1 Positivity as a Predictor of Student Retention PNAIRP Conference Presentation Monday, Oct. 4, 2010 Joe Montgomery, Ph.D. Dean for Institutional Effectiveness Columbia Basin College

2 Retention as a Major Concern for Colleges Considerable resources are devoted to reducing student attrition: Counseling/Advising First Year Introduction (FYI) Probation programs Tutor Center Student Support Services Faculty involvement Nonetheless, fall-to-fall retention is about 50% Four-year graduation rates at around 30% Even lower retention rates for students enrolled in dev math Studies of student attrition often find that work responsibilities and financial issues contribute to some students leaving– but not all. These factors aren’t under college control There is definitely a need for greater understanding of student attrition and effective interventions

3 Definition of Positive Psychology “Scientific study of optimal human functioning” P.P. helps people develop qualities that lead to greater fulfillment for themselves and others Main dimensions: - Positive emotions and subjective states, constructive thoughts, optimism, hope - Positive individual traits (e.g., courage, persistence, honesty, wisdom) - Positive institutions (e.g., healthy families, work environments, positive communities) Shifting attention from alleviating human suffering (medical model) to cultivating human flourishing Why is this of interest to us in IR?

4 Positivity Defined by Fredrickson as moments of positive emotion that quickly come and go (fits in with first dimension of PP) Occurs when we feel connected to others, loved, playful, joyful, creative, excited. Includes emotions of love, joy, gratitude, serenity, interest, inspiration Positivity is the building block for her “Broaden and Build “theory - With more positivity we feel good - Positive affect changes how our mind works–literally! We are smarter, more creative, more open to new ideas etc. - Builds our resources for the future– new skills, interests, better relationships, greater resilience - Blocks negativity, reduces negative symptoms of stress (e.g., reduces blood pressure) - “Tipping point” effect: our lives dramatically improve when “Positivity ratio” exceeds 3/1 - We can take charge of an increase our positivity; noticing when it occurs is a big first step

5555 Positivity Level FeelingsMood Physical Condition IntelligenceCreativity Personal Relations ResilienceLong-Term Trend Positivity ratio > 3.0; tipping point exceeded. Very positive, optimistic Very positive Feel strong & fit, body feels great, resistant to illness Bright, quick, sharp, rapid recall Apply learning in new contexts, new/unique thoughts and ideas Very warm, outgoing, welcoming Rapid recovery from negative events, losses “Broaden and Build”: Positive Spiral, “Flourishing” Positivity ratio < 1.0, approaching 0. Very depressed, highly anxious, acute sadness Very negative Major illnesses, lasting insomnia, painful joints, back injury, headaches, poor vision Very slow to understand, respond; poor memory No new ideas, can’t apply learning to new contexts Hostile, antagonistic Failure to recover from negative events, losses “Fight or Flight”: Negative Spiral, “Languishing” Fredrickson’s Broaden and Build Model

6 ALL RIGHT, WHO CHOSE WHO WE STAND BY? I HAVE STANDARDS.

7 CAN YOU BELIEVE WHAT THIS DUDE LOOKS LIKE WET? HA HA HA

8 Link Between Broaden and Build and Retention Hypothesis: Positivity is associated with many positive outcomes, including creativity, expanded awareness, greater intelligence, favorable relationships. Consequently, students high in Positivity should perceive college as being less difficult, more rewarding, have more positive perceptions of the college, and should perceive fewer barriers to their education. Students higher in Positivity should be more likely to stay in school, graduate/transfer, and report more satisfaction with their education, as compared to low Positivity students.

9 CBC Student Survey 7 main sections, 124 items (mostly 5-point Likert-type items) Part I. Student Education and Learning A. Educational activities (e.g., class participation, integrating ideas from multiple sources, working with other students, etc.) B. Educational experiences (items related to faculty teaching style, class discussion, higher-level thinking, etc.)– items derived from Ken Bain’s book What the best college teachers do Part II. Educational and Personal Growth– Personal Development (how much CBC has prepared them to transfer, provided a broad education, prepared them for employment) Part III. CBC as an Institution (able to enroll in desired classes, placement, advising, Resource Center, Tutor Center, cultural events) Part IV. Potential Barriers to College Success (work responsibilities, financial pressures, high school academic preparation, family support) Part V. Positivity items (taken from Fredrickson, 2009, with permission) Part VI. Overall Evaluation of Education at CBC ( quality of instruction, value of education, interactions with instructors, preparation for transfer, equipment and technology, etc.) Part VII. Student Demographics (full/part time, work schedule, credits earned to date, gender, ethnic group, major, parents’ education, income, etc.)

10 Positivity Scale (Fredrickson, 2009) Consists of 20 “Emotional Descriptors” Students rate the “greatest amount” that they experienced each feeling within the past 24 hours, from “not at all” to “extremely” 10 positive items. Examples include: Amused, fun-loving, silly Awe, wonder, or amazement Grateful, appreciative, or thankful Hopeful, optimistic, or encouraged 10 negative items. Examples include: Angry, irritated, or annoyed Contemptuous, scornful, or disdainful Embarrassed, self-conscious, or blushing Available online at Her approach to scoring: count positive items rated 2 or higher (P), count negative items rated 1 or higher (N), compute P/N Goal is to exceed the “tipping point” of 3.0

11 Comments on Scoring Positivity Scale Fredrickson’s scoring procedure is puzzling– she takes interval-level data (from Likert items) and converts them to simple counts (nominal scale), thus losing lots of information I added my own scoring procedure– after establishing strong internal consistency reliability, computed summative score for Positive and Negative items, ratio of Positive/Negative and compared these values with Fredrickson’s measure Reliability results: Positive Items: Alpha= 0.89 Negative Items: Alpha= 0.84 All Items: 0.77 Note: reliability values for each section of the Student survey exceeded 0.70

12 Correlation of Positivity Measures with Survey Dimensions Survey Dimension: Mean: Ed. Activities Mean: Perceptions of Faculty Mean: Educational & Personal Growth Mean: CBC as an Institution Mean: Barriers to College Success Total Scorer p-value N Positive Totalr p-value N Negative Totalr p-valueNS N Pos/Neg Ratior p-value N Fredrickson's P ratior p-value N

1. Work responsibilities 2. Financial pressures 3. A physical disability 4. Insufficient financial assistance college 5. Weak high school prep 6. Difficulty completing math 7. Poor physical health 8. Feelings of depression, anxiety 9. Inadequate financial assistance family 10. Difficulty connecting with faculty 11. Lack of family encouragement 12. Limited English 13. Family responsibilities Mean Pos Items r * * ** ** ** * * ** * p- valueNS.013NS NS NS.018 Mean Neg Items r.128 **.154 **.156 **.146 **.192 **.208 **.173 **.405 **.237 **.298 **.267 **.117 **.148 ** p- value Positivity Ratio (Likert) r-.130 ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** ** * ** p- value Positivity Ratio (Fredrick son) r * ** ** ** ** ** ** ** * p- valueNS NS Correlations Between Positivity Measures and Barriers to Education

14 Barriers to Educational Success Barriers to EducationMeanSt. Dev. 2. Financial pressures Work Responsibilities Financial assistance: college Family responsibilities Difficulty completing math Weak high school prep Financial help: family Connecting with faculty Depression, anxiety A physical disability Poor physical health Family encouragement Limited English ability

15 Emotional Descriptors:Mean Std. Dev. 1. Amused, fun-loving, or silly Angry, irritated, or annoyed Ashamed, humiliated, or disgraced Awe, wonder, or amazement Contemptuous, scornful, or disdainful Disgust, distaste, or revulsion Embarrassed, self-conscious, or blushing Grateful, appreciative, or thankful Guilty, repentant, or blameworthy Hate, distrust, or suspicion Hopeful, optimistic, or encouraged Inspired, uplifted, or elevated Interested, alert, or curious Joyful, glad, or happy Love, closeness, or trust Proud, confident, or self-assured Sad, downhearted, or unhappy Scared, fearful, or afraid Serene, content, or peaceful Stressed, nervous, or overwhelmed Mean for Emotional Descriptor Items Mean for Positive Items Mean for Negative Items Part V. Emotional Well-Being Items

16 Part V. Emotional Well-Being Items Positive Descriptors Negative Descriptors

17 Likert and Fredrickson P-Ratios: Regression with Quadratic Term Dependent Variable:Likert-Based Positivity Ratio Equation Model SummaryParameter Estimates R SquareFdf1df2Sig.Constantb1b2 Linear Quadratic Exponential Y= *Fred+ (-.042*Fred-squared) Fredrickson’s 3.0 tipping point corresponds to n the Likert-based P ratio

18 Positivity RatioCountPctCum Pct < to to to to to to > Total Positivity Ratio Distribution

19 Summary/Conclusions Fredrickson’s Broaden and Build Theory suggests that students low in positivity may be at a cognitive and emotional disadvantage in terms of completing their education, hence more likely to drop out Students with higher ratings on negative affect items and lower P ratios perceived greater barriers to educational success Within the Barriers scale, the P-ratio and Neg. Emotions correlated with “difficulty completing the math requirement”, “feelings of depression and anxiety”, “inadequate financial support from my family”, “difficulty connecting with the faculty”, “lack of family support, encouragement” Implications: early identification of those low on “P” and establishing interventions may reduce the risk of dropping out 2010 cohort study: longitudinal tracking of students, following initial Psychological Well-Being assessment

20 Appendix

21 Age Group Positivity Measure:< Positive Item Mean Negative Item Mean Difference Pos/ Neg Fred. p ratio n Positivity Results by Age Group

22 Parents Who Attended College Positivity Measure:MotherFatherBothNeither Positive Item Mean Negative Item Mean Difference Pos/ Neg Fred. p ratio n Positivity Results by Parent Education

23 Ethnic Group Positivity Measure:AsianHispanicWhiteDecline Positive Item Mean Negative Item Mean Difference Pos/ Neg Fred. p ratio n Positivity Results by Ethnic Group

24 Income Group Positivity Measure: < $16215 $ $21855 $ $27465 $ $33075 $ $ $44295 $ $49905 $ $55515 $55516 or more Positive Item Mean Negative Item Mean Difference Pos/ Neg Fred. p ratio n Positivity by Income Level

25 Positivity Measure:Full- timePart- time Total EWB Positive Item Mean Negative Item Mean Pos/ Neg Fred. p ratio n Positivity Results by Full vs Part Time

26 Positivity Measure:FemaleMale Positive Item Mean Negative Item Mean Difference Pos/ Neg Fred. p ratio n Positivity Results by Gender