I do not know where
it is,” I do not know what hours they are open.” This may imply that students would
possibly utilize the center if they were made more aware of the services it provides.
Still a large percentage of students claimed that lack of time was the biggest barrier
keeping them from seeking help at the writing center. This was evident in answers
such as: “no time,” “I work,” and “I am too busy.” This correlates with the data that
shows a decreased frequency for help seeking and task value: importance which
means that the less importance placed on a task, the less the interest in doing well in
it.
Interviews
In addition to open-ended questions, students who sought help via the
writing center were interviewed. These students were given the choice to join a focus
group if they had signed in, at the writing center, for assistance with an English
assignment connected to one of the courses surveyed. Results of the responses to
these interviews were very similar to responses on the questionnaires. Students
73
interviewed also felt that many of their classmates are not attending the writing
center because “they do not know about it” and/or “they have no time.” In addition,
when asked where they think other students go when they need assistance, many
students commented that they think “they are just not seeking help,” or “students are
just failing” instead of seeking out assistance. One particular “help-seeker”
mentioned that the reason many students do not take advantage of the writing center
services is because “they are scared to ask for help, they just fail.”
Both the open-ended questions and the interviews yielded similar responses
which are consistent with previous research on help-seeking and help-avoidance
behaviors; and which indicates that although students may know they need help, they
do not seek assistance because of fear they will be perceived as lacking ability
(Ryan, Pintrich & Midgely, 2001).
Summary
Results of this study showed that there was no linear relationship between the
hours that students spent in the writing center and their grade point average. The
reason there is no relationship between grade point average and help seeking has to
do with the fact that so many students did not seek help via the writing center. The
average number of hours that students spent at the writing center came out to 1.24
hours and that it is again because almost 90% of them reported to have never used
the writing center services. In other words, help-seeking frequency was very low for
this group of students. Additionally, because there was no relation between hours
74
spent at the writing center and cumulative grade point average, controlling for it had
no effect.
Contrary to expectations, quantitative analysis indicated that the only
motivational variables which significantly predicted help seeking tendencies were
classroom performance-avoidance goal structure and task value: interest.
Specifically results demonstrate positive correlations between task value: interest and
help seeking. Results also reveal a negative correlation between writing self-efficacy
and help seeking. This finding was further supported by the qualitative data which
revealed that a large percentage of students do not attend the writing center because
they feel confident about their writing skills. Further discussion on these findings and
their recommendations are included in Chapter 5.
75
CHAPTER 5
Discussion
This research study examined motivational variables associated with
academic help seeking in community college students. This chapter will discuss
implications of this research study in relation to the findings revealed. It will offer
recommendations based on information gained from the qualitative data on
perceptions and expectations regarding the writing center. It will also address
barriers related to academic help seeking. Finally, it will provide recommendations
for future research related to community college students based on the research
results
Relationship Between Help-Seeking and Motivational Variables
Students' perceptions of their classroom’s goal structure were found to
influence help-seeking behaviors. Classroom goal structures refer to messages in the
student’s classroom environment that make certain goals salient (Urdan, Kneisel, &
Mason, 1999). Specifically, results revealed significant correlations between
students' perceptions of performance-avoidance goal structure and the total number
of hours spent at the writing center. In other words, students who wanted to avoid
looking incompetent among their peers, were students who reportedly sought help
via the writing center. Although the type of help sought may have possibly been a
strategy to get quick answers (maladaptive help seeking) without having to exert any
mental effort, nonetheless, participants reported to have utilized this academic
support.
76
This finding contradicts previous research which found that performance-
avoidance orientation can foster avoidance of seeking help when needed (e.g., Ryan
& Pintrich, 1997; Urdan, Midgley, & Anderman, 1998; Ryan & Midgley, 2001;
Karabenick, 2004; Linnenbrink, 2002; Turner et al., 2002). However it does make
sense that students who want to avoid performing more poorly than others, seek
assistance. This makes sense because, in order to avoid looking less capable than
others, they need to get the answers to the assignment and to get those answers they
need to seek for assistance from someone who will give them the answers. Still
because visits to the writing center were not as frequent for this population, no real
relationship was found to exist between help seeking and classroom goal structures
overall. Additionally, perceived classroom goal structure had no significant baring
on students’ final English course grades.
These results suggest that regardless of a student’s perceived goal structure,
there is an increased use of avoidance strategies among this population, namely
avoidance of seeking help. Nevertheless, it is plausible that student perceptions of
goal structure may indeed vary by achievement level. This is supported by the fact
that different students in the same class have very different perceptions and
interpretations of the goal structure of their classrooms. Thus further research is
needed on how students perceive and respond to goal messages.
Current research also demonstrates that not only does perceived classroom
goal structure influence help seeking; but, a student’s self-efficacy influences help
77
seeking behaviors as well. Specifically, previous research states that increased self-
efficacy leads to an increase in help seeking (Ryan & Pintrich, 1997; Ryan, Gheen,
& Midgely, 1998). Contrary to predictions and previous research, the present study
found that for this population of students, the more confident they felt about their
writing skills, the less they sought out academic support via tutoring. Thus this
finding indicates that further research is necessary in order to understand help
seeking tendencies among self-efficacious students.
Lastly, students' task value was also found to influence help-seeking
behaviors. Specifically, the quantitative data showed significant correlations
between students' task value: interest and total number of hours spent at the writing
center. These results illustrate that when students demonstrate interest on a given
task, in this case, on completing writing assignments and achieving decent grades on
English papers, they are more apt to visit the writing center for assistance. In other
words, students may seek help from the writing center more often when they begin to
value the task of writing because it interests them. Although previous research on
task value suggests that expressing interest in an academic task is what motivates
students (Pintrinch & Schunk, 1996), this study has shown that task value can be
significant in predicting actual help-seeking behaviors. When students think that a
given task is important or worthwhile, it can lead to emphasis being placed on
engagement of that task and thus to learning. Moreover, it appears that students are
willing to seek help via tutoring as long as attaining a satisfactory grade is more
valued.
78
Relationship Between Help Seeking and Achievement
Contrary to predictions and to prior research on how help seeking leads to
higher achievement (Gardner et al., 2001; Karabenick, 2003; Ryan & Pintrich,
2001), this study yielded no direct relationship between help seeking and English
course achievement. This means that, students in this sample who visited the writing
center did not actually attain a higher grade point average or higher English course
grade than those who did not seek assistance via tutoring for this semester. In other
words, although students with high writing self-efficacy demonstrated lower
frequencies of help seeking through writing center tutoring visits, their English
course grades were comparable to the grades of students who sought writing center
assistance. This simply suggests that academic achievement should not be based
solely on whether a student seeks help or not.
More importantly, these findings bring us to question the type of help that
students may be seeking when visiting academic support centers on campus. Many
times students may seek help just to avoid doing the work (maladaptive help-
seeking). In this case they are not focused on learning the process to solve their
problem; instead they may be merely seeking assistance in order to have someone
else solve their problem. Additionally, according to previous research, maladaptive
help-seeking was found to be a negative predictor of achievement (Meuschke, 2005).
Specifically, research has consistently shown that when students adopt performance-
avoidance goals and try to avoid appearing worse than others, there are many
unfavorable outcomes which can impact academic performance and intrinsic
79
motivation in a negative manner (Church, Elliot, & Gabel, 2001; Elliot & Church,
1997). On the other hand, when students seek help in order to learn and understand
the subject content (adaptive help-seeking), they are more likely to learn and achieve
at higher levels. Still, because so many students did not seek help, it was difficult to
determine whether help seeking would lead to higher grades.
Student Perceptions of Writing Center Services
The qualitative portion of this investigation revealed that, for the most part,
those who sought help via the writing center felt that the services offered did help
them learn to write better. Additionally, they commented that the writing center
tutors were “nice” and “helpful.” On the contrary, students who commented on their
negative experiences while at the writing center, complained about the long wait
time in order to see a tutor. Other negative comments came from students who were
apparently maladaptive help-seekers. This is evident in the manner in which they
mentioned that they were “made” to do their “own work.”
This finding has important implications because these negative perceptions
apparently were assumptions about the services the writing center provides. The
emphasis of this academic support system is to help students become better writers
by assisting them to overcome problems with grammar, structure and punctuation.
The center provides one-on-one tutoring which can assist students with setting up
research papers, with essay topics, and with homework assignments.
80
Student Expectations of Writing Center Services
For the most part, students expected quick assistance with very little wait
time. They also expected to be assisted by knowledgeable tutors. Lastly, students
attending the tutoring sessions expected that the academic assistance offered would
help them get “better” grades in their English courses. However, when student
expectations differ from a center’s service guidelines, then it is understandable those
students will be disappointed with their tutoring experience; thus the negative
comments. One student mentioned how they were expecting to get the answers to an
assignment and then they were asked to answer the questions themselves. Another
commented on how even after attending a tutoring session, she received a low grade
on her paper. Other students mentioned that the writing center tutors do not help
write their papers for them, they only give them ideas. These comments imply
that it is important for students to be informed not only about the center but about the
type of services that the center provides. Too many questionnaires mentioned
students’ lack of knowledge regarding the center and its services. Most importantly,
it is recommended that information about the writing center be disseminated by the
teachers to their students. Although it is not recommended for teachers to require
their students to attend, as this does not encourage self-regulated learning; it is
important that students understand that the academic support services provided are
for everyone; not just the foreign students on campus. This should ensure that
student expectations are realistic and in line with the services the center provides.
81
Barriers Related to Help-Seeking
One interesting and important insight gained from the surveys and focus
group responses, is that the most frequently reported barrier related to help seeking,
for this sample population, is students’ high self-efficacy. Contrary to previous
findings, which contend that it is the self-efficacious student who is more likely to
seek help (Ryan, Gheen, & Midgley, 1998), this current investigation found that
students with high writing self-efficacy were actually the ones who tended not to
seek help. This finding makes sense as it is understandable that students, who
believe that they are doing well in a particular subject, should not feel as if they need
to get tutoring for that subject. In other words, this study found that students who
felt they “can figure it out” on their own did not seek help because they did not see
the need to. On the other hand, there is research which suggests that at overly high
levels of self-efficacy, students who feel too confident may become lax in their
efforts, and thus impede their learning (Salomon, 1984).
Equally important to keep in mind is that many of these students may not be
seeking assistance from the writing center specifically, but: may be seeking help
from other sources. As some students responded, “I go to get help from EOP,” “my
friend who took this class last semester is helping me,” and “I ask my teacher
questions after class if I need help.” Additionally, some faculty are already
providing direct feedback for improvement on students’ writing assignments, thus
possibly giving students the impression that there is no need to carve out extra time
to attend a tutoring session. From prior research we know that instructor feedback
82
on writing drafts serves as an effective instructional method which helps students
improve their writing (Wiltse, 2000). These results point to the need for further
investigation on how instructor comments may influence self-efficacy beliefs.
In addition to high self-efficacy as the most common reason for not seeking
help, many students claimed they had “no time” to seek help via the writing center.
However, lack of time seems to be more of an excuse than a barrier. Although this
population’s demographic information and responses reveal that many have job and
family responsibilities, the question is; how important is this task/assignment to you?
According to research on task value, the time and effort put forth toward a specific
task depends on how much a student values that task. Past research proposes that an
individual’s willingness to expend the needed effort on a task is determined by their
efficacy expectations (Eccles & Wigfield, 2002).
Compatible with recent findings, this research study found task value: interest
to be predictive of help seeking behaviors. In other words, students who sought help
from the writing lab tutoring services were students who, more than likely, valued
the successful completion of a writing assignment. This was evident from the
qualitative data gathered on the question “What is the reason you think many
students do not take advantage of the free services the writing center has to offer?”
Students’ responses included the following: “because they are not interested in
getting good grades, just passing,” “they don’t care, don’t take it seriously,” “maybe
they don’t care as long as they pass the class,” and “I believe that maybe because
83
school is not a priority.” Thus, it appears that the actual barrier keeping students
from seeking assistance from the writing center may be the value they have placed
on the successful achievement of writing tasks.
Lastly, lack of knowledge regarding tutoring services was mentioned as a
barrier to help seeking. This finding implies that students may not be getting
informed about the availability of academic support services on campus. Also
mentioned is the fact that students do not know that the tutoring services are free of
charge. This can deter students from seeking help via tutoring if they think they will
be charged for that assistance. Students who were interviewed at the writing center,
reported to have been there because they found out about the services through a
teacher other than their English instructor. Responses included the following: “I was
told in my ESL classes about it,” “I heard about it through my psychology and
sociology class,” and “My child Development teacher mentioned it.” Thus it is
recommended that English instructors not only recommend the use of the writing
center on their syllabus; but, that they also take some time to encourage the use of
academic support systems by explaining about the services offered. This may help
students understand what to expect when seeking assistance.
Limitations
This research study had a few limitations that must be taken into
consideration when interpreting these results. For one, the study focused only on one
urban community college. It examined the perspectives only of students enrolled in
84
four different sections of English courses; as opposed to other students who frequent
the writing center for assistance with writing papers for other courses. Additionally,
the fact that English is a course students “must” take as a prerequisite to others, says
much about the value that will be placed on the writing tasks assigned. Another
limitation of this study is that achievement was defined by the students’ final grade
in their English course. As previous research has suggested, grades may be reflective
of other contributing factors besides just academic performance (Jussim, 1991).
Many times instructors may include promptness of tasks assigned, class
participation, and neatness as determinants of final grade scores.
Lastly but more importantly, is that the research methodology for gathering
data was based on self-reporting. Previous research has pointed out that help-seeking
does occur in various settings outside the college (Karabenick & Knapp, 1991), thus
making direct observation of help-seeking unrealistic. For this reason, the current
study relied on students’ self-report on the frequency of help seeking. Additionally,
the survey methodology employed to obtain students’ perceptions of goal structures
may have skewed findings as this self-reporting method may make assessment of
variations in student interpretations of classroom goal structures difficult.
Recommendations
Several recommendations for action and for future research stem from the
current study. Although much research has been conducted about help seeking and
its effects on achievement, very little research has suggested ways to encourage
students to seek assistance when they need it.
85
Previous research has mostly focused on recommendations that academic
institutions become more “student centered” or concerned with what students are
learning or able to do as a result of a course. More specifically, research suggests
that instructors should foster a more mastery-oriented environment which focuses on
making sure that students acquire knowledge or skill (Meuschke, 2005). In
corroboration with previous studies and based on the results revealed by this
investigation, the following practices are recommended:
1. Given the high number of responses from students who claimed they were
unaware of the writing center, first it is recommended that all instructors, including
adjunct faculty, be well informed of the services offered through the writing center
so they can then inform their students of the availability of this resource. Students
can be informed if instructors include a sentence or two about the writing center on
their syllabus. In addition, it would be beneficial for all instructors to schedule a
writing center representative to attend a class session and give a brief presentation
about their services.
2. Besides lack of knowledge, lack of faculty encouragement is another reason why
students are not attending the writing center. Many students claimed that they had
not utilized the center’s services because they felt they had no need to since their
teacher had “not told them to.” Many students also reported that they would go if
their teacher tells them to. Students should be encouraged to seek help. They also
need to be reminded when to use the resources available and to the fact that
appropriate help seeking can aid in the attainment of their academic goals.
86
3. Furthermore, based on information from observations and from students who
regularly attend the writing center, it is recommended that the writing center recruit
more tutors. This is especially important to consider based on the fact that students
had lengthy waiting times when seeking assistance. Additionally, this long waiting
period was reported to be a reason for why the center is not able to attract more
students. According to research on academic support programs in community
colleges, helping students feel recognized is an important component to take into
consideration in order to attract those who are seeking help (Finkelstein, 2002).
Observations at the center found that students were sometimes leaving after having
waited more than 30 minutes to get assistance. One student was observed to have
waited more than 1 hour before she decided to cross her name off the sign-in list. At
this time, one of the tutors who had been walking around the room for the past 10
minutes decided to assist her. Studies also demonstrate that students will feel more
comfortable in utilizing academic support centers if they feel recognized
(Hendriksen, et al., 2005; Finkelstein, 2002). During the extensive waiting period, it
was also noted that no one acknowledged the long line of students who were there to
seek help. Many students reported that this is usually the case as they did not first
call to make an appointment with a tutor.
4. Given that help seeking is an adaptive behavior strategy (Karabenick, 1998), not
only should academic support systems be fostering appropriate help seeking
behaviors but classroom instructors should also foster mastery orientation in students
in order to help improve student learning. Most importantly it is necessary that they
87
focus on those students who appear to lack academic preparation. Research
demonstrates that factors such as students’ perceptions of the classroom goal
structure may be partially to blame for fostering maladaptive learning strategies and
thus lack of student achievement.
5. From research, we know that many students do not have the skills to benefit from
their academic experiences (Murphy & Alexander, 2005) therefore as instructors we
should help students become self-regulated learners by providing them with learning
strategies to improve their academic performance. This can be achieved through
strategic teaching which includes direct instruction on goal setting as studies reveal
that students need strategies to keep them motivated to stay on task (Karabenick &
Knapp, 1991). This type of instructional strategy requires that instructors model
strategic thinking in their classrooms and demonstrate its potential. For example,
instructors can demonstrate chunking and sorting during lessons as a way of showing
students how to better memorize concepts. By utilizing and demonstrating strategic
thinking in their classrooms, teachers are helping their students become better
thinkers and problem solvers. Additionally, instructors should pair strategic thinking
with explicit instruction. Because research shows that many students have limited
strategies for getting through their education, it is necessary to integrate strategy
instruction within the classroom content in ways that are meaningful and practical.
According to research by Murphy & Alexander, (2005) students are more likely to
apply strategies they have learned in their classes when they have been able to relate
to them. Instructors can also remind students to apply their strategic knowledge. This
88
type of strategy training can be accomplished with the use of explicit checklists,
which brings us to the next suggestion.
6. Also from research, we have found that students may need to be taught a self-
evaluative strategy such as a self-report scale where they can rate their progress and
monitor it (Dembo & Seli, 2004; Schunk, 2003). The use of checklists can be used to
promote self-regulation and monitoring through self-assessment, however it is not
meant to replace guidance and assistance from an instructor. In addition to
encouraging self-evaluations, Dembo and Seli (2204) suggest that instructors help
students analyze their strengths and weaknesses; set realistic goals; plan strategies
that will aid in achieving those goals; monitor their use of these strategies; and
finally evaluate the outcomes of utilizing those strategies.
7. Students should be encouraged to uphold high yet precise self-efficacy beliefs. As
demonstrated by research, students are motivated to engage in a task and to seek help
when they believe they can accomplish the assigned task. However, in order for
learners to maintain accurate self-efficacy, positive feedback should not be provided
when it is not deserved. Moreover, maintaining some doubts about whether one will
succeed can activate effort and lead to better use of strategies than will feeling overly
confident.
8. Instructors can focus on effort and strategy use rather than failure. They can also
reinforce self-motivating statements about students’ strategy use, especially if
students are utilizing academic support systems such as the writing center. These
89
experiences may enhance students’ actual engagement in the assigned task and their
motivation to continue to write (Schunk, 2003).
To the extent that these methods are employed, academic institutions will encourage
motivation for help seeking and continued learning leading to more self-regulated
learners and thus increased academic achievement among their students.
90
References
Alexitch, L.R. (2002). The role of help-seeking attitudes and tendencies in
students’ preferences for academic advising. Journal of College Student
Development, 43, 5-19.
Ames, C. (1992). Classrooms: goals, structures, and student motivation. Journal of
Educational Psychology, 84(3), 261-271.
Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral
change. Psychological Review, 82, 191-215.
Bandura, A. & Locke, E. (2003). Negative self -efficacy and goal effects revisited.
Journal of Applied Psychology 88 (1), 87-99.
Bembenutty, H. (2002). Self-Regulation of learning and academic delay of
gratification: Individual differences among college students. Paper
presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research
Association, New Orleans, L.A., April 1-5, 2002. Eric Digest. ED 468 704
www.eric.ed.gov
Blumenfeld, P. C. (1992). Classroom learning and motivation: Clarifying and
expanding goal theory. Journal of Educational Psychology, 84 (3),
272-281.
Church, M. A, Elliott, A. J., & Gable, S. L. (2001). Perceptions of classroom
environment, achievement goals, and achievement outcomes. Journal of
Educational Psychology, 93 (1), 43-54.
Community College Survey of Student Engagement (2006). Data Notes: Keeping
informed about achieving the dream data. July/August, Vol.1 (6)
Available:http://www.ccsse.org/publications/CCSSE_reportfinal2006.pdf.
91
Condly, S.J. (1999). Motivation to learn to succeed: A path analysis of the cane
model of cognitive motivation. Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation.
University of Southern California.
Dembo, M., & Seli, H. (2004). Students’ resistance to change in learning strategies
courses. Journal of Developmental Education, 27(3), 1-11.
Dillion, P., Patthey-Chavez, G., Thomas-Spiegel, J. (2000). Instructor attitudes,
curriculum content and student success: A multi-layered, multi-method
exploration of developmental instruction. Eric Digest. ED 462 984
www.eric.ed.gov.
Eccles, A., & Wigfield, J.S., (2002). Motivational beliefs, values, and goals.
Annual Reviews Psychology, 53:109-32.
Finkelstein, J. A. (2002). Maximizing retention for at-risk freshman: The Bronx
community college model. Institutional Development and Technology Eric
Digest , ED 469 657 www.eric.ed.gov
Gribbons, B.C., & Dixon, P.S. (2001). College of the Canyons
tutoring/learning/computer center retention and success. Eric Digest.
ED 473 879. www.eric.ed.gov.
Guthrie, J., Van Meter, P.., McCann, A. D. Wigfield, A., Bennett, L.,
Poundstone, C.C., Rice, M. E., Faibisch, F.M., Hunt, B., Mitchell, A. M.
(1996). Growth of literacy engagement: changes in motivations and
strategies during concept oriented reading instruction. Reading Research
Quarterly, 31, 306-325.
Hawley, T.H., & Harris, T.A. (2005) Student characteristics related to
persistence for first-year community college students. Journal of College
Student Retention, 7 (1-2) 117-142.
92
Hendriksen, S.I., Yang, L. Love, B., & Hall, M.C. (2005). Assessing academic
support: The effects of tutoring on student learning outcomes. Journal of
College Reading and Learning, 35(2).
Jussim, L. (1991). Grades may reflect more than performance: Comment on
Wentzel, (1989), Journal of Educational Psychology, 83, 153-155.
Karabenick, S. (1987). Computer conferencing: Its impact on academic help-
seeking. Paper presented at a Symposium on Computer Conferencing and
Allied Technologies, Ontario Canada.
Karabenick, S. (1998 ). Strategic help seeking; implications for learning and
teaching. Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc.
Publishers.
Karabenick, S. (2004). Perceived achievement goal structure and college student
help seeking. Journal of Educational Psychology, 96(3), 569-581.
Karabenick, S. & Knapp, J. R. (1980). Help seeking and the need for academic
assistance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80, 406-408.
Karabenick, S. & Knapp, J. R. (1991). Relationship of academic help seeking to
the use of learning strategies and other instrumental achievement behavior
in college students. Journal of Educational Psychology, 83, (2), 221-230.
Karabenick, S. (2001). Seeking help in large college classes: Who, why, and from
whom? Paper Presented at the Annual Meeting of the American
Educational Research Association, Seattle, WA.
Karabenick, S. (2003). Seeking help in large college classes: A person-centered
approach. Contemporary Educational Psychology. 28, 37-58.
93
Karabenick, S. A. & Newman, R.S. (2006). Help seeking in academic settings:
Goals, groups, and contexts. Mahwah, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum
Associates, Inc., Publishers.
Linnenbrink, E.A. & Pintrich, P.R. (2003). The role of self-efficacy beliefs in
student engagement and learning in the classroom. Reading and Writing
Quarterly 19: 119-137.
McCabe, R. H. (2000). No one to waste: A report to public decision-makers
and community college leaders. Washington, D. C. Community College
Press.
Meuschke, D. M. (2005). The relationship between goal orientation, help- seeking,
math self-efficacy and mathematics achievement in a community
college. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Southern
California.
Midgley, C., Kaplan, A., Middleton, M., Maehr, M. L., Urdan, T. Anderman, L.
H.,Anderman, E., Roeser, R. (1998). The development and validation of
scales assessing students' achievement goal orientations. Contemporary
Educational Psychology, 23, 113-131.
Murphy, P. K., Alexander, P. A. (2006) Understanding how students learn: A
guide for instructional leaders. Thousand Oaks, California, Corwin
Press-Sage Publications Company.
Nelson-Le Gall, S. & Jones, (1990), Cognitive-Motivational influences on
the task-related help-seeking behavior of black children. Child
Development, 61 (2) 581-589.
(NCES) National Center for Education Statistics, (1995). From remediation to
acceleration, raising the bar in developmental education, Digest of Education
Statistics, U. S. Department of Education.
94
Noel-Levitz, Inc. (2006). National freshman attitudes report. Iowa City, Iowa;
Denver, Colorado; Braintree, Massachusetts. www.noellevitz.com.
Pajares, F. (1996). Self-Efficacy Beliefs in academic settings. Review of
Educational Research. 66 (4) 543-578.
Pajares, F. (2003). Self-Efficacy beliefs, motivation, and achievement in writing: A
review of the literature. Reading and Writing Quarterly, 19: 139-158.
Pajares, F., Hartley, J., & Valiante, G. (2001). Response format in writing self-
efficacy assessment: greater discrimination increases prediction.
Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development, 33, 214-221.
Pajares, F., Johnson, M.J. & Usher, E.L.(2007) Sources of writing self-efficacy
beliefs of elementary, middle, and high school students. (manuscript in
review), Emory University.
Pajares, F., & Johnson, M. J. (1994). Confidence and competence in writing:
The role of writing self-efficacy, outcome expectancy, and apprehension.
Research in the Teaching of English, 28, 313-331.
Pajares, F., Miller, M. D., & Johnson, M. J. (1999). Gender differences in writing
self-beliefs of elementary school students. Journal of Educational
Psychology, 91, 50-61.
Pajares, F., & Valiante, G. (1997). The predictive and mediation role of the
writing self-efficacy beliefs of upper elementary students. Journal of
Educational Research, 90, 353-360.
Patthey-Chavez, G. G., Thomas- Spiegel, J., & Dillon, P. (1998). Tracking
outcomes for community college students with different writing
instruction histories. Paper presented at the California Association for
Institutional Research, San Diego, CA.
95
Perin, D. (2002). Literacy education after high school. Eric Digest. ED 467 689.
www.eric.ed.gov
Perin, D. & Charron, K. (2003). Trends in community college assessment and
placement approaches: Implications for educational policy. Paper Presented
at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association,
Chicago, IL.
Perin, D. (2004). Remediation beyond developmental education: The use of
learning assistance centers to increase academic preparedness in
community colleges. Community College Journal of Research and
Practice, 28: 559-582.
Perin, D. (2005). Institutional decision-making for increasing academic
preparedness in community colleges. In New Directions for
Community Colleges, Wiley Periodicals, Inc., No.129, Ch.3,
p.27-38.
Printrich, P. R. & Schunk, D. H. (2002). Motivation in education: Theory,
research, and applications (2
nd
Ed.). Upper Saddle River, New Jersey;
Columbus, Ohio: Merrill Prentice-Hall.
Printrich, P. R. & DeGroot, E.V. (1990). Motivational and self regulated learning
components of classroom academic performance, Journal of Educational
Psychology, 82, 33-40.
Pizzolato, E. J. (2006). Achieving college student possible selves: Navigating the
space between commitment and achievement of long-term identity goals.
Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology, 12 (1), 57-69.
Robinson, D.R., Schofield, J.W., & Steers-Wentzell, K.L. (2005). Peer and
cross-age tutoring in math: Outcomes and their design implications.
Educational Psychology Review, 17 (4).
96
Ross, M.E., Shannon, D.M., Salisbury-Glennon, J.D., & Guarino, A. (2002).
The patterns of adaptive learning survey: a comparison across grade levels.
Educational and Psychological Measurement, 62(3), 483-497.
Ryan, M. A., Gheen, M. H., Midgley, C. (1998) Why do some students avoid
asking for help? An examination of the interplay among students' academic
efficacy, teachers' social-emotional role, and the classroom goal structure.
Journal of Educational Psychology, 90(3), 528-535.
Schunk, D. H. (2003). Self-Efficacy for reading and writing: Influence of modeling,
goal setting, and self-evaluation. Reading and Writing Quarterly, 19:
159-172.
Sheu, H. & Sedlacek, W. E. (2002) Helping-Seeking attitudes and coping strategies
among college students by race. Paper presented at the Annual Conference
of the American Psychological Association, Chicago, IL.
Solorzano, D. G.,Villalpando, O., & Oseguera, L. (2005). Educational inequities
and Latina/o undergraduate students in the United States: A critical race
analysis of their educational progress. Journal of Hispanic Higher Education,
Vol. 4 (3).
Trombley, C., Reed, R., Martinez, A., Manzano, F., Soto, M. & Bauman, G.
(2002). Los Angeles Valley College Scorecard Project. A report compiled
with the assistance of the USC Center for Urban Education and presented to
the president of Los Angeles Valley College, Van Nuys, Ca.
Urdan, T., & Midgley, C. (2003). Changes in the perceived classroom goal
structure and patterns of adaptive learning during early adolescence.
Contemporary Educational Psychology, 28, 524-551.
Urdan, T., Midgley, C., & Anderman, E.M. (1998). The role of classroom goal
structure in students’ use of self-handicapping. American Educational
Research Journal, 35, 101-122.
97
Walker, B. J. (2003). The Cultivation of student self-efficacy in reading and
writing. Reading and Writing Quarterly, 19: 173-187.
Wisseman, J., Bulakowski, C. Jumisko, M. K. (1997). Using research to evaluate
developmental education programs and policy, in New directions for
community colleges. Grayslake, Illinois, Jossey.-Bass Publishers.
Wigfield, A., & Eccles, J.S., (2000). Expectancy-Value theory of achievement
motivation. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25, 68-81.
Wright, R. R. (2003). Real men don’t ask for directions: Male student attitudes
toward peer tutoring. Journal of College Reading and Learning 34 (1).
Xu, Y., Hartman, S., Uribe, G., & Mencke, R. (2001). The effects of peer tutoring
on undergraduate students' final examination scores in mathematics.
Journal of College Reading and Learning, 32 (1).
Zimmerman, B (2000). Self-Efficacy: An essential motive to learn.
Contemporary Educational Psychology 25, 82-91.
98
Appendix A
Recruitment Speech
Hello, my name is Leonor Vazquez and I am a doctoral candidate in the Rossier
School of Education at the University of Southern California. USC and Los Angeles
Valley College (LAVC) are working together to learn more about LAVC student
success. I would like to invite you to participate in a study I am conducting as part of
a requirement for my doctoral program at USC. As part of my study, I am
conducting a survey of how students learn. Between 250 and 300 participants from
English-033, English-021, English-028, and English-101, will be invited to
participate in this study. You were selected as a possible participant because you
are enrolled in an English course identified for this study. Your participation is
voluntary. The information you provide is extremely important in helping students
like yourself achieve their educational goals. We thank you in advance for sharing
your perceptions and valuable input.
This study is interested in the effectiveness of writing Labs, which require your
permission to access this information. This information is routinely accessed by the
Office of Research and Planning at Valley College and used to inform program
decisions at the college. This type of analysis is normal and is part of the ongoing
analyses performed at Valley College. But for the purpose of this study, your Valley
College ID will only be viewed by the principal investigator administering this
survey. Responses will be held in the strictest professional confidence. Instructors
will not have access to the information you provide on this survey and your answers
will not influence the grade you receive in tis course. You may still participate even
if you do not grant permission for your course grade, demographic data, writing
center attendance, or final exam score to be viewed as part of this study.
The survey will take between 20-30 minutes to complete. There are 53 items on the
survey. If you would be willing to participate in this study, I will need to obtain your
written permission on the informed consent form that you will be receiving. Please
read it over carefully and sign the last page of the form. Your Los Angeles Valley
College ID is needed in order to view other data necessary for this study (course
grade, writing lab attendance, and demographics). If you do not know your student
ID, your instructor can provide it to you. Once you have completed your survey and
signed your informed consent form, please place both in the box located at the back
of the room. If you choose not to participate, please place your survey and informed
consent form in the same box located at the back of the room. Are there any
questions?
Thank you
99
Apendix B
Informed Consent
University of Southern California
Rossier School of Education
Waite Phillips Hall 600 C
Los Angeles, CA 90089-4036
INFORMED CONSENT FOR NON-MEDICAL RESEARCH
*************************************************************
CONSENT TO PARTICIPATE IN RESEARCH
Community College Students and Academic Support Systems
USC and Los Angeles Valley College (LAVC) are working together to learn more
about LAVC student success. You are being invited to participate in a research study
conducted by Leonor Vazquez, M.A., (Principal Investigator) doctoral candidate and
Dr. Myron H. Dembo, Ph.D. (Faculty Advisor) from the Rossier School of Education at
the University of Southern California because you are a student in an English class on
this college campus. The results of this study will be contributed to a dissertation. A
total of between 250 and 300 subjects will be selected from various English courses to
participate. Your participation is voluntary. You should read the information below,
and ask questions about anything you do not understand, before deciding whether or not
to participate.
PURPOSE OF THE STUDY
The purpose of this study is to better understand how students learn in their English
courses, their help-seeking patterns, and the type of learning environments, which best
support learning in English at a community college.
This will be accomplished by assessing students’ perceptions of how they learn (i.e.,
writing self-efficacy), as well as perceptions of the learning environment and help
sought for the coursework (help-seeking) during the semester in relation to final course
grades and writing Lab attendance.
100
PROCEDURES
If you volunteer to participate in this study, we would ask you to do the following
things:
You will be asked to complete a survey in class, which asks 53 questions about how
you approach learning in this class. This survey will take approximately 20-30 minutes
to complete in class. For example, you will be asked to rate your opinion with items 1 –
21 using the following scale “Not true at all”, “Somewhat true”, and “Very true.” A
sample survey item asks you to rate your opinion with the following statement: “In our
class, really understanding the material is the main goal.” Another example on the
survey asks you to rate your opinion with the following statement: “In our class, getting
the right answers is very important.”
This study will also be looking at grade distributions in relation to the surveys,
demographic data (e.g., gender), and Writing Lab attendance, which require your
permission to access. You will be asked to write your student ID number on surveys
and at the end of this form. For the purpose of this study, the data and your Los
Angeles Valley College ID number will only be viewed by the principal investigator
and co-principal investigator administering this study. Responses will be held in the
strictest professional confidence. Instructors will not have access to the information
you provide on this survey and your answers will not influence the grade you receive in
this course.
POTENTIAL RISKS AND DISCOMFORTS
This study does not pose any identifiable risks beyond minor discomfort. You may be
uncomfortable due to spending time away from your studies, from your final grade
being reviewed, your Writing Lab attendance being reviewed, or concerned with the
confidentiality of your answers on the survey. If you feel discomfort you may stop and
withdraw from the study at any time. Confidentiality will be protected at all times
during data collection, analysis, and presentation of the written research report.
POTENTIAL BENEFITS TO SUBJECTS AND/OR TO SOCIETY
There will be no direct benefit to you for participating in this study. However, the
information from this study will be used to help inform decisions and improve
instruction and services for students.
PAYMENT/COMPENSATION FOR PARTICIPATION
There is no cash payment or compensation for participating in this study.
CONFIDENTIALITY
Any information that is obtained in connection with this study and that can be identified
with you will remain confidential and will be disclosed only with your permission or as
required by law.
101
Any personal information and data collected for the study will be coded to ensure
privacy. The data will be stored for three years in a locked file cabinet of the principal
investigator for three years after the completion of the dissertation, at which time the
information will be destroyed. Course instructors will not have access to the
information you provide on this survey and your answers will not influence the grade
you receive in this course. Responses will be held in the strictest professional
confidence and will only be viewed by the principal investigator and co-principal
investigator. The informed consent forms with your Los Angeles Valley College ID
and name will be stored separately from your completed surveys so that no connection
can be made to them. In addition, the portion of the survey and the scantron that
contains your student ID will be cut out and destroyed after data transcription, so the
information will be unidentifiable.
When the results of the research are published or discussed in conferences, no
information will be included that would reveal your identity.
PARTICIPATION AND WITHDRAWAL
You can choose whether to be in this study or not. If you volunteer to be in this study,
you may withdraw at any time without consequences of any kind. You may also refuse
to answer any questions you don’t want to answer and still remain in the study. The
investigator may withdraw you from this research if circumstances arise which warrant
doing so.
IDENTIFICATION OF INVESTIGATORS
If you have any questions or concerns about the research, please feel free to contact the
Principal Investigator, Leonor Vazquez via mail at levazque@usc.edu; or phone at
(626) 824-7043. You may also contact the Co-Principal Investigator Dr. Myron H.
Dembo via mail at WPH 600C, Los Angeles, CA 90089-4036 email at
dembo@usc.edu; or phone at (213) 740-2364.
RIGHTS OF RESEARCH SUBJECTS
You may withdraw your consent at any time and discontinue participation without
penalty. You are not waiving any legal claims, rights or remedies because of your
participation in this research study. If you have questions regarding your rights as a
research subject, contact the University Park IRB, Office of the Vice Provost for
Research, Stonier Hall, Room 224a, Los Angeles, CA 90089-1146, (213) 821-5272 or
upirb@usc.edu.
102
SIGNATURE OF RESEARCH SUBJECT
I have read the information provided above. I have been given a chance to ask
questions. My questions have been answered to my satisfaction, and I agree to
participate in this study. I have been given a copy of this form to keep.
I agree to have my demographic information accessed.
I do not agree to have my demographic information accessed.
I agree to have my grade for this English course accessed.
I do not agree to have my grade for this English course accessed
I agree to have my information regarding attendance at the Writing lab
accessed
I do not agree to have my information regarding attendance at the Writing lab
accessed
Student ID # (including all leading zeros, if applicable)
____________________________________________
_________
Name of Participant
Signature of Participant Date
103
SIGNATURE OF INVESTIGATOR
I have explained the research to the subject, and answered all of his/her questions. I
believe that he/she understands the information described in this document and freely
consents to participate.
Name of Investigator
Signature of Investigator Date (must be the same
as subject’s)
104
Appendix C
Student ID #:_________________
Learning in English Survey
Dear Student:
Your input is very valuable to this study. When responding to the following survey
items 1.-Please think about your experience with coursework in this class.
2. Make marks on the scantron with the #2 pencil provided
3.When you are finished, please turn in your surveys and signed consent form in the
box provided at the back of the room.
Please use the scale below to respond to the following statements. If you think the
statement is Very True of you, bubble in #5 on your scantron; if a statement is Not At
All True of you, bubble #1. If the statement is more or less true of you, find the
number between 1 and 5 that best describes you.
1 2 3 4 5
Not At All True Somewhat true Very True
1. In our class, learning new ideas and concepts is very important
2. In our class, it is important to understand the work, not just memorize it.
3. In our class, really understanding the material is the main goal.
4. In our class, it is important to get high scores on tests.
5. In our class, getting right answers is very important.
6. In our class, getting good grades is the main goal.
7. In our class, it is important not to look dumb.
8. In our class, one of the main goals is to avoid looking like you can’t do the
work.
9. In our class, it is important not to do worse than other students.
105
10. When I don’t understand my English work in this class, I often guess
instead of asking someone for help.
11. If I don’t understand something in my English class, I usually want someone to
explain it to me and not just give me the answer.
12. I don’t ask questions in this class, even when I don’t understand the work.
1 2 3 4 5
Not At All True Somewhat true Very True
13. When I don’t understand how to do something in this class, I usually want
someone to give me examples of similar problems we have done.
14. If there is something I don’t understand in this class, I’d prefer
someone give me hints or clues rather than the answer.
15. When I don’t understand my work in this class, I often put down
any answer rather than ask for help.
16. When I don’t understand my work in this class, I usually want someone to show
me the steps involved in answering the questions.
17. I usually don’t ask for help with my work in this class, even if the
work is too hard to do on my own.
18. If I need help with my English work in this class, I ask questions so the person
will provide enough information so I can figure it out myself.
19. If my English work is too hard for me, I just don’t do it rather than ask for help.
20. If I get stuck on a difficult English problem, I ask someone for just enough help
so that I can keep working through it.
21. If I need help to do part of my work in this class, I skip it.
106
Directions: Please use the scale below to respond to the following statements.
22. In general, I find learning the subject matter of this course ________.
1 2 3 4 5
very boring boring neutral interesting very interesting
23. I feel that, to me, understanding the subject matter of this course is important.
1 2 3 4 5
strongly disagree neutral agree strongly agree disagree
Directions: Please use the scale below to respond to the following statements.
1 2 3 4 5
not at all not much neutral somewhat very much
24. How important is it to you to get a good grade in this course?
25. Is the amount of work it takes to do well in this course worthwhile to you?
26. How much do you like learning the subject matter of this course?
27. How interesting do you consider the subject matter of this course to be?
28. How useful is learning the course content for what you want to do after you
graduate and go to work?
29. How useful is what you learn in this course for your daily life outside the school?
30. How useful is the information learned from this course for your other classes?
107
Directions: On a scale from 1 (no chance) to 10 (completely certain), how sure are
you that you can perform each of the writing skills below? Remember that you may use
any number between 1 and 10.
31. Correctly spell all words in a one page story or composition.
32. Correctly punctuate a one page story or composition.
33. Correctly use all parts of speech in a written composition.
34. Write simple sentences with good grammar.
35. Correctly use singulars and plurals, verb tenses, prefixes, and suffixes.
36. Write a strong paragraph that has a good topic sentence or main idea.
37. Structure paragraphs to support ideas in the topic sentences.
38. End paragraphs with proper conclusions.
39. Write a well-organized and well-sequenced paper that has a good introduction,
body, and conclusion.
40.Get ideas across in a clear manner by staying focused without getting off the topic.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
No Completely
Chance Certain
108
Directions: Using the scale from 1 (not confident at all) to 5 (completely confident),
answer the questions below.
41. Using the scale above, how confident are you that you will pass
English at the end of this term?
42. How confident are you that you will pass language arts at the end of this
term with a grade better than a D?
43. How confident are you that you will get a grade better than a C?
44. How confident are you that you will get a grade better than a B?
45. How confident are you that you will get an A?
46. Have you ever used the writing center for tutoring with your writing?
(This would include enrollment in English 67, 68 or 69 which are the
Writing Center tutoring lab courses.)
1. Yes
2. No
47. If you have ever used the writing center for tutoring services, please
tell us what the reason was : (mark only one response)
1. It was mandatory for the class, (i.e. instructor required it and I
may or may not have gotten class points.
2. To get extra credit points in the course.
3. My instructor suggested it to me
4. Another student told me about it
5. Other (specify) ______________________________________________
1 2 3 4 5
Not confident at all Confident Completely Confident
109
Directions: Please answer these next questions directly on this sheet of paper
48. If you did not seek any help from the writing center, during this course, please
tell us why you did not seek help.
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
___________ _______________________________________________________________
49. When you attended the writing center what type of assistance did you expect to
receive?
__________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________
50. What type of assistance did you actually receive from the writing center?
__________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________
51. What is the reason you think many students do not take advantage of the free
services the writing center has to offer?
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________________
110
52. When you have sought help from the Writing Center, to what degree have
your expectations been met?
53. What is your age?
1. Under 18 years old
2. Over 18 years old
Thank you for your time and attention to this important survey.
Please place your completed survey and signed consent form in the box at the back of the room.
If you have any questions regarding the questions and/ or content of this survey, please contact
Leonor Vazquez at (626) 842-7043 or Dr. Myron Dembo at (213) 740-2364.
1 2 3 4 5
not at all not much Neutral Somewhat very much
111
Appendix D
Lab Recruitment Speech
Hello, my name is Leonor Vazquez and I am a doctoral candidate in the Rossier School
of Education at the University of Southern California. USC and Los Angeles Valley
College (LAVC) are working together to learn more about LAVC student success. I
would like to invite you to participate in a study I am conducting as part of a requirement
for my doctoral program at USC. As part of my study, I am conducting a focus group
interview about students’ perceptions regarding the Writing Center. Fifteen participants
from any English course will be invited to participate in this study. You were selected as
a possible participant because you are enrolled in an English course and are attending the
Writing Center. Your participation is voluntary. The information you provide is
extremely important in helping students like yourself achieve their educational goals. We
thank you in advance for sharing your perceptions and valuable input.
This study is interested in the effectiveness of Writing Labs, which require your
permission to access this information. This information is routinely accessed by the
Office of Research and Planning at Valley College and used to inform program decisions
at the college. This type of analysis is normal and is part of the ongoing analyses
performed at Valley College. But for the purpose of this study, your Valley College ID
will only be viewed by the principal investigator administering this survey. Responses
will be held in the strictest professional confidence. Instructors will not have access to
the information you provide and your answers will not influence the grade you receive in
your course.
The interview will take between 30-40 minutes to complete. There are 5-8 questions.
If you would be willing to participate in this study, I will need to obtain your written
permission on the informed consent form that you will be receiving. Please read it over
carefully and sign the last page of the form, if you are willing to participate. Your Los
Angeles Valley College ID is needed in order to view other data needed for this study
(course grade, Writing lab attendance, and demographics). If you do not know your
student ID, I can provide it for you. The course roster obtained for this study by the
Associate Dean, Research and Planning, has your student ID.
Are there any questions regarding this study or anything I have said?
Thank you.
112
Appendix E
Writing Center Informed Consent
University of Southern California
Rossier School of Education
Waite Phillips Hall 600 C
Los Angeles, CA 90089-4036
INFORMED CONSENT FOR NON-MEDICAL RESEARCH
******************************************************************
CONSENT TO PARTICIPATE IN RESEARCH
Community College Students and Academic Support Systems
USC and Los Angeles Valley College (LAVC) are working together to learn more about
LAVC student success. You are invited to participate in a research study conducted by
Dr. Myron H. Dembo, PhD (Faculty Advisor) and Leonor Vazquez, M.A., Principal
Investigator and doctoral candidate from the Rossier School of Education at the
University of Southern California because you are a student attending the Writing Center
on this college campus. The results of this study will be contributed to a dissertation.
You were selected as a possible participant in this study because you are attending the
Writing Center to seek assistance with an English course. A total of 15 students will be
invited to participate. Your participation is voluntary. You should read the information
below, and ask questions about anything you do not understand, before deciding whether
or not to participate.
PURPOSE OF THE STUDY
The purpose of this study is to better understand how students learn in their English
courses, their help-seeking patterns, and the type of learning environments, which best
support learning in English at a community college.
This will be accomplished by assessing students’ perceptions of how they learn (i.e.,
writing self-efficacy), as well as perception of the learning environment (i.e., perceived
classroom goal orientation), and help sought for the coursework (help-seeking) during the
semester in relation to final course grades and Writing Center attendance.
PROCEDURES
If you volunteer to participate in this study, we would ask you to do the following things:
113
You will be asked to participate in a focus group interview which may be audio or
videotaped. You and 4 other students will be asked 5-8 questions about your perceptions
of the Writing Center. This interview will take approximately 30-40 minutes. This study
will also be looking at grade distributions in relation to Writing Center attendance, which
requires your permission to access your course grade. You will be asked to write your
student ID number at the end of this form. For the purpose of this study the data and your
Los Angeles Valley College ID number will only be viewed by the principal investigator
and co-principal investigator administering this study. Responses will be held in the
strictest professional confidence. Instructors will not have access to the information you
provide on this interview and your answers will not influence the grade you receive in
your English course.
POTENTIAL RISKS AND DISCOMFORTS
This study does not pose any identifiable risks beyond minor discomfort. You may be
uncomfortable due to spending time away from your studies, from your final grade being
reviewed, your Writing Center attendance being reviewed, concerned with the
confidentiality of your answers during the interview or concerned about being audio or
videotaped. If you feel discomfort you may stop and withdraw from the study at any
time. Confidentiality will be protected at all times during data collection, analysis, and
presentation of the written research report.
POTENTIAL BENEFITS TO SUBJECTS AND/OR TO SOCIETY
There will be no direct benefit to you for participating in this study. However, the
information from this study will be used to help inform decisions and improve instruction
and services for students.
PAYMENT/COMPENSATION FOR PARTICIPATION
There is no cash payment or compensation for participating in this study.
CONFIDENTIALITY
Any information that is obtained in connection with this study and that can be identified
with you will remain confidential and will be disclosed only with your permission or as
required by law.
Any personal information and data collected for the study will be stored for three years in
a locked file cabinet of the principal investigator for three years after the completion of
the dissertation, at which time the information will be destroyed. Course instructors will
not have access to the information you provide during this focus group and your answers
will not influence the grade you receive in your course. Responses will be held in the
strictest professional confidence and will only be viewed by the principal investigator and
co-principal investigator. When the results of the research are published or discussed in
conferences, no information will be included that would reveal your identity.
114
PARTICIPATION AND WITHDRAWAL
You can choose whether to be in this study or not. If you volunteer to be in this study,
you may withdraw at any time without consequences of any kind. You may also refuse
to answer any questions you don’t want to answer and still remain in the study. The
investigator may withdraw you from this research if circumstances arise which warrant
doing so.
IDENTIFICATION OF INVESTIGATORS
If you have any questions or concerns about the research, please feel free to contact the
Principal Investigator, Leonor Vazquez via email at levazque@usc.edu; or phone at (626)
824-7043. You may also contact the Co-Principal investigator Dr. Myron H. Dembo via
mail at WPH 600C, Los Angeles, CA 90089-4036; email at dembo@usc.edu; or phone at
(213) 740-2364.
RIGHTS OF RESEARCH SUBJECTS
You may withdraw your consent at any time and discontinue participation without
penalty. You are not waiving any legal claims, rights or remedies because of your
participation in this research study. If you have questions regarding your rights as a
research participant, contact the University Park IRB, Office of the Vice Provost for
Research, Stonier Hall, Room 224a, Los Angeles, CA 90089-1146, (213) 821-5272 or
upirb@usc.edu.
115
SIGNATURE OF RESEARCH SUBJECT
I have read the information provided above. I have been given a chance to ask questions.
My questions have been answered to my satisfaction, and I agree to participate in this
study. I have been given a copy of this form to keep.
I agree to have my demographic information accessed.
I do not agree to have my demographic information accessed.
I agree to have my grade for my English course accessed.
I do not agree to have my grade for my English course accessed.
I agree to have my information regarding attendance at the Writing Center
accessed.
I do not agree to have my information regarding attendance at the
Writing Center accessed.
I agree to be audio or videotaped as part of the focus group.
I do not agree to be audio or videotaped as part of the focus group.
Student ID # ____________________________________________
_________
Name of Participant
Signature of Participant Date
116
SIGNATURE OF INVESTIGATOR
I have explained the research to the participant, and answered all of his/her questions. I
believe that he/she understands the information described in this document and freely
consents to participate.
Name of Investigator
Signature of Investigator Date (must be the
same as subject’s)
117
Appendix F
Writing Center Interview Questions
1. How did you find out and become involved with the Writing Center?
2. What characteristics do you think good tutors should possess?
3. What do you think of the writing center (i.e.- environment, staff)?
4. Do you feel the writing center contributes to student learning?
5. To what extent do you feel tutoring provided by the writing center helps students like
yourself?
6. What do you expect to gain from utilizing the writing center services?
7. What is the reason you think many students do not take advantage of the free
services that the writing center has to offer?
8. Where do you think other students go when they need assistance with their
writing?
9. How do you think the writing center can attract more students?
10. Are there any additional comments you would like to make regarding your
experience?
Abstract (if available)
Linked assets
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
Conceptually similar
PDF
What motivational factors influence community college students' tendency to seek help through math tutoring?
PDF
Do the perceptions of the usefulness of academic support services influence ethnically diverse students' help-seeking attitudes and behaviors?
PDF
Psychosociocultural predictors of help seeking among Latino community college students
PDF
What factors influence student persistence in the community college setting?
PDF
Factors influencing nursing students' motivation to succeed
PDF
Students in basic skills mathematics: perceptions and experiences of community college progress and help-seeking
PDF
Student academic self‐efficacy, help seeking and goal orientation beliefs and behaviors in distance education and on-campus community college sociology courses
PDF
Problem-based learning and its influence on college preparation knowledge, motivation, & self-efficacy in high school students
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
Self-perceptions of student identity in community college students with disabilities
PDF
In pursuit of higher education: external and internal factors influencing the decision to attend college among Cambodian-American students
PDF
The examination of academic self-regulation, academic help-seeking, academic self-efficacy, and student satisfaction of higher education students taking on-campus and online course formats
PDF
Factors influencing student achievement in advanced placement and honors
PDF
Help, I need somebody: an examination of the role of model minority myth and goal orientations in Asian American college students' academic help-seeking practices
PDF
Relationships between a community college student’s sense of belonging and student services engagement with completion of transfer gateway courses and persistence
PDF
First-generation Armenian American community college students' perception of events affecting their identity development
PDF
Beyond the board room: how personal experiences and environments shape community college trustee learning
PDF
The effect of reading self-efficacy, expectancy-value, and metacognitive self-regulation on the achievement and persistence of community college students enrolled in basic skills reading courses
PDF
Organizational leadership and institutional factors related to the implementation of online educational programming in California community colleges
Asset Metadata
Creator
Vazquez, Leonor
(author)
Core Title
What motivational factors influence community college students' tendency to seek help from the writing center?
School
Rossier School of Education
Degree
Doctor of Education
Degree Program
Education
Publication Date
08/04/2008
Defense Date
05/27/2008
Publisher
University of Southern California
(original),
University of Southern California. Libraries
(digital)
Tag
community college writing centers,help seeking,motivational factors,OAI-PMH Harvest
Language
English
Contributor
Electronically uploaded by the author
(provenance)
Advisor
Dembo, Myron H. (
committee chair
), Clark, Ginger (
committee member
), diCesare, Deborah (
committee member
)
Creator Email
levazque@sbcglobal.net,levazque@usc.edu
Permanent Link (DOI)
https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-m1538
Unique identifier
UC1104682
Identifier
etd-Vazquez-2131 (filename),usctheses-m40 (legacy collection record id),usctheses-c127-105213 (legacy record id),usctheses-m1538 (legacy record id)
Legacy Identifier
etd-Vazquez-2131.pdf
Dmrecord
105213
Document Type
Dissertation
Rights
Vazquez, Leonor
Type
texts
Source
University of Southern California
(contributing entity),
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
(collection)
Repository Name
Libraries, University of Southern California
Repository Location
Los Angeles, California
Repository Email
cisadmin@lib.usc.edu
Tags
community college writing centers
help seeking
motivational factors