Eunjin Hwang

Sam Houston State University

Integration of Higher Education in Rural Area

:Comparison of Traditional and Non-traditional

Students

•73% of students in U.S higher education is

non-traditional students.

Introduction

1. Definition of Non-traditional Student

NCEB provides the definition of non-traditional students by six

characteristics.

•Financial Status•Family

Status

•Academic Status

•Enrollment Status

Attend part time/ Work

full time

Do not have a high school

diploma

Financially dependent

Have dependents/

Single parent

Source: U.S. Department of Education, NCES.

National Postsecondary Student Aid Study (NPSAS) 2000

Source : NCES. National Postsecondary Student Aid Study 2000

Figure 1. Percentage of students with nontraditional characteristics 1992-1993 and 1999-2000

Figure 2. Percentage distribution of undergraduates according to their student status, by type of institution: 1999–2000

Highly nontraditional

Moderately nontraditional

Minimally nontraditional

Traditional

Public

2-yearPublic

4-year

Private

Not-for-

profit

4-year

Private

For-

profit

4-year

Total

Source : NCES. National Postsecondary Student Aid Study 2000

According to data analysis of NCEB, the most common

characteristic of non-traditional students is financially

independent, attend part time, and delayed enrollment. Also, within

public 2 –year institution, highly non-traditional students are highly

distributed.

2. Social Factors

• Aging population

• Educational requirement for professions, vocation, occupations • Equal

opportunities women and minorities

What is the problem?

1. Non-traditional students have barriers in pursuing

their academic career.

1) Financial poverty

2) Time poverty

- Work full time

- Multiple roles

3) Institutional Barriers

-Learning the rules of

academia

- Reading and writing

assignment, etc.

2. Non traditional students from low socioeconomic

(LSES) backgrounds are more likely to have intensified

barriers.

3. University students from a LSES background often

belong to multiple equity group, the most common of

which is living in a rural or isolated area.

The Purpose of the Study is..

To understand the barriers of non-traditional student in a rural area.

To provides a new interpretation of non-traditional students of low socio economic status and racial or ethnical minor group.

To provide the social framework for better school policy and practice for supporting students of low socioeconomic status.

Research Question

1. How institutional rhetoric of higher education is differently

experienced by traditional students and non-traditional

students in the first academic year ?

2. What barriers are experienced by non-traditional

students in a rural area?

Significance of This Study

1. This study examines barriers of non traditional

students by comparing the difference of academic

experience in higher education between non-

traditional students and traditional students.

2. Previous studies examined barriers based on

qualitative method approach. This study focus on

non-traditional students, particularly in a rural area

based on quantitative method approach.

Theoretical Framework

1. Tinto’s Model of Student Retention

Figure 4. Tinto, V. Dropout from Higher Education (1975)

Criticism : The validity generalizing its constructs to explain

attrition among non-traditional students since the model was

developed mostly in relation to traditional students and residential

academic context.

2. Revised Model : Rovai’s model for adult dropouts

Learner Characteristic

-Age

-Gender

-Education

-Employment status

External factors

-Scheduling conflicts

-Family issues

-Financial problems

-Managerial support

-Personal issues(e.g.health)

Internal factors

-Social integration

-Academic integration

( instructor follow-up, activity

level, instructional design,

assignment level, etc. )

-Technology/technical/usability

issues

-Lack of motivation

Learner Skills

Dropout/

Persisten

ce

l--------------Prior to the course -------------------------ll-----------------During the course------------------l

Conclusion

1. Non traditional students, particularly of low socioeconomic

status in a rural area experience intensified study barriers.

2. To reduce the rate of attrition and support non-traditional

students, institutional support such as financial aids and

counseling services, etc. should be provided.

Bibliography

Bamber, J.,& Tett, L (2000). Transforming the learning experiences of non-traditional students: a perspective from higher education. Studies in Continuing Education, 22(1), 57-75.

Deil-Amen, R (2011). Socio-academic integrative moments: rethinking academic and social integration among two-year college students in career-related programs. Journal of Higher Education, 82(1), 54-91.

Gilardi, S.,& Guqlielmetti,C (2011). University life of non-traditional students: engagement styles and impact on attrition. Journal of Higher Education, 82(1), 33-53.

Hermida, J (2010). Inclusive teaching: an approach for encouraging non-traditional student success. International Journal of Research& Review, 5(1), 19-30.

Marandet, E.,& Wainwright, E (2009). Discourses of integration and exclusion: equal opportunities for university students with dependent children? Space & Polity, 13(2), 109 -125.

Marion, B (2001). Experiencing the barriers: non-traditional students entering higher education.Policy & Practice, 16(2), 141-60.

Park,J.,& Choi, H (2009) Factors influencing adult learners’ decision to drop out or persist in online learning. Educational Technology& Society, 12(4), 207-217.

Tones, M., Fraser, J., Elder, R.,& White, K (2009). Supporting mature-aged students from a low Socio-economic background. Higher Education, 58(4), 505-529.