/

' DOCUMENT RESUME

ED 124 056

AUTTOR Husband, Robdrt 1.TITLE

. Significant Others: A ij, ew look A.

PUB DATE 10 Jan 76 . .-,'7,$

NOTE .22pe; Draft of paper presened atthe Association for Innovation in(7th, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania,19161- . .....

A

112 007

Attrition.

Annual Meting ofHigher EducationFebivary 7,

..., ,\,--

EDRS PRICE MF-$0.83 SC-$ 1.67 Plus Postage. ,. ,

DESCRIPTORS Attendance;, CollegeStudents; *Dropout8f EnrollmentTrends; Friendship; *.Higher iaiati-osi- *Peer'

...,- .

Relationship; School Holding Pow-er; *SocialRelations;, Student Attittdes; *Student -Motivation;Transfers; Withdrawal - _,----

IDENTI3IERS *Significant Others; Spring Arbor_College'

ABStRACT4 A

Specific factors.related. to attrition at Spring ArborCollege were identified,.along'with several basic-problems with-

:- attrition-retention stud .s found in a review of the literature.-' Using the ."signifiCant other"-model, this pro.ject 'differed from the

general research.by taking a relational perspective to the problem ofattrition. e relationship a student's "significant others"and hi taping or leaving college yas examined.. The construct70 ificant other"-was defined as one who influences an individual's-conceptions (about himself and is orientation toward life) througheither interaction (definer) (of by example (model). The findings_supported three hypotheses: (1) \A student will have, a propensity todrop out if he has no "significant others" at the college. (2) A

student will have a propensity to remain if he has at lea.-t one"..signif_icant _other" affiliated with the college. (3) The Significant* r-survey is a useful-in ent in the early identification ofs dents who are most likely tol r ,out of Spring Arbor College.

--HI-g-h-ligts of a program designed to re&ml e, attrition based on theSignificanOther Model Were used in summaAzing the project.l(Author/LBH)

I.

************************************************************************ Documents acquired by ERIC include many_ informal unpublished* materials not available from other sources. ERIC makes every effort ** tb obtain the best copy available. Nevertheless, items of marginal *

* reproducibility are, often encountered:and this affects the quality *

.* of the microfighe and hardcopy reprodUctions ERIC makes available *

* via the ERIC Document Reproduction Service (EDRS). EDRS is not* responsible for the quality of the original document. Reproductions ** supplied by MRS are the best that can be made from the original: ***********************************************************************

$

.C)

LC%

04'

V

4

of

SIGNIFICANT.6tIOS: A New Loolcat Attrition

US OEAFITMENT

OF HEALrh.--v-OurAzioh

It WELFARENATIONALINSTirUrE0P-

-EOUCATioAr;NIS

Doti/4,1E+4r'WAS

BEENREPRO.AS RECEVE°

FROMOR ORGA

N14 rioN ORIGI

:AriNc17

MOTS OPSrArE0

DO NO7' NECESSAR41.`

REPRE-NA DONAL

11,157'11'41TE

OP

EOUCATioNPos/rIoN

OR POLICY

kyr

ft,

Robert L. Husband -

Spring Arbor College

January 10, 1976IP

PLEASE NOTE: This is a draft4ocuMent and is not CO be citedor quoted without permission of .the author. - . . .

. ,

PERMISS'ON TO REPTIODUSE. THIS-CIDPv-EHGHTED MATERIAL irA'S- BEEN GRANTEE) /34

_ .

TO ERiCr AND ORGANIZATIONS OPERATINGUNDER AGREEMENTS WITH THE NATIONAL IN

`STITUTE pc EDUCATION FURTHER REPRO-

DUCTION OUTSIDE ./1.1.1. ERIC SYSTEM RE

DUPES PERMISSION OF THE 'COPYRIGHT

ONiNfR

/

*Paper presented at.WorishopSession I of the7th Annual Meeting on."Future Solutioni toToday's Problems" ponsored by the Association forInnovation in Highdr,Education, Saturday, February7, 1976, Philadelphia. All rights to reprbducebr_quoteaie'restricted,

2

. , .. , _ '.--..$, ..-..-.._-- - ----.-__-_,....--0-........--.4, -0

,. i

Attrition in higher,edUcation Le not .a new-prololexci. Xriowingly, 0 ,.,0

or unknowl'uglyYit has been.a statistical dimension of colleges and ,

0 . .

universities eVer:since:the first student matriculated to a c011ege-,,

. campus. It has gained a position of prominence in recent,years; however,

because the loss of students Is now critically linked to thaissue,of

survival for most colleges and universities.

The problem of attrition whatever form i'tikes, is important to

.colleges and universities for several reasons.. One., it costs the col-

lege financially. The cost comes in tWt) forms: a).in dirett dollars

through_ loaa of revenue (tuition income, housing, fees, etc.) by loss)/

Of students; and. b) in its impact on the long range- ,program by main-. -

taining constantly low enrollments in upperclassmen courses which fix

high dollars amounts for instructional costs, at this level.

A secOnd'reason is that attrition breaks doWh the student con-.

tinuity and level of maturity in the student body, This has a parti.-.

cular.impact on the small college. As attrition takes'its toll, there

2

continues a large population, of underclassmen every year as compared

to a continued small populatioh of upperclassmen. This stvden mix

many- -times impedes the continuity and stability of a student body andt,

militakes.'igainst a maturing peer influence.

A final important consideration of attrition to an institution

is the impact it has pn the student who leaves.. AS mentioned before,

3

2

often` students leave with feelings of disappointmeni, disillusionment

arld resentment toward. the school. These feelings "fr.,

only affect the

, ..

student and his self-concept, but also colo4 r the influence he may have

on others regarding the institution.

`programs aimed at retaining those "disappearing" students have accom--

almost everything but successful retention. As Astin (19.75)"in-

dicates, dropping out of college has been intensely researched, but the

researqh has not clearly revealed which specific factors influence students

to leave, which specific factorS convince studenti to remain entol4ed4

or how these factors might be controlled by those with a vested interest_

in persiiading the student not to leave. While ultimate solutions_appear----

at this time out of the question

, -

sight into the college attrition

is'enlatteMpt to respond tb that

LITERATURE' REVIEW

it does seem likely that limited in-

pheno enon is possible,, This project

hypothesis.

A large body of literature is available regarding the issue of attri-

'tion or dropping out of\college. Cope (1968)Andicates that the liter-

ature agrees in general at three major points; 1) The average\rate.R!\ . ,

attrition nationally-oVer a four year career is relatively constant. 'Des.-

pate some questions about reliability and interpretation of gross national_

stem to agree that 40 per cent of the entering'figure , most authorities

students neve& achieve. "a ba caluareate degree, while an additional 20 per

cent do not gr'aduate on schedule - 2)4 The greatest proportion of attrition

occurs during the freshman year of college. It_ 'The attrition rate is

generally higher'a state sup, rted institution's than at private institutions.

4

3

Beyond these broad g4delines, very.slitt..6 of the literature suPpOrts

or confirms findings of previous, researchers, nor are specific factorsqt

which influence attrition readily identified.

on_ettritiOn_ha been the-failgee_

bye researchers to develop a theoretical or conceptual perepecive 'tor,

.

the problem. Relatively few genuine efforts have been made to raipe

the understanding of dropping out to a level of abstractiOn where

theory might intersect and play a role in guiding the-research. Most

of the work occurs at an operational` level only. For example, studies.9.

9

by Astin, 1964, 1972; Iffert, 1957, Knoell, 1966; McNelley, 4938; Summer-

skill, 1962 simply summarize'patterns of .persistence and withdrawal. Al-

though they_prgvide a,valuable data base- and helpto determine the extent

of the problem, they fail to tap the complex reasons and motivations'for

leaving college. At best, these approaches tend to be descriptive and

often rely upon statistical analysis alone as anavenue for exploring the

problem. As suggested by Cope (1968) few national studies' penetrate the

demographic level to explore the social and psychological influences

dro ping out.

0 ers (Alfred, 1973; Astin 1975a, 1975b. yer, 1968; Blanchfield,

1971; Cope, 1972; Hannah, 1972; Ikenberry, 1961; Johnson, 1970; Nelsoln,9

1966; Noel, 1975; Waller, 1964) have tried to--.1dentify patterns of attri-

--:'

tion and correlate these to personality traits or characteristics of the

..

.

students, environmental influences Of the institution,.or a combination

of-both. Their results have been quite varied and often conflicting,

Most recent and notable of these efforts is Astin's work Preventing

Students from Dropping Out. Based on his longitudinal and 4Ulti-institu-s

5

4

Lionel study-Ivolving approximately 101,000 students from 1968 .

through 1912, he'concludel that there are several key variables 14

studentS persisting or.withdrawing from college. He asserts that the

greatest prediction factor is the student's past academic record and

academic ability, Next in dignificance'are the students ' degree"aspir-.

dtions, religious background and preference,-college 'finances, study

habits, and the,educational attainment oe,the parents.

Based on his findings, many:of his recommendationd are similar to.

those of previous researchers. (ie. more selective admisSion procedures,

upgrading student's academic performance, and promoting financial assis-

tance) These recommendations have had a tendency to be all too obvious.

They prove to be of little value to institutions who, because of economic. .-..

:: ,..,-,

and academic reasons, cannot make substaValichanges in theird,pesent

cirdumstances.

Astin does make some other assertions however, which support the

hypothesis of thisproject. He finds,,for\exdMple, that participation

in extracurricular activities, especially membership fraterni-

ties and sororities,'Is significantly related to staying in college. In

addition, 'staying in on-campus residedce, having an on-campus job, and

attending an institution in which theSociar-backgrounds of other stu-

dents' resembles the student's own §oc14,b.ackgroundate also suggested

as enhancing a student's persistence, These support;, the theory, he

suggests, that student persistence to some extent depends upon the degree

of personal involvement;in campus life.

Of particular interest foi this study are the findings of, Dr. Lee Noel,

of the American College Testing Program- Noel compiled an annotated

63s

Tt

5

O

biblioglaphy_:of the doctoral dissertations on attrition-related

-'-1797subjectspublishedbetweenJanuary1970aAdAarc171975. lB,all, 65

'dissertations studying, a specific inst tution or group of institu-

'-itions and descritbing characteristics of drop-outs or factors influ-

encing the student's decisi to withdraw from college, were abstracted.

Noel concluded from his studies chat students drop out for four complex,

reasons (or more likely, a COMbixvtiOn of those reasons-)

1) ..-Isolation (loneliness, depression)

2) :Dissonance (incompatibility with environment, curriculum,people)

3) Boredom.) Financial dif-ficulties/pressures

The significance of this research-to our project is that the__ primary

factors Noel discovers in attrition relate heavily tio_interperSonal

or social dissatisfaction

,

A final series of Studies worth considerable attention are those of-.

.

.

Haller and Woelf),4- Directing their attention toward assessing inter-_

personal influence on orientation variables, their research has unusual------

potential in the study of attrition. The researcher's efforts were-to

clarify and bring into a measurable domain the social psychological concept

of significant others"-, (Haller, Woelfel, and-Fink, 1969; Haller and

Woelfel, 1972; Woelfel, 1968)

Conceived'by Harry Stack-Sullivan in the early 1940's, the concept

essentially referred to those-clusters of individuals, su4rounding a

person, who exert tremendous influence upon that person an4 his orientation

toward life This concept was differentiated by Haller, and*Delfel (1972)

from Mead's concept of "generalized others". (1934) The impoltant difference

they suggest is that,the . significant other provides a "segmentaAzed"

fib

*

/

6 (

view,of interpersodUi influence That is,` agiven individual care ,have

dlerent significant others.fot di.iferent issues in'hisiher life..

an-ting to determine the relationship between "significant others"

"an.individual's orientation toward certain life variables,'they

, -designed the Wisconsin Significnt Other Battery (Haller', Woelfel, and

Fink/ 1969; -Moelfelsen instrument to identify "significant

Others" and to asses their influence on-student's vocational. and edu7

cational.aspirations. Their findings impressively support ----:ihCCFitdiition

that ':,the significant other is the most precise concept available for

use in assessing inierpe'rsonal influence on orientation variables."

(abstraci, 1972) As a result of their research, they also suggest that the

doncepts,and instrumeused have high utility for other orientation

variables.

--- ,

The Nignificant othet'approach is a particularly attractive alter-,

native in attacking'the problem of attrition for Zwo reasons. One, it

fs,b12.11t upon a'theo;etical base. As was mentioned earlier, this is

contrary to the majority of the literature on attrition which has no. , ,

theoretical or conceptual framework.,The ,"significant other" approach, .go.

------

provides an opportunity tor generalizaelon and utility at a theoretical

level unavailable to.descriptiVe studies, Secondly,'it Can be used,

as both a theoryof predi6tion, and a theory of influence. At best,

moat of the present attrition research cah'only be Used sparingly as a

predictive tool. The "significant ot " model on the other hand, not'

only has potential for predicting students who are most likely to drop out,

but it also providet an immediate conceptu 1 framework,for creating pre--

//ventative attrition programs-

Y.

s

r;

THE PRQJECT

7

4

An extensive statistical analysis of attrition/retentioddata was

completed in the spring semester 1975.at Spring Arbor Co Lt was

the culmlnatiori of a five-year-research projeqz on:attrition (Kline;,

'

19741 The' subsequent repott.provided a wealth of Useful statistics and

did much to establish the_exact chmenstoRse___o_i- our-4U icion pros

..-howeVer, it fa3..le ly identipi ki:ctor-s-wh4ch

I ,-t.4o predict student attrition- The*Presiden of t e Collegd reques

greater efforts be made in :this- -area-y 7,

104Using the "significant other" model provided by Haller and wolfel

,

(1972) a new project was begun. The purpose of this project was * examine

the correlation or relationship-between a studentignificarit-0

(SO)Land his staying or leaving college. Our hypotheses were:

1) A-student will haws propensity to drop out of Spring,ArbOr".!,-

College if he has no (SO) affiliated' with the c llege.

2)- A student will have a propensity tjo remain at /Spring ArborCollege,if he has at_least one ( 0) afffliiited with the college.

3) The Significant Other Survey ir5 a useful }instrument in identi-::Lying students who are most likely to leave Spring Arbor College.,

?or the purposes of this projett the theoretical construct "signi-.

D

ficant others" Was defined as one who Influences an individual's concept-:7-

ions (abdut himself and his orientation toward life)' through either inter-.

action (definer) with the IhdividuaI or by example (Haller and Obelfel/

' 1972) At the operational lever the concept of "significant other" wasIt I

.determi d by the student as the iddividuals he/she identified in response

to the question "Who have_4

yob yelled most often about your attending

Spring Arbor College?"

9

r

fl

IP

8

INSTRUM4t4T: The instrument developed for this study was.a,moditied for

of the Wisconsin Significant Other Battery used by Haller and,Woelf4

( 72). (Appendix A) The intent was to rely upon the ualidity and relia-:

jbilit established for their Instrument. Although a complete instrument

was-ad istered Which would provide information regarding both tYpe of. .

.

"Significant others" (definers and models) we chose to wOrk.oniy with

those responlks which provided information regarding (S0i as,definers,

41.

'Thus as the term ''-significant others" ISO) was discussed'in this project,

it_refgmtry-ib those persons who_were definers (ghller and Woelfel,_

19 in a student's life. The purpose of this instrument was to ideritify

the (SO) for entering freshman in respect to their selec ontof a college.'

The quegtions of greatest concern on the'survey'were: "Who have you talked

li

with most of

)

en about your attending Spring Arbor College?" and "How often

-flaVe you'ta ed with the above people?' These Auestioni identified speck---- . , ,

fically,(S0) (definers) fox the student and the frequency of their influ-,,

ence. Spaces were provided for six responses to each quedtloh, with instruc-.

tions that more could be added if appropriate.

SAMRLE: The -1979 freshman 'class was selected as our population. The-.

, , __-,- \_

rowprimary reason for selecting this populatioh was that the-freshden year. -

IS when the highest rate of attrition °acute a1 Spring Arbor College ['SAC),

34_6 per cent (Kline, 1974)t To work the project through to an effective4

.

,

conclusion with this, particular,

sample would be to tackle the problem at

its roost intense state- It also would maximize the benefits if the project---

was successful- -01C of a population of 279 freshmen, 181 students parti

cipated in the project, Efforts wexe*mide to see.. -if the 181 participants,.4

through a self- selective process, had potentially biased the sample and-thus

. 0

e

O

..

not reflected the _total population. Demographic oharacteristi considered

significant in national attrition studies were reviewed fol bo

who participated and,those_wholtd not, In examinirl such a--f

-as as sex, ra6e,i

-- 1

religious backgro:Undbner4tal status, regional backgr60d,randacademic

__--- .

_-_,-

..---

-

achievement, no significant difference was estgblished betWeerrparticipants

,.

and non-participants...

Therefore, rt was concluded that the sample reflected-...,

,_, , .

the general population of the freshmen class.

ROCEDURE: All new freshman students were reqUested.to be at a,recitires1----k-

evening assembly the second week in October. gt the assembly, participants

were asked to respond to the Stgnificant Other Battery InstruCtions were

provided as a part of the battery and also given verbally. Students turned

.-..,

tn thPircona:Ple.t.0_survey.s upon leaving the auditorium. gollected were, 162v--------

surveyj In an attempt to gain a response from aTarger percentage of thei . .

------ . ..

class, surreys were mailed to all freshrhan,not at the assembly- An additional .

19 surveys were received in this manner-

.

Ater the surveys were, collected, responses, to four spedxfic questions

-"Were arialyzed and classified- Working with tie specifiJ questiOn, "Who

411.

have .you taliced with most often about your attending Spring Arbor College?";

those students who identified as a (SO) at least one member in the college

community Cotner students., fAcuity, or staff) were differentiated froM

those who .dent a.cl,-(so) not affiliated with the college. A second item

was the establishmeneof a priority ranking of influence or significance ,

for the (SO) identified by the question, "How often have you talked with

. the above people:" Thirdly, responses to the qUestion, "Where did your

parents want you to attend college?" were grouped in two categoriesthose

ii

r

-identifying (SAC) as paent's choice and those identifying other than

(SAC) . A finalresponse tabulated regards_ to the person theyr

thouglit.feltthesamey_they did oolt-Spring Arbor-Col-lege----

,'- -/ --.--

PeSULTg: Of the 181 students participating in the project, 97 o :t.hem:(54%).

. .

. . . ."!

college,______----.

idaicated.they had at least one (SO) that affiliated with- .

,Oitdent;-aculty,' Staft), Eighty four of them (46%) 'i ida as (SO)

individuals not affiliated with the college. The a rage n er of signi-

.

,- --ficant.ohers for each student was 3.7. In d- ining the priority

. ranking of_(SO) , the'three individuals th- tudent consulted most ofte

. t

were telectedin order of mostIxequenti onsultatiOn. When uency of, l /

A,_1,' consultation was .the same for two ox ore

,.(SO) , the e) Identified first

,

by the student was given priority.

Forty-four students who had tak 'the Significant Other Survey left

.Spring_Axbor Coll.ege during or t the,end of their freshMen year. Thirty-,

".. .

three or 175%) 1.4 these students indi ted on.their survey that they had

do, (SO) on 'campus Qf. those freshmanUloipersisted into their sophomore. / .

.

. ,

.

year, surveys nad been completed by .137,4tudent -ighty-ix or (63 %) of/

othese students indicatea on their s rvey that'they had at least one .(SCD,

(t.

affiliated with the college. .'

. .'-'

.- ,-,

,,--

.,

.

DISCUSSION &. CONCLUSION: Recognizing the severe limitatiOns of this project

14 .____----for generalization, we foUnd the results of opr study significant" fox- SPrng-,-

,

Arbor College. Several conclusions can b drawn abOut theme ampleOpula-_,

tion. A high correlation did indeed exist betWeen a freshman student's (SO)

and his propensity to leave Spring Arbor College. T is was demonstrated by

the fact that 75 per cent of the sampled 'students who failed to persist, for

a

ty

ID

11

. -,more t on year,. indicated on the survey that their (SO) were

persons no filiated with the college, Thig figure becomes. even -a /. ,

t

,

-----

more 'significant en further investigation is conducted on those whO -----

,..----

drOped out. Two of th eleven students indicating they had (SO ,o. 1

---__

campus who left *prang Arbor had their number one cave SAC eithe'r

prior to their leaving or at the time, A third student who related'

on hisQsr v y that his parents ,ware ihistrong disagreement with his

cnbice of Spring Arbor as a college, did hot return as a result of parental

asIstence, This -Aformation-was received in ''writing at the beginning

of the 1975 fall semester. Seven out of the eleGiMstuddnts had ohly-one

(SO) on campus, and for three of these their -only (SO)Non campus was

ranked third in influence,

A second conolusiOM that can be drawn is that those freshmi students

who identified as (SO) persons affiliated with the college had a propensity

to remain at -the Aollege, The statittical support -ems Slightly

Inconclusive when only 64% o students whb returned indicated.in the#1-

survey 'that th dAS0).on campus. However, this percentage was decep-7.4---,.

400twe low becai!se it .14ed three, es of students confounding the

percentage, who indicated on th r-ey they did not have (SO) on campus,

. .. e _-_,,r --....je ---/

/

One was the'student.whad developed a (SO) after the inStrument was

..

administered This student actually should be included in those who had

(SO) on campus as a result of developing (SO) during the freshmen year,

A second type"of student is one who still does-ma have a -(S0) on campus,

-.will hat develop one-, and will be reflected in future attrition statistics

in the sophomore, junior or senior years.' A third type of student who does

not have a (SO) on campus, bar remains, is the 'student who is being supported

I

\\e

4.

12

and encouraged to stay on at the college from his (SO) external to the

college.

A final conclusion is that the Significant Other SurVey was a useful

instrument foi identifying thoSe freshman in the sample population who

.erwere most likelyto leave Spring Arbor College, In showing that every

3 out of 4 students

October they had no

cent'ccuracy those

in the sample who left the college had indicated in

(SO) on calripus, the survey', :identified with 75-per

.

students most likely to leave the college, Along

with the accuracy of identification, the instrument is useful in that it

can identify students who are most likely to leavd-8AC early in the semester

(within ne month of the freshman's Matriculation to campus). This

gives the in titution a distinct advantage in,the ,longer opportunity pro-

'--- --Nvided to work specifically with those freshmen who are most likely to drop

c7i.rt-7,-----A final point is that the identification-of-I-SW-proved to be a --far.,..

.

more significantfaCtOr relating-to attrition than any other demograph

factors that could be identified, /-

We are"not suggesting that a cause al effect relationship has been

established between significant others and attritioni However, we would

assert,that the project has demonstated a tignififnt relationship between

the two variables of (SO). and attrition for the sample population used.

-Twd of the studies cited earlier'(Astin 1975b, Noel 1975) appear to_

.

lend support to 'mu .contention that (SO[dre a considerable factor in--- attri-

tion; Astin's findings On persool- involvement in campus life, membership

in fraternities and sororities, participation in extracurricular activities

lend themselves to the Sqnificant 0 odel- Participation, involvement,

-)

13

and membership find their greatest value in relating people to one

another in significant way; thus, the creation of significant others,

Noel's (1975) conclusions that isolation, disspnance and boredom

were critical factors on attrition also certainly seem to relate to the'

concept-,of "sigarfic-an-t-othere_-Tha----studeto establish signi-

ficant other relationships on camplisyould verymuc_h afftc his attitudes

of is° a ion, boredom., and clia&onance. If he were unable to devetath.____,_

these relationships,- ictates that his

merit and dissonance-wo-u-l-d increase.- `reel d social

boredom w5ti td also be

_ _ to others.

ficant relationShips

t

, we) ar.e_guic ,a,,gree that there may indeed be other v es

t affect att-r-ition"'ftt-0,--nia-a);-ka,ve__-_:seemed as po as the (SO) for-

freshman students at SAC. This focus on impact ships upon,-..,-- .---. --- - ---_,,,_

, assessing------ -attrition appears___

to be the- zeal thrust_ in examining or assesSing___ --- --_------- ---1- -_-- ,

inte ersonal influe ,upon- the orientation variable o ining in college.

APPLI

The purpose of

which re

was not only to identify significant factors

rition but then to also institute a program geared to

reducing attrition.----onstinced tha t of "significant oth

a 'defy powerful and worxable tool in dealing with the pro m of at

at Spring Arbor College, -a program was formula around this conceptUal_;--- ,

--k model Just a, few dirgnsions or the program will he highlighted in this-

application; -specifically those^

and a rd-ra-s-st.G.Q.sactiiiities.

which relate to -changes in the on-campus

e,

"---------._ ,

---;-----.. additional time and attention outside the classroom,

14

ON-CAMPUS ACTIVITIES

All on-campus activities were reviewed in. respect to their ability

to facilitate or maintain significant other relationships for the student._

In general,-instructional ,Staff' Were reminded and encouraged to establish .

good personal relationships with their students where possible. , It was .

suggested that they selectma few students in their field to whom they. would

tudents identified in the survey who did not have "significant others"

affiliated with the college were given extra exposure to selected people

on the campus such as student resident assistants d academic advisors.

-Tne Freshman orientation and academic advising ppgra'm was estructured*-

Orientation previously could be adequately described as aNeshow.

d tell"ti

operation in the 11. In light,of-HA41 h'S studies. (19 etch in cate

many students ar ving thoughts ,of withdrawing before even.'..s, zltering

----Cation was moved to the summer. comi4ping

with the'knowledge that for 60% of the students, parents are "significant

others" in'their selection of a college, we included parents in a summer .

$1* orientation weekend. The emphasis of the weekend was threefold: oneAaas

to plap the student's schedule for the 'fall and thus tie him intaG the pro-

gram early. A second was to run an initial (SO) Battery on the freshman

class to receive an early penoeption'of the potential problems. The third,

and most important emphasis, was placed upcW17EEg-a67-61-opment-of_sigraflcant

relationshipS betwee'e241 who were-at the weekehd. 'Both students and parents

were placed in sm41 groups (parents separate' from students) for the majority

of the weekend with activities.centered,round getting to.know another.

16

15.6

In this context, positive information regarding the college was

disseminated. The fall orientation then was a carry-over of this activity

for the students. Academic advising, information dissemination, and

registration were conducted in these established groups The_obvious---_

intent was to provide an initial primary or reference group experience

for the student.

Freshman Parents Day: Occurring the first Saturday of November and the lasto

. .

Saturday in the spring, ftesnman parents were invited back to the college.

at the collegets-eXpense._ Recogniz.ing again the impact of the parents as

a generalized "significant Other", arleadrt-was made to develop a low

profile public 'relatiOns program that,,if effective, w d be using the'z

par --S as support mechanisms external to the campus to encoura their

students'to remain at the college. The key to the day igas'the groupin

- , ,

'-'-N

the parents. Utilizing the data colleoted on the (SO) survey, parents woul

be grouped according to.Whetner or not they had encouraged their children 4. .r

. -.,

:6.

M

to attend o.? r t attend Spring Arbor College. Where possible, each group

..

would be composed of a majority of -ITatents who had encouraged tlieir students

to attend Spring Arbor. This grouping suggesa that the disCussion and. t.

,.

,.

orientation of the group Would be proactive toward Spring Arbor.and that

the principle of public advocasy would have a reinforcing affect on those

parents supporting the college. \

Extra eurricularlActivities: The social actrvities program was redesigned

to be asconducive as possible to the development of significant others,

1 Clubs and organizations were not predesigned'but created aroundthe interests of small groups of students, Broader. involvement in WASdesigned in the athletic program, both intramuratlYand'intercollegiately.

..

0

16

The,intramural-program was established-around living units to reinforcethe interaction and relationships already occurring at the residenceleirel, Interestingly enough anenlargemehtof the'womeWs athleticprograms-was supported pn-the basis of this model,

Living units were changed, where poSsible, with the,acquistion of

houses on the perimeter Of 'campus.. The.attempt,here was to institute

sMalker living groupg with some sense of self governance in hopes of

increasing intimacy of interaction. Stude chose to live in theh06pes.

This arrangement had the potential of backfiring,

which were net resolved. Therefore, in copjuncOon

intdrgrated a conflict management series onto our

sessions and residence staff-training sessions.

if co5,146ts developed

with this program, we

new student orientation

.4

A specialized activity, recognized as important at 4oring Arbor College

was music. _Although the vast majority of students were not Music majdrt,

better,than 60% of the freihman class indicated high interest and aptitude

in music on .their ACT Profiles. Combining the conceptsor public advoc,

and significant others, suggestions were made, to expand bind enlarge the4;',

field service program (musical,groupsgoing out from the college.)

ADMISSIONS

14

.

Non-traditional S lbggestions were offered to admiSsions ae'the role,.

they played in attrition/retention. Working again mainly with the t;heo-..

cries of public advocasy and significant others, a five -point proposal.

was recommended:.

,

- N .,

. .

1) Utilizte freshmen in' recruitment effort's. After selecting keyfreshman (i.e. ,those whom were identified more than twice -in response to

-.the question on) the (SO)' survey, "Who feels most like you'regarding SpringArboi College?") send three member teams:for recruiting, two with (SO)

.: on campus,,grouped with one whose (SO) were cot on campus.i

1

a'

I

17C

2. widely inCorpuzate block recruiting. That is, recruit from places-from which several. students are alieady attending SAC or are planning onextending. This is preferred in ttecruiting in new.territoty as the formersituation may cause students to be bringing their (SO) with them

. 3J Establish recruitment activities in the-homes Ofi5resent-freshrtien,

whose pater-its advocated Spring Arbor 4riollege. Hopefully have them co-hostthe activity with freshmen parents who did not advocate the college to theirstudent.

4) Piace-a LSO) question on the Admissions application for the admis-sions office to follow up, This follow-up would be in two'divensions:,

WY@

1

a) A th.ank you letter to -the (SO) for their imput into thepotentlaay.student's life, plus a 3 x 54.kcYsaying:

says you are a significant person in hislife, how can we best help him accomplish his goals?."

°b; Send.occasionally tne same (S0) information emphasizingthe positive attributes of the college-

Although further activities built around the "Significant Other Mqdel"

are continui ng to be developed, the above ipr(jec. b

already proved fruit-

ful in several ways, One, It has raisecithe c nsciousness of-the entire

college communiv regarding they Impact of inter rsonal relationships upon

'students staying or leaving SAC. Secondly, even though the. project has only

been partially- implemented, put attrition rate in the past yaw has declined

nearly eot ObViouSly, other lactots.may hra,ve Influenced this reduction,

such as the national ecunomic cdnditions, etc,; however, this project is the

only new variable of sizable dimensions that has been introduced, into Spring

Arbor Coiiege life.

4.

19:

4

41,

O

I

I

/

SELECTED,B1BLIOGRAPHY

1

Alfred, Richard L.'"Student Attrition: Stratec-es for Action." Officeof Education Planning and Research, Metropolitian Junion CollegeDistrict, Kansas City, Missouri, 1973.

Astin,-A -W: "Personal-and Environmental-Factors Associatedwith College .

Drop Outs Among High Aptitude Students." Journal-of Educational ...4,Psciy29L9.04, 19.64, 55, 276-287.

Astir), A. W. "College Drop-Outs: A National Profile." ACE Research Reports.Washington, D.C.: American Council on Education, 1972,

Astin, A. W. "Drop-Outs, Stop-Outs, and Persisters: A National Profile."Los Angeles: Labortory on Research for Higher Educatadh, Universityof California, 1975a. 0

Astin, A.W. Preventing Students From Dropping Out. San Francisco: Jossey-Bas, 1975b.

Attrition Study. Covenant College, April 1973.--

Bayer, A. E "The College Drop-Out: Factors AffectingSociology of Educate}, 1968, 41, 305-316.

Blai, B. Student Retention and Withdrawals at Harcum.Bryn Mawr, Pennsylvanil, 1979.

O

Senior College Completion."

Harcum Junior,doliege,

4

AP*

Blanchfieid, W C. "College Drop-Outs Identification: 4 Case Study." The Journals

of Experimental Education, 1971, 40, 1-4,

Carnegie Comtission on-Higher Education. More Time,, Less Options_ New York:McGraw-Hill, 1972.

Cohen, A, M., and Brawer, Florence- Student, C.h-dTacteristics, Personality,and Drop -Out Propensity. Washington, D.C.: American Association ofJunior Colleges. 1970- .

...

Cope, R G. "Limitations of Attrition Rates and Causes Givenor Dropping Outof College." Journal of ollese Student Personnel, 1968, 9, 386-392.

-

Cope, R. G "Are Students More Likely to, Drop -Out of Large Colleges?" CollegeStudent Journal, ',1972, 6, 92-97.

Couch, C., and Murray, J. S., "Significant Others and Evaluation," Sociometsy,1964, 27, 502-509.

Escher, Sister Firmin Attrition Study of Freshmen, 1971-7i. College of St.Benedict, July 5, 1973.

Etters, E M Attrition at Parsons allege, 1950-1967 Office of InstitutionalResearch, Parsons College, Fairfield, Iowa, 1967,

20

)

Fenstemacher, W. "College Drop-Outs, Theories, and Research Findings.",Tomorrow's Imperative Today, Robert G. bppe,'ed.,The Associationfor Institutiotial Research, 1973.

Haller, A. 0.'Woelfel, J., and Fink, E. "Wisconsin Significant Other,Battery: Instruction, Validation, and Relability Tests of Question-naire Instruments. to Identify 'Significant Others' and MeasureTheir Educational-and Occupational Expectations for High SchoolUse," Madison,.University,of Wisconsin, Final Report, U.S. Office ofEducation, Project t5-1170, 1969.

italler, /1 E. and Woelfel, J. "Significant Others and Their Expectations:Concepts and Instruments, to Measure Interpersonal Influence on ,

Status ASpirations " Rural Sociology, 1972, 37:4, 591-622,

'Hannah, W. "Perspnality fferentials between Lower Division Drop-Outsand Spay-Ins," T e Journal of College Student Personnel, 1971,12, 16-19,

Hannah, W. "Withdrawal From College." Project on Student Development-CAsC, Spring Arbor College, 1972.

Iffert, R. E, "Retention and Withdrawal of College Students." Washington,01C-; 'U.S. Government Printing Office, 1957.

them, R. E, and Clarke, B. S. College Applicants, Entrants, Drop-Outs.-1 Bulletin 1965, No. 29, Washington, D.C.: Government Printing

' Office, 1965- ." .

kenberry, S- O. "kao.tors in College PerSistence," Journal of CounselintlPsychology, 1961, 8, 322-329. ,

. .

..

. ,

*

,

3ohnson, D. t "Personality Characteristics in Relation to4College _Persistence."Journal of Counseling Psychology, 1970, 17, 162-167.

Kline, G., Attrition Study, Institution 1 Research, Spring Arbor College;1974.

Knoell, D. M- °institutional Research on Retention and Withdrawal."" InH.T Sprague (ed.), Research on College Students. Berkley, California:Western,Interstate Commission for Higher Education and Center forHigher EducatiOnf December, 196P,.41-65.

Knoell, D. M. "A Critical, Review of Research on the College Drop-Out." In'L. Pervin.et. al,,(ed.) College Drop-Out and the Utilization ofTalent. TrinO6toh: PrincAon University, Press, 1966.

Marsh; L M. "college Drop-z-Uut:;;-- Review." Personnel and ,Guidance Journal.1966,, 44, 475- 481..-

Mead, G. H. Mind, Self, and Soclivey. Chicago: University of Chicago 'Press, 1934.

..21

I

4

O

,_ k

McNelley, J H, 'college Student Mortality. "U.S. Offide of BOUdation,Bulletin 1937, No 11. Washicgton,'D.C..: U.S:' Printing Office, 1938.

./

.11elson, A G. "College Characteristice'Associated with Freshmen Attrition."The Personnel and Guidande"Journal, 1966, i4,1046-1050.

s ,

(,

Noel, L. Attrition/Retention.Studies: Annotated Bibliographies. ACTProgram: Iowa City, 1975.

Summersk111, 3 "Drop-Outs from College ".. In N; Sanford, (ed.)-TheAmerican,College. New York: Wiley, 1562.

.Waller, C. "Reseach,Related to College Persistence: A Review of'Some--Research Concerning College Student Persistence and Withdrawal,"College and'Iiniversity'1964, 39, 281 -294..

Woelfel, J- "Significant Other Rolds, p and the,Educatienal and OccupationalAtta4nMent Process: Results; of Preliminary Administratignof theWisconsin Significant'Other"_Battery." _Madison: University ofWisconsin-, Unpublished PhD Dissertation, 1568.

t :

1 a

4%

I

u