1. NONTRADITIONAL STUDENTS IN COMMUNITY COLLEGES AND THE MODEL OF COLLEGE OUTCOMES FOR ADULTS Applied Technology, Training and Development University of North Texas Nanette Philibert, B.S., M.Ed.

2. Introduction Welcome

3. Background/Significance of the Study Rise of nontraditional students in higher education Increase in enrollment in Community Colleges Foundation of higher education programs

4. Theoretical Framework Donaldson & Graham’s Model of College Outcomes for Adults  Proposes a framework to examine and access key elements affecting the learning of nontraditional students  Looks at relationships between six major elements related to adults’ lives and undergraduate experiences

5. Theoretical Framework

6. Prior Experience & Personal Biographies Psychosocial and Value Orientations Adult’s Cognition (Justice & Dornan, 2001) Connecting Classroom Life-World Environment Outcomes

7. Purpose of the Study The purpose of this study is to examine three components of the Model of College Outcomes for Adults: Prior Experience and Personal Biographies Connecting Classroom Life-World Environment And assess their application to traditional and nontraditional students in community colleges in both technical and nontechnical courses of study.

8. Hypothesis Revised MANOVA Hypothesis*  Ho1.There is no statistically significant difference between traditional and nontraditional students in community colleges as measured by Personal Experience & Personal Biographies, the Connecting Classroom, and Life-World Experience.  Ho2.There is no statistically significant difference between students in technical and nontechnical community college courses as measured by Personal Experience & Personal Biographies, the Connecting Classroom, and Life-World Experience.  Ho3.There is no statistically significant difference between traditional and nontraditional students and technical and nontechnical students in community colleges as measured by Personal Experience & Personal Biographies, the Connecting Classroom, and Life-World Experience. * Discussion with Dr. Henson, Dr. Allen, and Nanette on 22 March 2005.

9. Limitations Participants vary in age, gender, ethnicity, educational level, academic ability, socioeconomic status, life experience, work experience, and motivation Ability to generalize the results Administrative support

10. Delimitations Study is limited to samples of convenience collected from day and night students Study examines only three components of the model

11. Definitions Horn’s definition of a nontraditional student (1996) Community College Technical Course Nontechnical Course

12. Literature Review Traditional verses Nontraditional Students  GI Bill and World War II  Meaningful involvement in the college environment  Adult schema, metacognition, and academic success (Kasworm, 1997; Meriam & Caferella, 1991,1999; Hughes & Graham, 1991)  Learning Styles (Sheehan, McMenamin & McDevitt, 1992)  Motivations and characteristics of adults (Fujita-Stark, 1996)  Personal and academic adjustment of nontraditional students (Chartrand, 1990)  Perceptions of effective teaching (Donaldson, Flannery & Ross-Gordon,1993)

13. Literature Review Community Colleges  Most democratic of all post-secondary institutions (McLeod, 2002)  Reasons that students enroll (VanDerLinden, 2002)  Basic academic education and applied forms of training (Carnevale & Desrochers, 2001)  Primary provider of credit and noncredit certificates and certifications (Carnevale & Desrochers, 2001)

14. Literature Review Model of College Outcomes for Adults Draws on the work of Kasworm (1995; 1997), Kasworm & Blowers (1994), Kuh (1993), Cupp (1991), Graham & Donaldson (1996), Donaldson, Graham, Kasworm & Dirkx (1999) Adult Cognition was examined by Justice & Dornan (2001) Webb (2004 )

15. Methodology Population Traditional and Nontraditional Students currently attending technical and nontechnical courses at North Texas Community Colleges Sample Table 1 Sampling Table _________________________________________________________________ Nontraditional Traditional _________________________________________________________________ Technical Degree Programs 7575 Nontechnical Degree Programs 7575 _________________________________________________________________

16. Methodology Instrument Content and Construct Validity Reliability Pilot Study Data Collection Arrange with schools to visit classrooms On-site survey administration and collection Schedule for 1 to 2 weeks in summer (end of June)

17. Methodology Treatment of the Data and Data Analysis  Compile data on spread sheet  SPSS  MANOVA Statistical test to determine if two or more independent variables can significantly impact two or more dependent variables Post Hoc tests utilized as needed  T-test for various demographic variables: Marital status, education level, military status, and employment status

18. Next Steps  Make committee suggested changes  Finalize instrument items  Validity  Prepare Human Subject Package and submit  Conduct Pilot Test  Reliability  Contact institutions  Schedule survey administration  Administer survey  Collect and compile data  Analyze  Findings and Discussion  Re-writes  Defense

19. Committee Recommendations Finalize Instrument Items Prelim. Validity Human Subjects Board Requirements Conduct Pilot Test Prelim. Reliability Contact Institutions Survey Schedule Administer Survey Collect and Compile Data Analyze Data Findings and Discussion Incorporate Feedback Process Flow Re-writes Defense

20. Questions