1. Results of a Psychosocial Intervention Program to Facilitate Adjustment to College Jean F. Ayers, Jonathan F. Mattanah, Leonie J. Brooks, Julie L. Quimby, and Bethany L. Brand Bethany L. Brand Towson University

2. Student Collaborators on the Transition to Towson Study  Michael ArmstrongKourtney Murphy  Stephanie BarrStephanie Nadeau  Elizabeth BierachAmber Norwood  Laura BowmanErica Sherry  Kaitlin CarrozzaEmily Stevens  Melissa FarrellThomas Theriault  Pellie GershovskyAnn Thomas  Kristen Hood Jodi Trumbull  Meghan Jancuk Lisa Wanionek  Amie Kolos  Chet Meinzer

3. College Attendance ► estimated that over 60% of US high school graduates will attend some form of postsecondary education (US Census Bureau, 2003) ► attrition from college highest in the first year (Tinto, 1987) ► half of those who drop out of college in the first year drop out in weeks two through six of the college experience (Levitz & Noel, 1989)

4. Models of Adjustment ► Stage models: adjustment proceeds through a sequence of predictable stages (e.g., Rubble & Seidman, 1996) ► Interacting factors that influence adjustment ( Schlossberg, 1981 ): ► perception of the transition ► characteristics of the pre- and post- transition environments ► characteristics of the individual

5. Specifics of College Adjustment ► “little fish in a big pond” phenomenon ► less contact and interaction with faculty than in high school ► physical separation from familial and peer support groups ► exposure to diverse behaviors, values, and perspectives

6. Social Support: Theoretical Models ► Buffering theory: social support “buffers” individuals from the physical and psychological impact of highly stressful situations. ► “Enhancement theory”: positive social relationships provide multiple benefits even in the absence of highly stressful events

7. Prior Research ► Social support plays a significant role in how well students adjust to university life in the first year (Hunsberger,Pancer,Pratt, & Alisat, 1994). ► students’ expectations about university life influenced adjustment throughout their college years (Jackson et al., 2000) ► a group-based intervention focusing on establishing social support and meeting the challenges of university life led to better adjustment, compared to a control group, in the second and fourth years of college (Pratt et al., 2000)

8. Current hypothesis ► A time limited psychosocial intervention would facilitate improved adjustment to college on both subjective and behavioral outcome measures. ► We hypothesized positive outcomes despite the application of the intervention in a more metropolitan setting and with a more diverse sample than has been used in prior research.

9. Research Design ► randomized, controlled intervention for incoming college freshmen ► peer facilitated semi-structured psychosocial groups using clinical honor students as facilitators ► repeated measures related broadly to adjustment at three time points (summer prior to matriculation, mid-fall, and mid- spring of freshman year)

10. Methodology: Sample ► 184 first year college students over two years of data collection (55 male and 129 female); current results focus only on the first year of data collection (N=88), which have been analyzed at this point. ► 45 randomly assigned to the intervention group; 43 assigned to the control group ► mean age of 17.6 years ► 69.1% Caucasian; 15.8% African American; 5.3% Asian American, and 9.8% “other”

11. Methodology: Measures ► Beck Depression Inventory (Beck, Steer, & Garbin, 1988) ► UCLA Loneliness Scale (Russell, Peplau, & Cutrona, 1980) ► Social Provisions Scale (Cutrona & Russell, 1987) ► Student Adaptation to College Questionnaire (Baker & Syrik, 1984)

12. Methodology: Procedure ► Intervention groups met nine times; eight times across the fall semester and once in the spring semester ► control group met once in the fall semester for an informational session and data collection and once in the spring semester for data collection only

13. Semi-structured guidelines for intervention groups ► “check-in” with all group members ► structured task to facilitate the topic for the meeting ► group discussion ► sharing of ideas and skill building ► evaluation of the session ► preparation for the following session

14. Sample topics for intervention groups ► maintaining old social ties and developing new ones ► balancing work, academic, and social demands ► peer pressure, values, and college life ► residential issues ► expectations regarding college

15. Results ► Present results at three time points  Summer prior to the intervention  Fall of the First-Year (mid-way through intervention)  Spring of the First-Year (at the end of the intervention)

16. Prior to Intervention (Summer) ► No difference between the groups on loneliness or social support at baseline. ► Intervention group was slightly more depressed (p. =.06)

17. Fall Semester- Effects on Depression, Loneliness, & Soc. Support ► Groups did not differ in the fall semester in terms of depression, loneliness, or social support.

18. Fall Semester- Adjustment to Campus ► The groups did not differ in terms of academic, social, or emotional adjustment to the campus either.

19. Spring Semester – Effects on Depression, Loneliness, & Soc. Support By end of year, intervention group was less depressed (p. =. 09, R effect =.24), less lonely (p =.03, R effect =.31), and reported greater social support (p. =.05, R effect =.27). By end of year, intervention group was less depressed (p. =. 09, R effect =.24), less lonely (p =.03, R effect =.31), and reported greater social support (p. =.05, R effect =.27).

20. Spring Semester- Adjustment to Campus ► Intervention group showed better social adjustment to campus (p. =.06, R effect =.28) but did not differ on academic or emotional adjustment.

21. Conclusions ► Preliminary results confirm that this intervention is effective for students at a large, metropolitan university, especially in the social adjustment realm. ► We found evidence for a sleeper effect of the intervention, consistent with results from Pratt et al. (2000). Effects of the intervention show up most clearly by the end and not mid-way through it. One possible explanation is that Fall semester is a very disequilibrating time, when students’ adjustment is in flux, masking intervention effects. ► Need to examine what moderates the effect: Gender, students’ expectations regarding adjustment, etc.