Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
Institutions
LSH@usc.edu
This paper includes analyses from the Transfer and Retention of Urban Community
College Students (TRUCCS). TRUCCS is currently funded by the Lumina Foundation
Grant #1415. Originally, TRUCCS was supported by the Field Initiated Studies Program
of the U.S. Department of Education, Office of Institutional Research and Improvement
Grant No. R305T000154.
Square Pegs: Adult Students and Their “Fit” In Postsecondary Institutions
Just like the proverbial “square peg” that meets resistance when forced to go through a
round hole, adult students often struggle while progressing through systems of higher education
that have been shaped to accommodate traditionally aged students. Figure 1 graphically displays
the metaphor of “square peg” adult students and their friction points at the “four corners” labeled
----------------------------------
Insert Figure 1 About Here
----------------------------------
Adult, or older than the traditionally aged, college students are included in the mass of
undergraduates (National Center for Education Statistics, 2002). While this paper promotes
inquiry focused for the benefit of older students, there is reason to believe that other non-
One of the reasons that adult students may have difficulty progressing through the
postsecondary system is that they are perceived as “out of sequence.” Societal norms establish
that formal education is designed for the young. Settersten and Lovegreen (1998) described the
“tri-partition” of the life cycle into three orthogonal and linear segments of, 1) education
followed by 2) work and subsequently followed by 3) the leisure of old age. While the linear
pattern may have been applicable in earlier decades, life styles today are moving away from
partitions and towards a more co-mingled life course. Adults frequently juxtapose education
with work and increasing numbers of older adults opt to co-mingle work with leisure well into
old age. Despite the rising number of nontraditional life paths, Sissel, Hansman, and Kasworm
(2001) suggest that most colleges have not redefined themselves to better serve adult students.
They clearly assert that college catalogs, web pages, admissions information, on-campus
1
newspapers, and administrative office hours remain geared toward the younger more traditional
student.
In this paper, I describe the “four corners of friction” (access, success, retention, and
institutional receptivity) and illustrate them using data from the Transfer and Retention of Urban
5,000 students from the Los Angeles Community College District (LACCD). Participants were
enrolled in classrooms selected in a stratified random fashion during the Spring of 2001.
Subsequently, questionnaire data has been routinely collected along with transcript information
detailing the sample’s total academic history at the LACCD. The unique nature of the TRUCCS
data collection allows us to view transcript information dating back to the student’s first
enrollment in the district regardless of how long ago that occurred. With this sample, the
transcript data goes back to 1974. Using the student’s reported date of birth, each course was
coded with the exact student age at the time of enrollment. This method provided a cross-
sectional look at all students during specific age spans (regardless of calendar year) as well as a
longitudinal look at students who enrolled in courses over long time periods (either contiguously
traditional students (round pegs); while “square pegs” enrollments occurring when students were
22 to 30 years old were coded as young adults, those 31 to 45 years coded as prime timers and
those 46 years and above coded as last chancers (see Figure 2).
------------------------------------
Insert Figure 2 About Here
----------------------------------
2
Corner 1: Access
Older adults return to school for a variety of reasons including: 1) keeping up with
technology; 2) a desire to change careers or advance in the current profession, and 3) to maintain
physical and mental alertness (Allen, 2002). Kasworm (2003) suggested that personal transitions,
proactive life planning, or a combination of the two, motivate adult college students. Whatever
the reasons for returning, adult student must determine how to fit education within the
boundaries of their lifestyles. Nontraditional students often enroll in programs that are easily
accessible, have relatively flexible course schedules, and are supportive of adult commitments
(Kasworm, 2003).
Students possessing more nontraditional traits, seek out more flexible programs, and are
more likely to enroll in distance education than other students (National Center for Education
Statistics, 2002). These types of programs may give some students greater access to programs
and more flexibility to schedule their coursework (Furst-Bowe & Dittmann, 2001).
Evidence from TRUCCS. Using the age step defined by age at first enrollment, I provide
Table 1 indicating students’ response to a seven-part Likert scale (1= very unimportant to 7=very
important) to questions asking reasons for first enrollment. Note that analysis of variance tests
(ANOVA) were performed and the results of post hoc tests against traditionally aged students for
------------------------------------
Insert Table 1 About Here
----------------------------------
While the strongest reason to enroll was to get a degree, note that its importance does
slightly wane by age step. For all other items it is of note that the pattern is such that the
3
importance increases with each age step indicating that adult students are purposeful in their
enrollment.
college student using earlier grade point averages and scores on standardized and placement tests.
With respect to differences in student age, these traditional measures of ability and suitability
may not be appropriate or equitable. It has been suggested that noncognitive variables, or those
factors that may be experiential and/or contextual, may be more appropriate to identify predictors
Using the TRUCCS sample, Figure 3 provides the results of district placement tests for
determining the level of recommended placement in English and Mathematics by entering age
step. The highest score (3) is placement at the transfer level while a score of 2 represents one
course level below transfer and is the pre-requisite for level 3, etc. While these findings are
highly suggestive, it must be noted that not all students have taken the placement tests. Thus, on
average, older students are more frequently placed in lower levels of math and English. While
the findings for the Math placement for “last chancers” shows a slight deviation from the
downward slope associated with age, it must be noted that a smaller proportion of the total “last
chancers” took the placement test. The result of the placement tests indicate that (1) older
students are less able than their traditionally aged counterparts, (2) people lose their academic
skills with age, or (3) the tests are biased towards traditionally aged students. When comparing
the self-reported high school GPA of the same groups of students there was virtually no
difference. Thus the evidence suggests, if measured at the same age step (i.e., high school) for
this sample, academic performance regardless of when chronologically that occurred, was about
equal.
4
----------------------------------
Insert Figure 3 About Here
----------------------------------
Corner 2: Success
The term success in higher education may be open to interpretation, but from a student
achievement point of view, it is generally measured in grades. Over time there has been a debate
on whether or not older students can perform at the same levels as their younger counterparts. In
1979 Sikula reported that the failure rates of adult-returning students as high as 75% and
recommended that the costs of maintaining remedial programs for adults were too high and
should be discontinued. Six years later, Leppel (1984), comparing grades of returning adults,
contradicted earlier findings and reported that older students performed at a higher level.
Whisnant and colleagues (1992), studying specifically community college students confirmed
the findings that adults over the age of 25 years earned higher grades in both developmental and
transfer level courses. Grades are traditionally used in studies as a predictor of virtually all
postsecondary outcomes including retention (Hagedorn, Maxwell, & Hampton, 2002; Tinto
1993), adjustment to college (Cabrera et al, 1999), and teacher satisfaction (Howard & Maxwell,
The View from TRUCCS. Using the TRUCCS data, I viewed and subsequently analyzed
grades in two ways. First, through the coding of every course that the sample took with the exact
age of the student at that time, I was able to create four groups of coursetaking behaviors based
on the age step of the student. For example, within the young adults group, one student may
have taken English 101 in 1975 at age 24, while another took the course in 1986 at age 25, while
another at age 29 took the course in 2000. Despite the difference in chronological time, the
5
indicators of success would be included in the young adult age step for the first set of analyses.
In the second view, I included ONLY those students who attended the LACCD over an
extended period of time crossing more than one age step. I then compared grades across age
steps within subjects allowing students to serve as their own comparison groups. In this way, if
“Student A” attended classes from age 18 to 42, her grades while a prime timer could be
compared to her grades while a young adult and traditional student. To compare students against
themselves, I found that 125 students had taken courses at the LACCD over at least three age
steps. Including only those students who attended the LACCD over at least three age steps
eliminated those students who were merely enrolled in the last semester of one step and the first
semester of the next age step. For the 125 students who fit this description, a general linear
model repeated measures revealed that the comparisons were significant (Wilks’ Lambda= .6ll;
F=39176; df=2, 123; p < .001). Table 3 indicates the cell means at each step. The sample tested
indicated that excellence can increase with age step. For this sample of long-term students, the
----------------------------------------
Insert Tables 2 and 3 About Here
---------------------------------------
Corner 3: Retention
for public resources and decreased funding at the state level (Summers, 2002). Measures of
retention may include three-year persistence rates, five-year persistence and degree attainment
rates. Some community colleges measure retention by the number of students that are enrolled
6
on the first census day of a semester divided by the number of students attending classes in the
Some measures of retention take into account the educational goal of students at the
beginning of their enrollment, but do not recognize when intentions change. It may be
“dropouts.” Nontraditional students may have various reasons for leaving a program, such as
family issues or job requirements. However, they may also leave school because their personal
goals have been met or perhaps they have determined that completing the program is no longer a
goal for them. In fact, students who “stop out,” that is, they attend, withdraw, and return, one or
more times, is not atypical of nontraditional students and it may be misleading to consider them
as dropouts or non-persisters (Kerka, 1995). Further, with increasing numbers of students doing
a “shuffle” between various educational institutions and reverse transfer students enrolling in
community colleges after already obtaining credits at a four-year college, the issue becomes even
more clouded (LeBard, 1999; Maxwell, Hagedorn, Brocato,. Moon, & Perrakis, 2002).
While retention is typically measured longitudinally, adult student retention may be more
objectives are measured (Kerka, 1989). Course completion rates may be a helpful alternative to
measure student success. Course completion is measured by taking a ratio of the courses passed
to the courses completed for a given term or terms. This allows for a short-term indicator of
TRUCCS Data and Retention. Similar to the analyses presented for the corner on success,
retention will be tested in two ways. First, looking cross-sectionally at course completion ratios
across the age steps regardless of chronological time and then within subjects who have
7
remained at the LACCD across age steps. Interestingly, the proportion of courses completed
increased with each age step. While 61% of the courses taken by students in the traditional age
step were completed, young adults completed 66%, prime timers completed 75%, and last
Using the 125 students who enrolled in courses across three age steps, a repeated
measures comparison also revealed significant differences (Wilks Lambda=.437; F=66.099; df=2,
170, p< .001). Course completion ratios steadily increased from 36% to 48% to 71% across the
three steps.
It has become increasingly important to understand the different needs of adult students
and design programs that more appropriately attract and support students fitting the
opportunities including distance education (with training for those intimidated by technology)
and allowing students to enroll part-time and work at their own pace may also be helpful.
Further, institutions may be more receptive to adult students by designing classes that are
specifically for adult students. These courses may help to alleviate any anxiety about being
conspicuously older than their peers. Institutions that foster staff, faculty, and student
interactions that support the confidence and self-efficacy of adult students may also be very
Hagedorn, Perrakis, and Maxwell (2002) identified ten “Positive Commandments,” for
community colleges that may improve student success. These commandments include providing
opportunities for increased faculty-student interactions; more financial aid and affordable
education; more flexible course offerings and class times; more 4-year college transfer centers;
8
increased numbers of expert faculty; on campus assistance in learning and study centers;
additional electronic resources for students; local campuses; more work study programs; and
career counseling.
adult students, I compared student responses to possible obstacles to obtaining academic goals as
stated by the sample via the TRUCCS follow-up survey (Spring 2002). Table 4 provides means
and standard deviations for selected obstacles displayed by the age of students during the time
they responded to the survey. Students rated problems on a five-part Likert scale (1= not a
problem to 5= very large problem). Results of the post hoc tests following a statistically
significant multivariate ANOVA are indicated. All comparisons are against traditionally aged
students.
As seen in Table 4, there are trends by age group. Prime timers appear to be the most
time crunched and report the highest levels of family responsibilities. Young Adults and Prime
timers report high levels of job responsibilities. Interestingly, there is no difference in getting
along with other students regardless of age step. Finally, last chancers report the lowest levels of
These comparisons do provide some insight into policies that may assist adult students to
successfully achieve their goals. As illustrated by the analyses related to the other three
“corners” there are differences in the reasons that adult students enroll in college. While in
college, adult students do not achieve academic success at lower levels than traditionally aged
students.
------------------------------
Insert Table 4 About Here
--------------------------------
9
Institutions like the University of Phoenix and other for-profits have recognized the value
of convenience and support for adult students. These very expensive programs have not had a
problem in attracting nontraditional students to enroll. For this reason, the University of Phoenix
is now the largest undergraduate program in the country. Traditional colleges, especially
community college must acknowledge the population is aging. The 2000 Census reports that the
current median age is 35.3 years and rising and the largest 5-year age group is 35-to-39 year olds
(8.1 percent) followed by the 40-to-44 year olds (8.0 percent) (Meyer, 2001). Bash (2003)
recently sounded an alarm directed to members of the academy who prefer working with
traditionally aged students. He warned of the needs to include adults who will increasingly seek
lifelong learning. If colleges and universities are to compete with institutions like the for-profits,
they must become more receptive to adult student needs and expectations.
10
References
Bash, L. (2003). Adult learners in the Academy. Anker Publishing, Williston, VT.
Cabrera, A.F., Nora, A., Terenzini, P.T., Pascarella, E. T., & Hagedorn, L.S. (1999) Campus
racial climate and the adjustment of students to college: A comparison between White
students and African American students. Journal of Higher Education, 70(2), 134-202.
Furst-Bowe, J. & Dittmann, W. (2001). Identifying the needs of adult women in distance
learning programs. International Journal of Instructional Media, 28, 405-413.
Hagedorn, L. S., Maxwell, W., Hampton, P. (2002) Correlates of retention for African American
males in community colleges. Journal of College Student Retention Research, Theory,
and Practice, 3(3). 243-264.
Hagedorn, L.S., Perrakis, A, I., & Maxwell, W. (in press, Summer 2004). The Positive
Community College Commandments. Academic Exchange Quarterly.
Howard, G. S., & Maxwell, S. E. (1980). Correlation between student satisfaction and grades: A
case of mistaken causation? Journal of Educational Psychology, 72(6), 10-20.
Institutional Research and Information. (2002). Enrollment and student characteristics: Within-
semester retention. Retrieved October 5, 2003, from the Los Angeles Community
College District Web site: http://research.laccd.edu/research/
Kasworm, C. (2003). Adult meaning making in the undergraduate classroom. Adult Education
Quarterly, 53, 81-98.
Kerka, S. (1989). Retaining adult students in higher education. (ERIC Reproduction Service
No. ED308401).
Kerka, S. (1995). Adult learner retention revisited. (ERIC Reproduction Service No. ED 389
880).
LeBard, C. (1999). Reverse transfers in the community college. (ERIC Reproduction Service
No. ED433871).
Leppel, K. (1984). The academic performance of returning and continuing college students: An
economic analysis. Journal of Economic Education, 15(1), 46-54.
Maxwell, W. B., Hagedorn, L.S., Cypers, S., Moon, H. S., Brocato, P. , Wahl, K. & Prather, G.
(2003) Community and Diversity in Urban Community Colleges: Coursetaking among
Entering Students. Community College Review. 30 (4), 21-46.
11
Meyer, J. (2001). Age: 2000. Census 2000 Brief. U.S. Census Bureau, Washington D.C.
Available: http://www.census.gov/prod/2001pubs/c2kbr01-12.pdf
Settersten, R.A. & Lovegreen, L. D. (1998). Educational experiences throughout adult life: New
hopes or no hope life-course flexibility? Research on Aging, 20, 506-538.
Sikula, R. A. (1979). Can the academically underprepared adult complete university courses
successfully? College Student Journal, 13(1), 5-8.
Sissel, P., Hansman, C., & Kasworm, C. (Fall, 2001). The Politics of Neglect: Adult Learners in
Higher Education. In Hansman, C. and Sissel, P. (Eds.). Understanding and Negotiating
the Political Landscape of Adult Education, ( No. 91) , (pp.17-28). San Francisco: Jossey-
Bass.
Settersten, R.A. & Lovegreen, L. D. (1998). Educational experiences throughout adult life: New
hopes or no hope life-course flexibility? Research on Aging, 20, 506-538.
Tinto, V. (1993). Leaving college: Rethinking the causes and cures of student attrition. Chicago:
University of Chicago Press.
Whisnant, W. T., et al (1992). The “old” new resource for education – student age. Community
Services Catalyst, 22(3) 7-11.
12
FIGURE 1. Square Pegs.
13
N=265
Step 3: Last Chancers
45 years and above
N=1140 Step 2: Prime Timers
Traditionally aged 31 to 45 years
Students
N=2089
N=2949 Step 1: Young Adults
22 to 30 years
14
Table 1. Importance of specific categories for first enrollment by age steps.
Step GPA
15
Table 4. Means and standard deviations of obstacles by age step.
16
1.6
1.4
1.4 3= Transfer Level
2=One level below transfer
1.2 1.17 1= Two levels below transfer
0=3 or more levels below transfer
0.99
1
Placement Score
0.84
0.77 English Score
0.8
Math Score
0.7
0.6
0.6
0.41
0.4
0.2
0
Traditional Age Young Adults Prime Timers Late Chancers
Age Category
17