2.3.2:?

I

.3... E...

 

Law.

:.......+.. .. . fl.

.
313 i. .2. V ..L....

cu““ m n a O ‘1‘“!
{awafi .fiWJmflw ,
.. um»? cm...)

,

4n in.

$2....

.5. : to e x
a... L5. .53:
$1.21."... a .

.2 ,
1!! .I. am
. $26. ..u§uukx...,.?r
E, u.u....in§ .3
{garafithknw}, .1 .61....
.‘1335. o... .

.439: ..
”umwmrgi

~I ¢!mll.f1\

z urn-1.2....
I: .

S.l“’.l zrb‘lu‘fl‘
522; 15.3 .. a...“
. .2 fin...“

Lu... 9.5%.?

A... 11.! $5.551! skit}...
3.5.7.. I. I;

700V

This is to certify that the
dissertation entitled

THE PROCESS OF TRANSITION FOR COMMUNITY COLLEGE
TRANSFER STUDENTS

presented by

Catherine Therese Flaga

has been accepted towards fulfillment
of the requirements for

Ph.D. degreeinHigher’ Adult, & Lifelong

 

 

Education

 

Date A l 30k)?“

M5 U is an Affirmative Action/Eq ual Opportunity Institution 0-1277l

 

LIBRARY
Michigan State
University

 

 

 

PLACE IN RETURN BOX to remove this checkout from your record.
TO AVOID FINES return on or before date due.
MAY BE RECALLED with earlier due date if requested.

 

DATE DUE DATE DUE ' DATE DUE

 

Tfififfiéh

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

6/01 c:/CIRC/DatoDuo.p65-p.15

THE PROCESS OF TRANSITION FOR
COMMUNITY COLLEGE TRANSFER STUDENTS

BY

Catherine Therese Flaga

A DISSERTATION

Submitted to
Michigan State University
in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of

DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY

Higher, Adult, and Lifelong Education
Department of Educational Administration

2002

ABSTRACT

THE PROCESS OF TRANSITION FOR
COMMUNITY COLLEGE TRANSFER STUDENTS

By
Catherine Therese Flaga

Little existing literature addresses the full picture of the process of
transition for community college transfer students over time at their new four-
year institution. Many students experience “transfer shock” (Hills 1965), which
is defined by a drop in grade point average at the new four-year institution.
However, the transfer shock literature does not even begin to tell the full story
of transfer student transition. In addition, the literature is relatively void of
research on the transition that transfer students undergo within the social
culture and physical structures of the four-year university. A great deal of
research has been conducted on freshman transition and success issues, as
well as transition issues for K-12 students. However, a much more limited body
of research is available about transfer student success. There is a need to have
a clearer understanding of the process of community college transfer student
transition over time, and the ways in which they learn about and adapt to their
new environment. Therefore, this research project was conducted to address the
question: What is the nature of transition for community college transfer
students over their first semester at a large, four—year university?

I utilized the concept of consequential transition, as developed by King
Beach (1999) as a lens for examining progress over time in the relationship of
the transfer student to their new four-year university. Taking a process
approach helped to enhance the existing literature, since very little longitudinal

research or research with more than one data collection point has been done on

transfer students. Using a qualitative, design with two data collection points, I
studied how a group of community college transfer students proceeded through
their first year at a four-year university. Thirty-five community college transfer
students were interviewed in January of their second semester at Michigan
State University about their community college experiences and their first
semester at MSU. Thirty students returned in late March or early April of this
same term to recount their second semester’s experiences and to reflectively
compare their time at the community college to their time at MSU, as well as to
compare their first semester at MSU to their second semester. Their stories led
to the development of five main themes: Learning Resources, Connecting,
Familiarity, Negotiating, and Integrating. The themes played out in three
different environments within the university: academic, social, and physical.
Differences were also noted in terms of living arrangements. In addition,
students in the study offered advice to future transfer students. Using this
knowledge as a basis, many implications are discussed as well as potential
interventions by community colleges, four-year universities as well as the
students themselves to assist with successful transition. Interventions include
improvements on and additions to traditional institutionally—based transition

programming, student affairs programming, and academic advising.

©Copyright by
CATHERINE THERESE FLAGA

2002

This dissertation is dedicated to
my husband
Michael P. Flaga
with all my love and gratitude,
to all the community college transfer students
I have had the pleasure to work with
who inspired this project,
and
to future transfer students

who I hope will benefit from this research.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

After working closely with transfer students for over seven years, it is an
honor to put their stories to paper and bring them to life for a broader audience.
It is quite clear that there are many similarities among transfer students, but a
great deal of uniqueness with each story as well. I have strived to portray their
experiences in an accurate light and to illuminate their journey through MSU.

Dissertating requires a great deal of patience, endurance, perseverance.
and adjustment. Fortunately. by working very closely with my advisor and
committee chair, Dr. Marilyn Amey, every problem was met with a creative and
workable solution. Having a competent and caring advisor has been over half
the battle for me. I have needed and gratefully received the proper balance of
challenge and support: just enough encouragement accompanied by push to get
the job done. Thank you Marilyn for your time and caring attention to this
project, especially your thorough feedback on my writing. I honestly do not
know how I could have done it otherwise. I am also very grateful to my
committee members. Drs. King Beach. John Dirkx, and Anna Ortiz for
committing time, expertise, and encouragement to my dissertation. I am
especially grateful to King for his work on and development of Consequential
Transitions. which inspired the shape of this study.

I have received a great deal of professional support for this project. I am
indebted to the College of Natural Science and the Department of Zoology for
their ongoing support. tuition reimbursement and flexibility with my work
schedule. Many thanks to Deb Dotterer, who has been an incredibly supportive

supervisor and provided me with encouragement for the final push.

I would especially like to thank my mentor, Dr. Eileen Wilson, for
inspiring me to pursue my doctorate, for providing challenge and support
throughout the years, and for being my advocate within her former role as my
supervisor. Eileen’s commitment to excellence and professional development as
well as her human touch are evident to all she encounters. I feel blessed to
engage in a rich mentoring relationship with her.

I am very grateful to have found my “created cohort”, JoLee Black Bear,
Sonia Garcia-Lombardini, and Arend Vander Pols. We endured many a class
together, and when any of us was having a rough day, the others would chime
in and keep us going. Thank you for empathizing, analyzing writing, and for
your friendship. Special thanks to Arend for spending the summer of ’99
grappling with the literature and keeping me on target with our study group for
comps on 9/ 9/ 99. Thanks for making such a grueling process more comforting!
Also thanks to fellow students Pam Eddy and Anne Hornak, who have been very
insightful and uplifted my spirit on many occasions. A wonderful side effect of
the program has been finding such great friends.

Personally, my husband Mike has been a saint throughout this process.
Whatever I needed, he provided, be it technical support, a kind word, a back
rub, or a clean house. His stability and love have kept me going all these years.
Thanks for taking such good care of me! Many, many thanks go out to my dear
friend Cristina Kapustij, lovingly known as Gidget, whose faith in me gave me
the courage to continue in the rough spots, take some needed breaks in the
middle to play hot tub scrabble, and someone to celebrate the triumphs with.
Thanks for understanding! I would also like to thank my parents and ten

siblings who highly value education and provided a loving, solid foundation on

vii

which I have been able to reach my goals.

Most of all, I would like to thank the transfer students I have had the
honor to work with who inspired this project, especially the student
participants of this study who let me into their lives for a while. I hope their

stories will help their fellow students in the future.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

LIST OF TABLES ........................................................................................ xiiii
CHAPTER ONE: PURPOSE OF STUDY AND RESEARCH QUESTIONS .............. 1
CHAPTER TWO: CRITICAL REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE ............................. 5
Introduction ............................................................................................... 5
The Students and their Environments ......................................................... 5
Community College Students ................................................................... 5
Community College Missions 8:. Culture ................................................... 6.
Four-Year University Mission 8r. Culture .......................... ‘ ......................... 7
Adjustment Research ................................................................................. 10
Coping Mechanisms ............................................................................... IQ
Coping And College Adjustment .............................................................. 14
K-12 Adjustment Studies ........................................................................ 16.
Freshmen Adjustment and Development ................................................. 18
Transfer Shock ....................................................................................... 2 1
Other Community College Adjustment Studies ........................................ 25.
Theoretical Frames .................................................................................... 27
Person-Environment Fit .......................................................................... 2S
Consequential Transition ........................................................................ 29
CHAPTER THREE: METHODOLOGY ............................................................. 31
Research Question .................................................................................... 3 1
Participants and Site for the Study ............................................................. 31
Data Collection .......................................................................................... 36
Interviews .............................................................................................. 36
Procedures ................................................................................................ 38,
Pilot Study ............................................................................................. 38
Main Study ............................................................................................ 38
Analysis of Data ........................................................................................ 39
Coding of the Data ................................................................................. 40
Study Location and Recruitment ................................................................ 41
Limitations ................................................................................................ 42
CHAPTER FOUR: ANALYSIS OF THE DATA ................................................... 45
Research Questions ................................................................................... 45
Introduction to Themes 85 Additional Findings ............................................ 46
Community College Experiences ................................................................ 49
Academic Environment at the Community College ................................... 49
Social Environment at the Community College ........................................ 51
Physical Environment at the Community College ..................................... 53
Learning Resources ................................................................................... 54
Formal Learning Resources .................................................................... 55-
Informal Learning Resources .................................................................. 61
Initiative ................................................................................................ 63

Connecting ................................................................................................ 65

Connecting-Academic Environment ........................................................ 66
Connecting-Social Environment .............................................................. 69
Connecting-Physical Environment .......................................................... 73
Familiarity ................................................................................................ 77
Familiarity-Academic Environment ......................................................... 80
Familiarity-Social Environment ............................................................... 86
Familiarity-Physical Environment ........................................................... 87
Negotiating ................................................................................................ 9O
Negotiating—Academic Environment ......................................................... 9O
Negotiating-Social Environment .............................................................. 96
Negotiating-Physical Environment ........................................................... 99
Integrating .............................................................................................. 102
Advice For Future Transfers ..................................................................... 108
Have Prior Contact With MSU 8r. Visit Campus ...................................... 108
Connect With an Advisor 8:. Gain Transfer Course Equivalency Information
................................................................................................. 109
Live On-Campus .................................................................................. 1 10
Understand the Parking System ............................................................ 1 1 1
Get Involved On-Campus ...................................................................... 112
Things MSU Can Do To Help ................................................................. l 12
Summary ................................................................................................ l 13
CHAPTER FIVE: CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS .................................. 114
Overview of the Study .............................................................................. 1 14
Review of the Themes and Additional Findings ......................................... 117
Implications ............................................................................................ 120
Overlying Structural Considerations ..................................................... 12 1
Negotiating ........................................................................................ 1 2 1
“Becoming a Spartan” ........................................................................ 123
Four-Year University Academic Environment ...................................... 124
Campus Structure ............................................................................. 125
Traditional Institutionally-based Transition Programming ...................... 126
Transfer Admissions and Campus Visits ............................................ 126
Orientation ....................................................................................... 127
Transfer Orientation Seminar Courses ............................................... 128
Increased Learning Connections ........................................................... 131
Campus Involvement. ........................................................................ 132
Mentor programs ............................................................................... 132
On-campus living .............................................................................. 133
Community College and Four-Year University Advising Implications ...... 135
Collaboration between Community College and Four-Year University
Academic Advisors. ................................................................. 136
Application of the Themes to Advising Practice. .................................. 137
Benefits of Academic Advising for Students ........................................ 138
Ideas For Future Research ....................................................................... 139
Conclusion .............................................................................................. 141
APPENDICES ............................................................................................. 143

APPENDIX I ................................................................................................ 144

QUESTIONS FROM INTERVIEW ONE ....................................................... 145
QUESTIONS FROM INTERVIEW TWO ...................................................... 147
APPENDIX II .............................................................................................. 148
RECRUITMENT E- MAIL .......................................................................... 149
PART ICIPANT CONSENT FORM ............................................................... 151
REFERENCES ............................................................................................ 1 54

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1. Participant characteristics ............................................................... 35
Table 2. Learning resources students utilized to learn about MSU .................. 65
Table 3. Means of connecting ........................................................................ 77

CHAPTER ONE

PURPOSE OF STUDY AND RESEARCH QUESTIONS

Most community college transfer students expect to succeed
academically at their new four-year institutions due to their previous college
experience. Similarly, the university structure assumes that students do not
need as much assistance with transition as freshmen, and does not provide a
great deal of structured transition programming, such as extended orientation
and campus visit programs. Despite these assumptions, the culture and
expectations of four-year institutions are vastly different from community
colleges. Many students experience “transfer shock’ (Hills 1965), which is
defined by a drop in grade point average at the new four-year institution. In
addition, a larger percentage of native students persist to graduation than
transfer students (Bulkley, 1974; Hills, 1965).

However, the transfer shock literature does not even begin to tell the full
story of transfer student transition. Academic performance is one minor part of
students’ experiences, and grades are the result of a process that has occurred
throughout the semester. The transfer shock literature shows information on
academic grades, but not on how these grades were achieved. In addition, the
literature is relatively void of research on the transition that transfer students
undergo within the social culture and physical structures of the four-year
university.

A great deal of research has been conducted on freshman transition and
success issues, as well as transition issues for K-12 students. However, a more

limited body of research is available about transfer student transition and

success. There is not a clear sense of whether or not transfer students
experience transition similarly to or different from freshmen. From availability
of campus services, it appears that universities may believe transfers have
limited adjustment issues, but the literature is unclear. Traditional transition
programming, such as orientation is much more comprehensive for freshman
than for transfers. In addition, the studies on transfer students have focused on
academic gains or losses, but have not dealt with transfer students’ stories of
their process of transition, and how they became a part of the university
community over time. Before interventions can be created to assist transfer
students with successful transition, there is a need to have a clearer
understanding of the process of transfer student transition over time, and the
ways in which they learn about and adapt to their new environment.

Due to enlarging enrollments at community colleges that have lead to
increased numbers of community college students interested in transferring to
four-year universities, it is important to understand this growing population of
students at four-year universities. The issue of transfer shock and transition
from community colleges to four-year institutions has been discussed in the
literature since the inception of junior colleges, as community colleges were
commonly called during the beginning of their history. There is awareness
within higher education of increased enrollments in the community colleges and
thus increased numbers of transfer students to four-year institutions (Cejda,
1997; Hills, 1965; Oliver, 1995; Watt, 1930). However, little is known about this
increasing population. Cejda (1997) found that 80% of the community college
students he studied indicated a desire to transfer and Illinois’ state system

reported an increase in transfer students from 28% to 39% of the total student

population and from 44% to 52% of all upper division students (Bartlett, 1995).
It appears four-year universities will continue to see increased numbers of
applications from community college students wishing to transfer. Therefore, it
is important that the community college transfer student transition process be
studied further.

The desire to better understand community college transfer student
transition leads to the development of many research questions that call for

further investigation. The research question guiding this study is:

o What is the nature of transition for community college transfer students

over their first semester at a large, four-year university?

More specifically:

o How do transfer students’ experiences change between their first and second
semester at MSU?
o How are the experiences similar or different for on- and off-campus

students?

Thirty-five community college transfer students participated in this qualitative
study. They were interviewed twice during their second term at MSU and were
asked to respond to a series of questions exploring their transitions into the
university environment during their first two semesters. I utilized the concept of
consequential transition, as developed by King Beach (1999) as a lens for

examining student progress over time. Taking a process approach helped to

enhance the existing literature, since very little longitudinal research or
research with more than one data collection point has been done on transfer
students. In addition, components of Tinto’s (1987) theory of freshmen ‘
integration were seen in the data, especially in terms of students’ experiences
with the academic and social environments. With this knowledge, possibilities
exist for the creation of interventions by community colleges, four-year
universities as well as the students themselves to assist with successful
transition. Through research, we can better assess what measures would ease
the transition for transfer students.

Before proceeding to the logistics of the study, a critical review of the
literature is prudent. Following the literature review and discussion of
theoretical lenses that support the study, chapter three outlines the
methodology of the study. Chapter four relays the data from the study as it
related to the emergent themes. Finally, Chapter five presents an overview of

the study as well as implications and ideas for future research.

CHAPTER TWO

CRITICAL REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE

Introduction

Many factors impact the transition of transfer students from community
colleges to four-year universities. In order to gain an understanding of the
differences between community colleges and four-year universities and how
they affect the academic success and transition of transfer students, a thorough

investigation of the current literature is necessary.

The Students and their Environments

Transfer student transition fundamentally involves students as well as
the collegiate environments they attend. Further explanation of community
college students, as well as community colleges and four-year universities lays
the groundwork for further understanding of community college transfer

student transition.

Community College Students

In order to focus research on community college transfer students’
experiences, it is important to understand the characteristics of community
college students. The student population at community colleges is quite diverse
in terms of ethnic background, goals, age, socio-economic background, and
family responsibilities. A larger percentage of ethnic minorities, low-income, and
nontraditional college-age students attend community colleges than four-year

institutions (Laanan, 1998). Transferring to a predominately white institution

can be a quite significant change. The average age of 29 for community college
students is significantly higher than the students at four-year universities
(Griffith 85 Conner, 1994). Many community college students are juggling family
and significant work responsibilities with school (Daugherty, 1994). The vast
majority of community college students commute to school, rather than living
on campus, which leaves them detached from the campus community. The
majority are also part-time students (Cohen 8:. Brawer, 1989). The diversity of
community college students and their eclectic interests make it more difficult to
form peer groups, which can support their academic experience (Astin, 1993). A
study of community college transfer students needs to be sensitive to the
differences among students, which may impact the themes that emerge from
the study. To understand how shifting environments impact students, it is
important to know about the environment they are departing - the community
college - as well as the environment they are moving to - the four-year

university.
Community College Missions 8: Culture

Community colleges have very broad-based missions. They serve many
different audiences, including people seeking technical and occupational
training, taking classes for enjoyment, as well as those with intentions to
receive a bachelor’s degree. At the cornerstone of the community college
mission is its open door admissions policy. Community colleges do not limit
admissions based on grade point averages and standardized test scores, but
rather open their doors to anyone who has a high school diploma or GED

(Griffith 85 Conner, 1994). Therefore, community colleges allow access to higher

education for many segments of the population who would otherwise not be
able to attend, due to the stricter admissions policies of four-year institutions
(Oliver, 1995). In addition, tuition rates at community colleges are significantly
lower than those at four-year universities, which promote access to higher
education for those with financial constraints. Enrollments at community
colleges continue to increase, which indicates an increased expansion of access
to higher education.

The academic culture of community colleges includes a large focus on
students and classroom teaching. Without an emphasis on research, teaching
is the primary objective of community college faculty. Cohen and Brawer (1989)
explain:

Junior college instructors were considered to be better than those

in the universities because their responsibilities were only to

teach, not to conduct research; their pedagogical preparation was

more evident; and they were bona fide instructors, not teaching

assistants (p. 149).

Class sizes tend to be small, and personalized attention of students is
commonplace. Community colleges attract students with a wide range of
academic abilities, from honor’s program students to many who need remedial
work (Cohen 8:. Brawer, 1989). The community college curriculum and structure
accommodate virtually all levels of academic ability. Therefore, students who

intend to transfer have access to a wide variety of courses, many of which do

not parallel what they will find at the four-year university.

Four- Year University Mission 8: Culture

Four-year universities have very difl‘erent missions and culture from

community colleges. I will specifically focus on large, state funded research-

intensive universities, because while they are significantly different from
community colleges, they attract a large percentage of community college
transfer students. The admissions policies at state funded research intensive
universities are selective, and focus heavily on standardized test scores and
grade point averages. Although state-funded four-year universities are less
costly than private institutions, they are significantly more expensive than
community colleges. Therefore, access to four-year universities is limited to
those who meet the academic restrictions, as well as the financial restraints
(Tierney, 1997). In addition, four-year universities tend to have a less diverse
undergraduate student population in terms of age and ethnicity than
community colleges (Laanan, 1998). A large part of the mission of research-
intensive universities is a strong commitment to research and graduate
education. This is in contrast to community colleges, where undergraduate
teaching, rather than research, is the primary focus (Cohen 85 Brawer, 1989).
Four-year universities typically have large residence hall systems and on-
campus activities. Since most transfer students are commuters, they may have
fewer opportunities to integrate themselves into a university’s social system
(Townsend, 1995). Therefore, many structural differences are found between
four-year universities and community colleges.

The academic culture at four-year universities includes strong academic
rigor. Class sizes tend to be large, and students must be proactive in the
educational process. Differing classroom expectations are indications of
academic culture that is dissimilar at four-year universities as compared to
community colleges (Oliver, 1995; Townsend 85 et a1., 1993). Often, four-year

institutions have decentralized student services ofi'rces, as opposed to the “one

stop shopping' structure of many community colleges. The total full-time
enrollment at four-year universities tends to be larger, stafl' to student ratios
are larger, and the personal attention to individual students may be less than
at community colleges. Many researchers have found the university to be a very
different academic environment from community colleges. Townsend reflects:

Not only are course standards usually higher, with assignments

reflecting a premium on writing and critical thinking, but

university students’ behaviors are also different from those in the

community college. (p. 188)

Townsend also discusses Boice’s (1992) description of the four-year university
academic environment reflecting “an almost Darwinian perspective about
academic success: The academically fit will demonstrate their ability and
survive, while the less fit will withdraw or flunk out” (p. 189). There are higher
expectations of student independence and out-of-the-classroom preparation at
four-year universities. Townsend asserts that faculty might take on a
“Darwinian” attitude of survival of the fittest partly because it is how they are
treated in tenure decisions, which are typically a part of the culture of four-year
universities and not those of community colleges.

Many researchers also found a higher level of student competitiveness as
opposed to collaboration at four-year universities. Community college transfer
students who were interviewed found higher academic standards at the four-
year institution, and a need for their own support system prior to arrival at the
university (Townsend, 1995). Not only were the academic expectations greater
at the four-year university, the university students were perceived as more
competitive, which reflects the academic culture of the university. Kuznak

(1972) also found that reverse transfer students were more satisfied at the

community college because there was less competition at the two-year college,

9

and more attention was given to the individual student there.

Overall, it is important to understand the differences between the
community colleges and four-year universities in order to appreciate the impact
that moving between the two environments may have on transfer students. It is

also crucial to illuminate previous research on student adjustment.
Adjustment Research

Researchers have approached the study of student adjustment in a
variety of ways, including utilizing coping mechanisms to frame their studies. A
large body exists for K-12 students as well as college freshmen, while more
limited research has been conducted specifically on community college transfer

students.
Coping Mechanisms

The processes of coping and adjustment have been studied throughout
the last century. Three distinct generations of research are evidenced
throughout the personality and social psychology literature (Suls et al., 1996).
The first generation focused on psychoanalytic perspectives, and largely
involved individuals’ use of unconscious defense mechanisms, which are often
considered maladaptive (Freud, 1937). The second generation largely ignored,
downplayed or rejected individual differences or personality traits as influencing
coping behaviors, but instead took on a transactional perspective, which
focused on situational influences of coping behaviors (Lazarus 85 Folkman,
1984). The third and most current generation of research started fairly recently,

and looks at both situational and personality trait influences on coping

10

strategies. It has emphasized conscious rather than unconscious trait theories,
such as the Big 5 personality factors (Neuroticism, Extraversion, Openness to
EXperience, Agreeableness, and Conscientiousness: N, E, O, A, and C,
respectively), which have been largely studied by Costa 85 McCrae (1985). In
addition, a small body of research relates coping to college adjustment. The
following is a more thorough discussion of the second and third generation of
research on coping, since those approaches are the most relevant to studying
transfer student transition.

The main body of coping literature looks at the transactional perspective
of coping, the second generation of research in this field. The primary premise
of this perspective is that the coping process is a transaction between the
person and the environment in a given situation. Proponents of the
transactional perspective reject a dispositional approach to coping. Evidence of
this can be found in Cohen and Lazarus’ (1979) review of studies from the
1960s and 1970s, from which they concluded that coping is more inconsistent
than consistent from one situation to another, and to the extent that situational
conditions affect the coping process, traits have little predictive value. In
addition, when dealing with a single stressful encounter, such as grieving, a
person may utilize several different coping strategies. Therefore, Cohen and
Lazarus conclude that situational rather than dispositional factors determine
coping behaviors.

The transactional perspective’s most prevalent researchers are Lazarus
and Folkman (1984), who define coping as the following:

We define c0ping as constantly changing cognitive and behavioral

efforts to manage specific external and /or internal demands that

are appraised as taxing or exceeding the resources of the person.
(p. 141)

11

They believe in a process-oriented rather than trait-oriented approach. Lazarus
and Folkman’s work has three main features. First, it is concerned with what
the person actually thinks or does, in contrast to what the person usually does,
would do, or should do, which is the concern of the trait approach. Second,
what a person does is examined within a specific context, that is, there is a
need to know with what the person is coping. Lazarus and Folkman explain the
third feature as follows:

To speak of a coping process means speaking of change in coping

thoughts and acts as a stressful encounter unfolds. Coping is thus

a shifting process in which a person must, at certain times, rely

more heavily on one form of coping, say defensive strategies, and

at other times on problem-solving strategies, as the status of the

person-environment relationship changes. (p. 142)

Therefore, coping is an ever-changing dynamic process in which the person
evaluates and re-evaluates the environment and modifies behavior. Lazarus and
Folkman do not believe that there is a set pattern to the coping process for
individuals, but rather that the situation itself is the deciding factor.

Lazarus and Folkman (1984) posit that there are two broad types of
coping: emotion-focused and problem-focused. Emotion-focused coping
strategies are directed at the self, and can involve viewing a stressful situation
differently, shifting levels of aspiration, or developing new standards of
behavior. Other emotion-focused strategies include lessening emotional
distress, avoiding, minimization, distancing, selective attention, positive
comparisons, and interpreting positive value from negative events. Problem-
focused coping strategies attempt to deal head-on with the stressor. They are
directed at the environment itself, and attempt to alter environmental

pressures, procedures, or barriers.

The amount of control the person believes he or she has over the

12

situation can determine the type of coping strategies he or she will use (Lazarus
85 Folkman, 1984). Known as situational control appraisals, they can take place
in two steps. Primary appraisal involves assessing what is at stake in a given
stressful situation. Secondary appraisal involves evaluating what coping
resources and options are available. If people believe they have some power or
control of a situation, then they are more likely to use problem-focused
strategies. If it is a situation that has to be accepted, and the person has no
control, then one is more likely to use emotion-focused strategies. For example,
Lazarus and Folkman studied college students’ coping strategies before and
after a college exam. Students were more likely to use problem-based strategies
before an exam while they had some control, and emotional—based strategies
after the exam while waiting for the grade. To measure both problem- and
emotion-focused coping strategies, Lazarus and Folkman (1984) developed the
Ways of Coping checklist (W OC), which is a self-report measure. It is one of the
most widely used coping assessments.

The major premise of the third generation of coping research is that both
situations and personality explain significant amounts of variation in coping
behavior. Research reflected both situational and dispositional influences on
coping. One example can be seen in Parkes’ (1986) research, which found that
both personality and situational factors predicted direct attempts to change
stressful circumstances. Gallagher (1996) concurs by noting, “it seems possible
to understand the relationship between coping and objective outcomes, by
taking into account individual differences (p. 427).” The development of the Big
5 personality traits highly influenced the resurgence of personality traits within

coping research. The research also typically does not assume that particular

13

coping strategies are adaptive or maladaptive, which is in contrast with the view
of first generation research. Coping mechanisms have been used as the basis

for many studies on college adjustment. Several examples are discussed below.

Coping And College Adjustment

Several studies have looked at coping related to college adjustment.
Aspinwall and Taylor (1992) conducted a longitudinal study to investigate the
impact of individual differences and coping on college adjustment and
performance. They categorized three primary strategies of coping: avoidant
coping, active coping, and seeking social support. They assessed that since
adjusting to college is an ongoing, chronic stressor for many people, coping
efforts can be detrimental to their overall success and adjustment. Therefore,
since college adjustment can be both controllable and chronic, it may be
especially likely to show the adverse effects of avoidant coping and the generally
beneficial effects of active coping. Aspinwall and Taylor found that higher self-
esteem, greater optimism, and an internal locus of control predicted less use of
avoidant coping. Avoidant coping, then, predicted less successful adjustment to
college. Greater optimism and greater desire for control predicted greater use of
active coping to deal with the stress of entering college. Active coping, in turn,
predicted better subsequent adjustment to college. In addition, social support
predicted better adjustment to college. In terms of social encouragement, college
students have been found to utilize informal support networks, such as friends
and family, considerably more than formal support services, such as counseling
centers (Robbins 85 Tanck, 1995). This finding may have an impact on the types

of interventions that are developed for transfer students by universities.

14

Programs structured with peer interaction may be more beneficial.

In addition, Aspinwall and Taylor (1992) found that the effects of self-
esteem and desire for control on academic performance are mediated largely by
increased motivation to succeed in college. Controlling for college entrance
exam scores, these two individual differences predicted increased motivation
after three months of college, which, in turn, predicted higher grades at the end
of two academic years. However, desire for control predicted lower grades at the
end of the two-year period. Aspinwall and Taylor conclude that this may be due
to the fact that someone with higher desire for control may stick with a difficult
curriculum longer than someone with low desire for control.

Healthy college student adjustment has also been related to parental
relationships. Anderson and Fleming (1986) found that lower scores on the
college maladjustment scale were related to adolescents’ perceptions of personal
control over their lives, greater residential and economic independence, and
positive feelings of emotional attachment to parents. Lopez (1991) also found
that parental relationships related to college student adjustment. In addition,
Rice et a1. (1995) noted that secure attachment to parents resulted in increased
success with college student adjustment. In a similar vein, Valentiner et al.
(1994) found that:

With controllable events, family support predicted adaptive coping,

and coping predicted changes in adjustment. With uncontrollable

events, family support related directly to changes in adjustment.
(p.1094)

Therefore, college students’ relationships with their parents appear to play a
role in their adjustment to college.
No research has specifically linked coping strategies to community

college transfer students’ transitions to four-year institutions. Research in this

15

area would help to broaden the knowledge base within the literature. This
knowledge can then be utilized to create interventions to assist in transfer

student transition and adjustment.

K-12 Adjustment Studies

Although very few studies have been conducted on the process of
transition of community college transfer students, many have studied the
affects of K-12 students transitioning to a new K-12 school. One example is a
study conducted by Causey and Dubow (1993), which measured coping
strategies of new junior high school students after three weeks and again three
months later. They also measured students’ perceptions of the environment.
COping strategies and attitudes about the school are considered resources,
which are defined as “traits, abilities, or means, both material and human,
which can be used to meet demands” (Patterson 85 McCubbin, 1987, P. 167).
Consistent with the negotiation literature, Jason et a1. (1992) suggest that
adjustment to the new environment may be viewed as a transaction between
students, resources, and stressful situations.

Causey and Dubow (1993) used a “prospective” approach, which was
originally developed by Holahan and Moos (1981) and includes a longitudinal
focus. In keeping with this approach, they collected data at two time points in
order to examine whether resources used initially to cope with transition
predicted change over time in adaptation. Causey and Dubow looked at both
global and specific measures of the environmental influences. They asked
students to report on their overall perception of the school environment as well

as more specific stressors that they found the most difficult personally. They

16

found that resource variables of higher levels of approach coping (similar to
Aspinwall and Taylor’s (1992) active coping and seeking social support) and
lower levels of avoidance coping, along with positive perceptions of school
environments were in general associated with positive adaptation.

The changes in the use of coping strategies over time are important to
assess. A student viewing the school environment more positively over time was
related to improved adaptation. Causey and Dubow (1993) also relay the need
for objective plus subjective measures of environment. In addition, they
emphasize the importance of assessing general adaptation to a new school, as
well as specific problematic stressors that students’ experience. Finally, they
recommend interventions to assist students in utilizing a greater number of
approach coping skills. These recommendations could be useful when designing
a study of community college transfer student transition.

Barone et al. (1993) looked at aspects of students’ transitions beyond
high school. They utilized the concept of ecological transition, which
Bronfenbrenner (197 9) defines as a “change in role, setting, or both” (p. 26). The
relationship between persons and environment comprise the major aspects of
transitions. Both person and environment bring resources to the transition. To
elaborate on this approach, Barone et al:

adopted an ecological “person-in-context” perspective in

characterizing the transition from high school. Emphasis is placed

on the transactions between the individual and the local context

as influential in understanding both the transition process and
adjustment-related outcomes. (p. 182)

Individuals bring caping and academic skills to the transition, while the
environment provides formal and informal resources, such as tutoring

programs and peer groups. They found that students used more informal

17

resources rather than formal, and recommend interventions to ease the
transitions of students to life beyond high school.

Barone et al.’s (1993) study was also longitudinal; they surveyed
students during spring of their senior year of high school, as well as six months
later. They looked at changes in use and composition of reference groups
between the two times, including family, peers, and non—family adults. They
also emphasized the use of social network resources in coping with the
transition as well as uses of resources for seeking employment.

Although these studies do not focus on community college transfer
students, components of this research provide a useful framework for studying
community college transfer student transition. The use of reference groups is a
component that would be constructive to assess in community college transfer
students. What support networks do they use, and how does this use change
over time? Change and lack of social support may hinder successful transition.
An ecological model is one way of assessing both institutional and individual

factors.

Freshmen Adjustment and Development

Several researchers have looked at the adjustment and integration of
college freshmen into the campus community. A variety of factors have been
shown to impact freshmen adjustment and development throughout their first
year of college.

Vincent Tinto (1987) presented a theory of freshmen development that
particularly addressed freshmen integration into the college environment. Tinto

posits that integration has three distinct stages, separation, transition, and

18

incorporation. Separation involves disassociation from high school and past
communities. The transition stage bridges the old and new. This can be
especially difficult if the old community is profoundly different from the new
college community. Finally, for incorporation to occur, students must establish
full membership in both the academic and social communities of college life.
This occurs through involvement in the community. If incorporation does not
happen, the student is more likely to depart. Although this model was
developed for freshmen, it may hold true for transfers as well. More research is
needed to see if Tinto’s model relates to transfer students as well as freshmen.

Alexander Astin’s (1984; 1993) Student Involvement Theory addresses
classroom learning, and also includes individual student attributes, such as
motivation and behavior. Astin (1984) elaborates:

Student involvement refers to the quantity and quality of the

physical and psychological energy that students invest in the

college experience. According to the theory, the greater the

student’s involvement in college, the greater will be the amount of

student learning and personal development. (pp. 528-29)

Involvement can include both in class and out of class activities, such as
student-faculty interaction, involvement in the residence halls, athletics, etc.
The theory is helpful with addressing the multiple influences on student
learning and adjustment.

Astin (1984) found that persistence was higher for students living on
campus and they were more likely to aspire to a graduate or professional
degree. They were also more likely to be involved in extracurricular activities.
On-campus jobs facilitated retention, while off-campus jobs hindered it. It is

possible that these differences will be found in transfer students who are

commuters versus residents.

19

In addition, involvement with faculty has been shown to be an important
part of the developmental process for students that also impacts their
persistence at the university. Astin (1984) elaborated:

Frequent interaction with faculty is more strongly related to

satisfaction with college than any other type of involvement, or,

indeed, any other student or institutional characteristic. (p. 304)
Similarly, Donaldson and Graham (1999) found that adult students interacted
significantly with faculty and peers within the “connecting classroom”. So,
although they were not as involved in traditional campus activities, such as
sports and student organizations, adult students were very involved within the
classroom environment.

Informed by student involvement theory, Terenzini et al. (1996) found
that students’ out of class activities had a profound impact on student learning.
Interpersonal relationships within the activities played a large role. In most
cases, out of class experiences enhanced academic and cognitive learning. More
possibilities for blending the academic and social realms of campus life should
be explored, which include opportunities to interact with many different types
of people. One positive example is that of living-learning options, which have
proved successful. Internships, speaker programs, and orientation programs
are other possibilities.

Students are also profoundly changed by the college experience.
Pascarella and Terenzini (1994) synthesized over 2500 studies, which showed
that college impacts students in many ways, including their cognitive,
psychosocial, and moral development. Typically, the majority of studies that
they looked at focused on traditional students at four-year colleges and

universities. More needs to be known about how transfer students may be

20

impacted, and if it is similar or different from native students.
Transfer Shock

The theory of transfer shock is prevalent in the literature on transfer
students. Watt 85 Touton (1930) studied transfer students who entered the
University of Southern California between 1922 and 1928, and a drop in grades
for transfer students during their first semester at their new four-year
institution compared to their grades at the community college. However, John
R. Hills did not coin the term “transfer shock” until 1965. Hills utilized the work
of Watt 85 Touton (1930) and Siemans (1943) among others in his research.
Hills developed transfer shock theory utilizing “more than a score of studies
conducted on students entering hundreds of colleges between 1910 and 1963”
(p. 244). The main components are:

1. Students who enter junior colleges and transfer to four-year
colleges typically experience an appreciable drop in college
grades after transfer.

2. Usually the transfer’s grades after transfer are lower than the
average grades of the native students.

3. Often, but not always, the transfers’ grades recover from the
loss which occurs immediately after transfer, but the degree of
recovery varies from a slight amount to complete recovery to
their pretransfer level.

4. The transfer student seems to suffer most if he transfers into a
curriculum which requires competence or training in
mathematics, if he transfers into a major state university, or if
he transfers from a junior college instead of from a four-year
coHege.

5. The transfer will be less likely to survive to graduate than will
the native student, on the average.

6. The transfer who does survive to graduate will probably take
longer to reach graduation than will a comparable native
student. (p. 244-245)

The theory of transfer shock is the premise for much of the research that

followed in the years after Hills’ inception of the theory.

21

Many researchers have found results consistent with transfer shock
theory. Patricia Diaz (1992) found that 79% of community college transfers
experienced transfer shock after transferring to a four-year college, particularly
a drop in GPA during their first semester. Watt 85 Touton (1930) discuss
previous studies that indicate a drop in transfer GPA during the first semester.
The transfer GPA at the four-year institution was found to be lower than the
transfer students’ previous college work as well as lower than native students’
GPAs. Decades later, Bulkley (1974) found that transfer students at Michigan
State University from two-year colleges experienced a significant drop in GPA,
while transfers from four-year institutions had stable GPAs. Hills (1965) also
found that transfer shock was more severe for community college transfer
students, than for those transferring from a different four-year institution. This
is consistent with the notion that many academic cultural differences exist
between two and four year institutions, as well as differences in student
populations. As another example, transfer students to MSU had a lower
graduation rate than native MSU students (Bulkley, 1974). The theory of
‘transfer shock’ held true for most students in his study, however, ‘recovery’ of
GPA did not occur for two-year college transfers. Also, Oliver (1995) notes that
Graham and Dallam (1986) found similar results confirming transfer shock. So,
there is solid support of transfer shock theory in the literature. The dip in GPA
that transfer students experience at their new four-year university may be
similar to the dip in GPA that freshmen experience when compared to their
grades in high school. However, the dip that transfer students experience may
have greater impact due to their shortened timeframe at the four-year

university, which allows less time for “recovery”.

22

While many scholars agree with Hills’ theory, other researchers found
results inconsistent with and have harsh criticism for transfer shock theory.
Siemans (1943) found:

(a) that junior college transfers hold their own academically with

the native group and, (b) that grading standards in the junior

colleges seem to be about the same as those of the university for

engineering students. (p. 26)

Nickens (1972) disregards transfer shock and states, “in the absence of
evidence indicating that ‘transfer shock’ is caused by transfer, it seems
inappropriate to assume that such a relationship exists” (p. 1). Even Hills in a
later writing (1965) states that

Differences in performance between “natives” and transfers cannot

clearly be attributed to inadequacies of the junior college unless

inadequacies of the students themselves have been ruled out

experimentally or statistically. (p. 244)

There is clearly a gap in the research literature even today. A more thorough
investigation of how academic preparedness relates to instances of transfer
shock is needed. Nickens (1972) found no significant difference in junior college
transfer’s first term GPA and native students’ first term junior year GPA after
the variance accounted for by the results on a standardized academic
achievement test was removed (Nickens, 1972). Nickens also argues that
“recovery,” the GPA of transfers rising in subsequent semesters after “transfer
shock,” may be caused in part by attrition of “poorer” students. Nickens
equates the dip in GPA that was seen in some transfer students’ first semester
in his study to the same adjustment period that freshmen have their first
semester. Perhaps there is no transfer shock, but rather standard adjustment

to a new environment. Although Nickens has harsh criticism for the transfer

shock theory, it has continued to be prevalent in the literature throughout the

23

years.

Another factor that may have bearing on the observance of transfer
shock is academic major. Brent Cejda (1997) found that community college
transfer students at Benedictine College majoring in education, fine arts and
humanities, and social sciences experienced “transfer ecstasy”, that is an
increase in GPA. However, he also found that students majoring in
mathematics, sciences, and business experienced a statistically significant dip
in GPA during their first semester, that is, transfer shock. With these findings
in mind, it would be important for transfer shock research conducted in the
future to break down analysis by academic discipline. Cejda does not
hypothesize or elaborate on why differences based on academic discipline
occurred. It is important for future studies to fill this gap in the literature, and
look further into differences, including factors that help explain why they occur.

Number of credits earned prior to transfer is another individual factor
that may impact transfer shock in different ways. Richardson and Doucette
(1980) found increased transfer shock in students with only one year of
community college credits prior to transfer, as opposed to those with two years
of coursework at the community college prior to transfer. Therefore, number of
credits earned prior to transfer may impact the transfer students’ experience at
the four-year university. Richardson and Doucette speculate why transfer
students with one or two years of coursework have a lower grade point average
when compared to native students:

Transfer shock might be attributed to differential grading

standards at the university and the community college or to the

need for community college transfers to become oriented to the
new environment and requirements of the university. (p. 47)

Therefore, a variety of factors may impact transfer student adjustment.

24

Although they point out a grade differential for students with one or two years
of community college coursework prior to transfer, Richardson and Doucette do
not hypothesize why the difference occurs. More research is needed to address
the differences based on credits.

Much of the literature on transfer shock is consistent with the original
theory, while other works contradict it. In addition, transfer shock is one
indication of difficulty with transition, but does not illuminate reasons behind
the academic difi'rculty. Even the studies that looked at differences in academic
discipline and number of credits earned did not further elaborate or speculate
why these differences occurred. Although transfer shock is a useful starting
point, it is limited in scope and does not illuminate the full transfer student
experience. Therefore, more needs to be known about the factors that facilitate

or hinder successful transition into the new environment.

Other Community College Adjustment Studies

A few researchers have explored questions concerning the academic
success of community college transfer students that move beyond the study of
transfer shock, which only captures the academic component as measured by
grades. The work of Barbara Townsend (1995) goes further in explaining the
academic component by capturing students’ perceptions of the academic
environment as well as the transfer process. In a qualitative study, Townsend
interviewed community college transfer students on their experiences at the
four-year university and with the transfer process. Students tended to seek out
informal resources, such as friends and family, as opposed to formal systems.

Only one student used the community college’s center established to aid

25

potential transfer students. In addition, Townsend (1995) found that none of
the transfer students she interviewed participated in the orientation provided by
the four-year university, though many realized later it probably would have
been helpful. In terms of their academic experiences, community college
transfer students reported experiencing much higher academic standards at
their new four year institution, including faster-paced courses and a heavier
emphasis on writing (Townsend, 1995). Many felt that the community college
did not sufficiently prepare them for the academics at the four-year university.
In addition, the students in Townsend’s (1995) study suggested that the
academic difficulty they were having at the four-year institution was in large
part due to the underprepared student population at the community college,
which they believed caused lowered standards in the classroom.

While Townsend (1995) focused on academics, Frankie Lanaan’s (1996,
1998) research addressed social components as well. Laanan (1998) attempted
to move “beyond transfer shock” to study additional factors beyond GPA that
affect community college transfer students’ adjustment to their new four-year
university. His quantitative study looked at academic, social, and psychological
factors that impact adjustment, such as how involved the students were at the
community college and the four-year university, as well as their quality of effort,
which impacts their educational outcomes. Academic adjustment included GPA,
the extent to which students experienced difficulty adjusting to the academic
standards or expectations, as well as increased stress at starting at the four-
year university. Social adjustment included the extent to which students agreed
that they experienced little difficulty adjusting to the social environment at the

four-year university, that they met people and made as many friends as they

26

would like, and are involved in social activities. Laanan found that traditional
and non-traditional aged students have different experiences, yet their
adjustment process was similar. More profound differences were found between
white and non-white students. The findings suggest that important involvement
and quality of effort variables contribute to students’ positive adjustment
processes.

Many approaches capture adjustment, but a longitudinal approach is
one way to capture transition as a developmental process. The work of
Townsend (1995) and Laanan (1998) illuminated some of the factors that
impact transfer student success, yet Laanan suggests further research be
conducted that is qualitative and longitudinal. Although many transfer shock
studies occurred over time, they were very narrow in focus. What is missing
from the literature is a comprehensive look at the community college transfer
student transition over time, which includes a view of the students’ experiences
and perceptions before, during, and after their first six months at the four-year
university. Within a process-oriented study, it would also be useful to look
closely at one individual factor, such as coping strategies in order to expand the
knowledge gained. However, before a study can be formulated, a theoretical

framework needs to be illuminated.
Theoretical Frames

Now that the individual and institutional characteristics have been
explained, as well as previous research on adjustment, it is important to
develop a theoretical frame for future studies. Many frameworks exist that

could formulate future studies of community college transfer student transition.

27

Two possibilities are person-environment fit and consequential transitions.
While person-environment fit has some historical significance, it was more
appropriate for this study to utilize consequential transitions as a theoretical

framework, as explained below.

Person-Environment Flt

One framework for studying transfer student transition is the person-
environment fit theory (Caplan 85 Van Harrison, 1993; Kelley, 1991; Lewin,
1935). Part of the academic difficulty that transfer students face with their
transition stems from an initial lack of understanding and “fit” in their new
environment. Over time, as they learn about and negotiate with the
environment, they can better succeed within it. Students can also change their
environment through personal choices.

House (1981) outlines basic analytical principles for studying personality
and social structure. First is the components principle, which states that one
must adequately understand the nature of the social structure, in this case,
community colleges as well as the four-year university. Second is the proximity
principle, which states that one must recognize the effects of social structures
are transmitted to individuals through stimuli that impinge directly on the
individual. Thus, the university structure affects transfer students as they learn
and interact within the system. Third is the psychological principle, which
states that one must understand individual psycholoy adequately so that one
can specify and test when, how, and to what extent the environment afi'ects
individual personality or behavior. Therefore, it is important to study how the

university influences students individually.

28

House’s principles can be utilized in the study of transfer student
transition. The components principle can be applied by studying the various
aspects of the university environment, including departments and campus
services. It will be helpful to have a clear sense of the academic culture of both
community colleges as well as four-year universities, elaborated below. The
proximity principle can be utilized by studying how students utilize and
negotiate the various components of the campus, and how the two different
educational settings affect them differently. The psychological principle can be
applied by studying the psychological influences that the university has on
individual students. One such individual measure is coping skills. A study
utilizing an ecological approach would be very helpful to addressing this task.
However, the person-environment fit model does not fully address a process-
oriented, dynamic approach. Consequential transitions (Beach, 1999) or
appears to be a more appropriate framework for a study of community college

transfer student transition.
Consequential thon

Consequential transition is a developmental framework created by King
Beach (1999) that looks at qualitative change over time in persons making some
type of shift. According to Beach (1999):

The concept of consequential transition involves a developmental
change in the relation between an individual and one or more
social activities. A change in relation can occur through a change
in the individual, the activity, or both. Transitions are
consequential when they are consciously reflected on, often
struggled with, and the eventual outcome changes one’s sense of
self and social positioning. (p. 1 14)

Defining characteristics of Consequential Transitions include potential identity

29

change. Lateral consequential transitions occur when an individual moves
between two historically related activities in a single direction. A typical
example is a person moving from school to the workforce upon graduation.
Another example is community college transfer students moving from the
community college to the four-year university with no intention of returning to
the community college. A transition is considered “consequential” if qualitative
change occurs in the individual.

The framework of consequential transitions is appropriate for use in
studying transfer student transition. A consequential transition does not look to
separate the person and environment, but rather to look at how their
relationship changes over time. Both the person and environment are
constantly changing and interacting with each other. The focus is on the
developing relationship. It is possible for researchers to understand the
environment by looking through the eyes of the person, and asking for his or
her perspective. This is different from the traditional person-environment fit
literature, which posits that person and environment must be measured
separately, and does not take into account as strongly the interactive processes
that persons and environments possess. A framework of consequential
transitions will assist in measuring how community college transfer students
learn about their new four-year university environment. Considering the
relevant nature of the Consequential Transitions construct, and the limitations
of Person-Environment Fit theory, I utilized Consequential Transitions as the
theoretical framework for my study of community college transfer student

transition.

30

CHAPTER THREE

METHODOLOGY
Research Question

The desire to better understand community college transfer student
transition leads to the development of many research questions that call for

further investigation. The research question guiding this study is:

0 What is the nature of transition for community college transfer students

over their first semester at a large, four-year university?

Broken down further:

0 How do transfer students’ experiences change between their first and second
semester at MSU?
0 How are the experiences similar or different for on- and off-campus

students?

Using a qualitative, design with two data collection points, I studied how
community college transfer students proceeded through their first year at a

four-year university.
Participants and Site for the Study

I studied a group of 35 community college transfer students during their

first and second semesters at Michigan State University who had attended only

31

one community college, and no other higher education institutions prior to
transfer. The study initially had a target number of 20 participants, but more
were interviewed in order to have balanced numbers of on-campus and off-
campus students. Although even more students were interested in
participating, the sample size was limited to 35 due to time and resource
constraints, and the fact that balanced numbers of on- and off-campus
students had been reached.

MSU’s Office of Admissions and Scholarships provided contact
information for 453 community college transfer students admitted to MSU for
Fall, 2000 that had attended only one community college, transferred in 45
credits or more, were ages 18-24, and were full-time students. I recruited both
female and male students in varying majors as well as fairly even numbers of
both on- and off-campus students. Participants received a $20 gift certificate to
the MSU Bookstore after the second interview, in order to encourage retention
and compensate participants for their time. Qualifying participants were
initially added to the study on a first-come, first-served basis. As the sample
became larger, some interested students were not invited to participate in order
to leave room for balanced numbers of on- and off-campus students in the
sample.

Thirty-five students participated in the first interview. Two students were
eliminated from the study after the first interview since they did not meet the
study criteria as they had attended another four-year university prior to
attending the community college. Three others were unable to participate in the
second interview for various reasons. Thirty students returned for the second

interview, and were included in the final analysis. Following a similar design

32

pattern to Cejda (1997 ), participants in the sample were limited to community
college transfer students who had earned 45 credits or more prior to transfer,
were 18-24 years old, and who were attending Michigan State University as full-
time students. Students in the study ranged from 20-24 years old, with an
average age of 21. Narrowing the sample to students ages 18-24 streamlined
the data, since transfer students of traditional age have different experiences
than those of non-traditional age (Laanan, 1998). The credit minimum of 45
ensured that students had spent at least three semesters at a community
college prior to transfer, and therefore spent significant time in the community
college environment. The students in the study actually spent an average of 2.3
years at the community college, ranging from three to eight semesters. This is
in contrast to students who take a few courses while dually enrolled in high
school before their freshmen year of college. Full-time student status was
important to ensure that students were spending a significant amount of time
within the campus community.

Assessment of the data determined some of the similarities and
differences among individual students. Many individual student factors had
potential to emerge as significant within the data. Possibilities included
academic major, age, gender, ethnicity, and type of community college attended.
In the sample, seven attended a feeder community college, that is, in close
proximity to the four-year university. Other types of community colleges
represented included twelve suburban, eight rural, two out-of-state and one
international community college. By monitoring the individual student
characteristics as I built my sample of participants, I ensured that I included

students who lived both on- and off-campus as participants, and attempted to

33

have fairly even numbers of each, 14 and 16 students respectively in the final
sample of 30. Many transfer students are commuters (Griffith 85 Connor, 1994).
However, MSU’s campus structure is primarily set up for on-campus students.
MSU has the largest residence hall system in the country, housing 17,000
student in the halls, as well as 2486 in campus apartments (MSU, 1999). In
addition, student experiences differ for on- and off-campus students (Astin,
1993). Therefore, including both on- and off-campus students in the study
provided for potentially useful comparisons among students based on housing
choice. I also ensured that I included participants in varying majors, including
15 students in open-enrollment majors that follow MSU’s general admission
criteria, such as natural science, humanities, and social science, as well as 15
students in limited-enrollment majors that have additional admission criteria of
prerequisite courses and higher grade point averages, such as engineering,
education, and business. Cejda (1997) found that the impact of transfer shock
varied for students in different academic majors, yet offered little explanation as
to why this may have occurred. Including students from varying majors helped
to glean how students’ transition processes varied in terms of major, and made
the sample more representative of the total student population. In addition, in
terms of representation, by monitoring the individual student characteristics as
I built my sample of participants, I ensured that both male and female students
were included in the sample, eleven and 19 respectively. Several ethnic
backgrounds were represented as well. When students had the option to write
down their ethnicity in a self-report, they responded: one African American, 22
Caucasian or White, one Chinese, one Hispanic, one White /Hispanic, one

Vietnamese, one White / Vietnamese. Two students chose to leave the ethnicity

34

line blank. So, of those who reported, 21% identified as persons of color. The
students in the study were not asked to self-report their sexual orientation.
Several participant characteristics of the final sample of thirty are shown on

Table 1 below, broken down by living arrangements.

Table 1. Participant characteristics

CC
of
CC
CC

American
10

iteNietnamese
on

 

1
0
1
1
1
0

Michigan State University was an excellent site for the study. MSU
admits the largest number of community college transfer students when
compared to all other four-year institutions in Michigan. In addition, the sizes
of both the campus and student population are very large, and are in stark
contrast to community college campuses. The student enrollment at MSU for
fall semester 1999 was 43,038. In addition, MSU’s campus includes 2100 acres
of existing or planned development (MSU, 1999). Therefore, the differences

between MSU and community colleges are great.

35

Data Collection

Overall, the study was a collection of individual case studies collected
over two points in time, guided by the concept of Consequential Transitions
(Beach, 1999). In studying consequential transitions, it is vital to have a
methodology that measures qualitative change over time. Therefore, a design
with two data collection points was appropriate to assess changes over time in
individual students. Since virtually no qualitative, longitudinal studies or
studies with more than one data collection point have been conducted on
community college transfer students, the study was exploratory in nature. Data

were collected through interviews.
Interviews

The first method of data collection was a series of individual, semi-
structured interviews with 35 transfer students. Students were interviewed
twice over time, and asked retrospective questions in the first interview.
Therefore, the two interviews captured three time points. The interview data
provided a depth of understanding of the struggles and triumphs that
community college transfer students experienced over time, during different
parts of their transitions. Collecting a series of snapshots over time of the
transition helped to create a clearer picture of the transition process overall, as
well as student perceptions of the university as compared to their community
college over time. Interview methodology was preferred over other forms of data
collection that would gather collective data about a group of students. Having
separate data on individual students about three time periods allowed for

analysis of individual student’s development over time. Then, by looking at the

36

data collectively, overall themes were assessed. The changing perception of
students over time was looked at closely. The interview questions were
developed with the concept of Consequential Transitions (Beach, 1999) in mind,
and looked to glean knowledge of the developing relationship between the
students and their new four-year university environment. Beach posits that
transitions are not always smooth, which may in fact be helpful to the overall
developmental process. Open-ended questions within the interviews assisted in
illuminating the transfer process in its true form, which may or may not be a
seamless process. The interview questions were also consistent with Beach’s
concept since they traced the process over time (see Appendix I).

I conducted in depth individual interviews with students on two
occasions. During the first interview, students were asked to think
retrospectively about their experiences at the community college, as well as
their expectations and aspirations of university life. Then, they were asked to
talk about the realities that they experienced at the university. So, although
compressed into one interview, the first interview gathered information about
two points in time. The first interview took place in the first few weeks of their
second semester, after students received their first semester grades, and
included retrospective questions on their community college experiences as well
as their first semester at MSU. The second interview took place later in the
second semester, when they had time for reflection, and had also taken their
first and second set of tests in the second semester. That way, students could
discuss the differences between the two semesters, including their approach to
social situations, academics and academic progress. The interview data were

analyzed qualitatively, which helped to create a picture of the transition process

37

over the three time periods. Tracing individual student experiences has helped
to enhance and provide richness to the existing literature, and allowed for a

developmental focus.

Procedures

The procedures included both a brief pilot study as well as the main

study.

Pilot Study

The pilot study was conducted with a few students in order to test out
the interview protocol. Information gathered from the pilot study better
informed how the main study was conducted, in terms of clarifying that the
interview questions and instructions were understandable to the students.

Interviews during the pilot were audiotaped to assist with the learning process.

Main Study

Since I interviewed new transfer students, I needed to locate the
interviews at a convenient, quiet, and private location on campus. Each
interview lasted 1/2-1 hour. Therefore, total time commitment for the
participants was 1-2 hours. I conducted a study with two data collection points

with the following timeline:

0 Email to recruit students sent early spring semester, 2001
o No interviews: One early spring semester (January, 2001)

0 One late spring semester (March/ April, 2001)

38

As a first major attempt at research, this project was both challenging and
rewarding. The actual interview process was delightful. It was quite refreshing
to actually be out in the field with students, after many, many months of
background research and reading. It was a challenge to interview students with
varying personalities and styles, and to adjust my approach to interviewing
accordingly.

The interviews were audio taped, transcribed verbatim, and analyzed. In
addition, I took field notes during the interviews. Dragon Naturally Speaking
voice recognition software, which was utilized for the bulk of the transcribing,
was a Godsend. It allowed me to dictate my interview tapes into a microphone
while the computer typed for me. It did take some time to tweak the software,
but the overall results were an incredible time and money saver. I also used a
varying speed tape recorder to listen to the tapes slowly the first time while I
was reading them into the computer headset, and quickly a second time as I
double checked and made small corrections to the computer’s typing. Listening
to the tapes again allowed me to envision the interview and remember the
student as a person. As soon as I was done with the second run through the
tape, I wrote up a brief summary of the important highlights of the interview.
This was essential in preparation for the second interview, and also allowed me
to process and connect with emerging themes in the data. It was also essential

for within-case analysis.

Analysis of Data

Following the principles of qualitative analysis, an extensive analysis of

39

each student’s data was conducted, and was guided by the concept of
Consequential Transition (Beach, 1999). It was important to look at each
students’ individual process of transition, the ways in which they developed,
and how their coping strategies played a role over time in the developing
relation of the students and the environments of MSU. Once I had a clear sense
of each student’s individual process, I looked for similarities and differences
between different students. It was important that the interviews represent a
reflection of the transfer student experience. Therefore, participants had the
opportunity to perform “member checks” by reviewing the transcripts from the
interviews (Seidman, 1991). Although five students wished to review the
transcripts and were sent copies, none reported back any necessary changes,
additions, or inaccuracies.

I synthesized the data from the interviews into different themes, looking
for commonalties in experiences, and grouping information into separate
categories including learning resources, connecting, familiarity, negotiating,
and integrating. Consistent with Beach’s (1999) concept, I also looked for
patterns over time, to see the movement that each student made over the
course of the three time periods covered in the two interviews. Beach (1999)
posits that transitions are not always smooth, which may in fact be helpful to
the overall developmental process. Therefore, as I looked for patterns within the

transfer process, I kept in mind that they may not be seamless.

Coding of the Data

A coding scheme was developed using the “grounded” approach,

originally advocated by Glaser and Strauss (1967), according to Miles and

40

Huberman (1994). The codes were created after the first round of data collection
was complete. The codes were developed after an initial run-through of the
data, which allowed the codes to be more context-sensitive than they would
have been prior to initial analysis of the data. The codes generated after the
initial analysis of the data were later adjusted as new themes emerged, while
others were combined.

Several of the interviews were thoroughly color coded by hand. Others
were read through to pull out points of importance. Individual student
interviews were looked at as a set of two interviews each, in order to assess
individual change over time. Following the individual student analysis, the
interviews were looked at as a collective whole that related to the emerging
themes. Therefore, each case was looked at as an individual set, and then
written up as a cumulative data analysis for the group. I chose to write about
the group as a whole, yet utilized unique examples from each of the students.
Text search functions within Microsoft Windows’ “My Computer‘ as well as
Microsoft Word were highly utilized to search all interview data for keywords

related to the themes and findings outlined in Chapter 4.
Study Location and Recruitment

Michigan State University was an excellent site to conduct this study as
the largest higher education institution in Michigan that admits the greatest
number of transfer students. Having participants in the study from the nearby
‘feeder school’ as well as rural, suburban, out-of-state, and international
schools opened up the possibility of comparison based on type of community

college attended. However, no salient differences were found in the students’

41

experiences at the community college based on type. Therefore, no analysis is
presented in terms of type of community college.

MSU is committed to the academic success of its transfer students, so
there was significant “buy in” for this project at all levels. Another fact that
assisted with the logistics of the study was that I am a full-time member of the
MSU academic staff, which left me well connected across campus. The Director
of Admissions and the Assistant Director of Transfer Admissions were both
willing to assist with student contact information, and are very interested in the
results of my study.

Recruitment took place through a targeted emailing to community college
transfer students who started MSU in the fall semester of 2000. The MSU Office
of Admissions and Scholarships provided contact information for the sole
purpose of recruitment for the study, in exchange for a personal briefing of the
results of my study. All parties hope the results will help to impact future
interventions for transfer students. A consent form was also created for
participants. Both the recruitment letter and consent form are a part of

Appendix II. Human subjects approval was filed with the university as well.
Limitations

Since this was a study with only a small number of participants, it was
limited in scope. The study provided for depth of understanding of a small
group of students, but implications for larger groups of students based on the
results of this study needs to be done with caution. The uniqueness of the
study is both a strength and a weakness. Since no research has been

conducted on this precise topic, no specific study protocol was utilized and

42

tested in previous studies. Participants were all from the same four-year
institution, and were limited to those that chose to respond thereby making it a
selective sample, which may have not included students who were struggling
and did not want to talk about their struggles, for example. Although more
students volunteered, sample size was limited due to time constraints and an
effort to have balanced numbers of on-campus versus off-campus students. The
sample was diverse in terms of ethnicity and gender. However, no analysis was
done to look at similarities or difference of experience or transition based on
gender or ethnicity. In addition, no data were gathered in terms of the sexual
orientation of the students in the study. While havingtwo data collection points
assisted in seeing change over six months, it did not measure longer-term
affects of transfer. One disadvantage to my full-time employee status is that
participants may have perceived me as an authority figure. However, I
approached participants in my role as a doctoral student, not a full-time staff
member. The interviews took place in a neutral cite that was not affiliated with
the College of Natural Science where I work. In addition, some potential
participants were eliminated if they were my advisees to avoid conflict of '
interest. Therefore, students in the majors that I advise were not recruited for
the study. Finally, although it would have been unlikely, any students who met
the criteria who were minors were excluded from the study.

Having two interviews is less ideal than three. However, due to when I
received access to participants, only two interviews were conducted for this
study. Asking retrospective questions during interview one and then conducting
interview two provided a sense of three time periods, but was different than

interviewing students before, during, and after their first semester at MSU. The

43

retrospective data collected in interview one about the students’ community
college experiences were often comparative to MSU, possibly due to the time
lapse. Asking student about their community college experiences shortly
following them may have gleaned a more “pure” sense of the students’ time at
the community college, without comparisons to MSU. In addition, I did not
collect observation data that would help triangulate the students’ perceptions,
which would be more ideal. However, since the students’ transitions happen
across so many venues it would have been difficult to capture observations for

this study.

44

CHAPTER FOUR

ANALYSIS OF THE DATA

Research Questions

Community college transfer student transition is a complex process. The
desire to better understand the process leads to the development of many

research questions that call for further investigation.

The research question guiding this study is:

o What is the nature of transition for community college transfer students

over their first semester at a large, four-year university?

More specifically:

6 How do transfer students’ experiences change between their first and second
semester at MSU?
9 How are the experiences similar or different for on- and off-campus

students?

Using a qualitative design with two data collection points, I studied how
community college transfer students proceeded through their first year at a
four-year university. The following addresses the research questions in depth,
as they relate to the findings of this study. Issues related to students’ place of

residence are included in data presented throughout the themes as relevant,

45

rather than addressed separately.

Introduction to Themes & Additional Findings

An extensive analysis of each student’s data were conducted, and was
guided by the concept of Consequential Transition (Beach, 1999). According to
Beach, a Consequential Transition entails a developmental change that has
occurred over time that often includes a shift in identity or perception due to
the relation of individuals and social situations. Consistent with Beach’s
concept, I looked for patterns over time, to see the movement that each student
made over the course of the three time periods covered in the two interviews.
The framework of consequential transitions is appropriate for use in studying
transfer student transition. A consequential transition does not look to separate
the person and environment, but rather looks at how their relation changes
over time. Both the person and environment are constantly changing and
interacting with each other. The focus is on the developing relation. This
overarching construct was utilized to guide the analysis of the interview data
and development of the themes.

Five themes about the process of transfer student transition emerged
from the data: Learning Resources, Connecting, Familiarity, Negotiating, and
Integrating. Each is important to the overall transition of the students in this
study. They illuminate the nature of the transition for community college
transfer students over their first semester at a large, four-year university as well
as the changes that occur between students’ first and second semester. In
addition, advice for future transfer students from the participants will be

relayed.

46

Each of the themes interrelates to the three distinct environments of the
university within which the students interacted: the academic, social, and
physical environments. The academic environment includes interactions in
class, with faculty both in and out of the classroom, study groups, advisors, as
well as information on career opportunities. The social environment includes
both formal and informal interactions with other students outside of the
classroom through student organizations, parties, residence halls, apartment
complexes, common areas on-campus, etc. Finally, the physical environment
not only consists of the bricks and mortar of the university but also the campus
organizational structure in terms of how the campus services and departments
function and are organized, campus logistics, overall campus culture, and
parking. In addition, the physical environment includes the finances that are
required for schooling, since tuition and other expenses can be considered a
structural requirement.

Transition is a socialization process that occurs over time. At some point,
the transition feels “over” in the student’s mind. When this happens depends on
a number of factors for each individual, including the five themes of Learning
Resources, Connecting, Familiarity, Negotiating, and Integrating that are found
in this study. By utilizing learning resources, students are able to connect. After
students connect, they are more familiar with the environment due to their
interactions. Familiarity is related to becoming socialized and comfortable
within the environment, and understanding the norms and values within the
academic, social, and physical environments of MSU. Students are also aware
of the negotiating process that they need to undertake in order to be successful

within the environment that they are now familiar with. This facilitates their

47

transition. In addition, for some students, a deeper theme of integrating has
emerged, which encompasses a shift in perception that relates back to the
student’s identity. Data within the theme of integrating are very reflective of
Tinto’s (1987) theory of freshmen integration. While Tinto’s theory encapsulates
the academic and social campus environments, the data in this study also
portrayed a third, the physical environment. How the themes play out will be
portrayed in the discussion hereinafter. The data presentation begins with an
initial discussion of the students’ perceptions of the academic, social, and
physical environments of the community college.

The students’ words are woven into the discussion of this chapter.
Quotes were chosen that best illustrate each point, and are representative of
many of the interviews that were conducted. The data audit utilized is as
follows: e.g., (9A, 2) represents a quote from interview 9A, page 2. Interviews
marked A were from the first time period, while those marked B were from the
follow-up interview. This allows the reader to assess when a student spoke. In
addition, in order to protect the identity of the participants, any reference to the
specific community college they attended has been eliminated from the data
presented. In its place is simply, “at CC“, as some students called it. Although
many types of community colleges were represented in the sample, no salient
differences were found in the students’ experiences at the community college
based on the type. Therefore, no analysis is presented in terms of type of
community college. Specific reference to student major at MSU is included,
since experiences varied in terms of size and culture of the major. In addition,
when students say "there" they are referring to the community college, and

when they say “here” they are referring to MSU. With these points in mind, here

48

are their collective stories.
Community College Experiences

To start, the students paint a picture of their experiences at the
community college within the academic, social, and physical environments.
This provides a context and foundation for their experiences at MSU. Further
understanding of the community college environments informs the discussion

of the five themes as they relate to the students’ MSU experiences.
Academic Environment at the Community College

Students’ experiences help to explain their perception of the academic
environment at the community college. One student struck upon many
academic components at her community college when she said:

I went to CC for two years, four semesters. It was the best move. I
highly recommend anybody going to the community college
instead of a big university. A lot of the basic classes they teach at
community colleges are more one-on-one and you get a lot more
out of it than you would at a major university. Especially, I am a
biochemistry major and I had a lot of chemistry and math classes
at the CC. It’s more one-on-one so you understand the basics
before you get into these big classrooms where you’re just a
number instead of an actual person. (30A, 1)

Class size and relationships with faculty were highly valued.
The classes were a lot smaller. They were sorta the same as my
high school with 30 people in the class. And there was really a lot

of interaction between you and the teacher; it wasn’t all a lecture.
(25A, 1)

Community colleges tend to utilize faculty as opposed to teaching assistants for
instruction. Students believed that the faculty were highly invested in teaching
and getting to know students.

I liked the teacher-class ratio. It was no more than thirty students

49

in a class, and you really got a lot of one-on-one time with the
teachers if you wanted it, and the teachers never looked down on
you. They weren’t some “higher power”, like I’ve noticed with some
of the professors. The professors at the community college, I’d say
probably fifty percent of them had their Doctorates, so they
weren’t undergrads or anything. (6A, 1)

Community college courses were typically well attended. One student believed
that class size impacted class attendance. “At the community college you would
have probably 90 percent of turnout in classes. And here it’s probably around
50 percent or 60 percent, just over half unless there is an exam (13, 2).”
Students also noted that faculty got to know them and made sure they
understood the material.

Most classes were a lot like here I would say. It was positive, only

one out of all of them I took wasn't very positive. So that was really

nice. They were very willing to help. They would help you; they

don’t leave you out there on your own. They would challenge you.

(17A, 2)

The classrooms had a very welcoming atmosphere. One student spoke for many
when she said, “It wasn’t as competitive (5A, 1).” The students felt comfortable
in the classroom and interacting with faculty.

Their community college experience laid the foundation for university
work. Based on the culture of their community college coursework, many
students felt well equipped for the academic content at MSU.

I feel like they prepared me really well for the classes here. There’s

no lag in knowledge... They pushed you to do your best and to

pursue excellence. In a lot of cases, I think I worked harder at CC

than at MSU, because of the smaller classes there, and the more

one-to-one ratio that you have with your instructor, and you gain

a lot more push. (1A, 1)

Another student portrayed the academic quality of her community college

experience this way:

I think a lot of the teachers had high expectations. They didn’t
think that, “oh you are at a community college. You don’t have to

50

 

try as hard,” because they knew these classes were going to
transfer to a university. So I think they pushed just as much as
what the teachers expect here. I think you get more of a one-on-
one thing than you do here; all my teachers down there knew my
name. If I ran into them I’m sure they would know who I was. But
here, some of my teachers I know they wouldn’t know who I was.
They might be like “hey, I think that girl is in one of my classes“,
but they wouldn’t know who I was. That’s why I went to the
community college first because I thought it would be a better
transition than just coming up here, especially being from a
smaller town, where I didn’t really want to jump in here and be in
a big class and be exposed to that. (24A, 2)

Overall, the small classes and dominant interaction with faculty were seen as

strong assets to the community college academic experience.

Social Environment at the Community College

The social environment at the community college was comprised of both
formal and informal interactions within and outside of the classroom. For some,
the social environment at the community college assisted them socially and
academically.

I met a lot of friends there, some friends that also continued on

over here.... I mean I met some friends who I wouldn’t have gotten

through the class without them, who helped me study and have a

social life. It was wonderful. (20A, 2)

Some students were heavily involved in the formal social structure of the
community college, including student organizations and campus events.

I was in an organization called Phi Theta Kappa, which is an

international honors society of community colleges, and I served

as an officer for a couple of different positions within that

organization. We did a lot of the service events and stuff like that.

I was also in that jazz band and in concert band. I played in the

pit for a play. I was pretty involved there. (2 1A)

There were also many ways that students were involved socially at the

community college in an informal way. The majority of the students connected

with both students and faculty, creating a type of social environment around

51

the classroom. When asked if she got to know students at the community
college, one student responded:

Eventually yes, the same people started showing up in classes,

and then people transferred here, people with the same plans so

we were in the same classes. After the first semester, those were

the people that I pretty much stayed with the rest of the time I was

there. (17A, 1)

This student was able to develop a social network through classroom
connections. Some students connected socially by working at the community
college, as well.

I worked on-campus and I met a lot of people there and actually I

liked it a lot... I really wasn’t involved in organizations or anything,

but I think I had more friends there, and I had a job, so I was able

to make friends. (15A, 1, 6).

Many students did not have social involvement at the community college
beyond the classroom due to their commonly off-site work obligations and the
constraints of commuting.

I met a lot of people and on breaks and stuff we’d sit around and

talk but I was working so much I really didn’t have time to do

anything outside, which is one of the nice things about coming

here, to have the opportunity to have more social time. (5A, 1)

Some students felt isolated socially at the community college. “Socially...it was
just my friends from before, but nobody at CC; it was just me” (7A, 2). Many
students were very focused on academics and did not want to be involved in
other ways at the community college. “I didn’t want to be there any longer than
I really had to, so I didn’t get into any of the sports or activities per se. Basically
I wanted to get my education and get out (9A, 1).” While some students were

involved socially in formal or informal ways at the community college, others

used the community college simply to attain their educational goals.

52

Physical Environment at the Community College

The structure of the community college was conducive to students
academically, logistically, and financially. Almost all the students chose the
community college for its affordability.

I went to CC because the price was right. When you compare the

price of a university to a community college, it was a third of the

cost, and then you can transfer over after two years. Since I’ve

been paying for the tuition all myself, it was the best way to do it.
(1A. 1) ’

Transfer students in this study perceived that they took a larger responsibility
financially for their education than native students, and this often influenced
their decision to initially attend the community college. “I had to pay for my own
tuition, so the financial aid [at CC] was right. I didn’t have to pay anything out
of my own pocket for the time being, so that’s where I decided to go“ (20A, 1).
Many transfer students voiced frustration at the lack of understanding of native
MSU students to their financial situation.

Sometimes I get annoyed by the kids who are like, “oh, I’ve never

had a job, my parents are paying for everything, they bought me a

new car“, which is because I have a job and I pay for my own car

and I live on my own. I don’t even live with my parents anymore.

I’m a lot more independent than I think a lot of college students

are, whereas at CC a lot of people were independent like that, so

you get a different feel for that. (24B, 7)
The community college campus structure enabled students to gain an
affordable education that fit into their lifestyle. Students enjoyed the flexibility
of class scheduling that allowed them to work.

It’s actually a really good community college. I got a lot out of it.

It was nice because I could take a lot of evening classes and have

a three credit course and only have to go one night a week so I

could still work full-time. (5A, 1)

Ease of parking and navigating the small campus environment at the

53

community college were seen as perks of the physical environment.
It didn’t cost anything to park. That was cool. I liked that. That
was definitely cool. I get here [to MSU] and I have to work because
I have to be able to afford to park. And there’s not as many people.
There’s millions of people here, and there it was a lot smaller
community. (7A, 2)
Overall, students were satisfied with the small yet comprehensive
campus environment of the community college.
Overall, I enjoyed the community college and I’m glad. Then when
I came here I look back and I I don’t think I would have been
able to come as a freshman and handle it. I look at some of the
freshmen now and I don’t see how they manage, I really don’t. (9A,
2)
The students generally had positive experiences at the community college as a
stepping-stone to MSU. Their community college experiences provide a

backdrop for the discussion of the primary themes of transition below, which

speak to their experiences at their new four-year university.

Learning Resources

Students used a variety of learning resources to gain knowledge at MSU
that lead to success and satisfaction in the environment. Learning resources
are defined as the variety of tools that the students utilized in order to gain
information and learn about the campus environment and academic system.
One student spoke to the combination of learning resources that students
employed almost simultaneously, and in conjunction with each other. This
student blended his use of learning resources to find out about campus
services.

I didn’t know about any [campus services] before I came here.

Most of the ones I’ve learned about now have been through the

clubs, mostly. That’s been a way for me to talk to people who’ve
been here for a couple of years. They’ve shown me a lot of the

54

things I needed to know. Then just through my classes; my
instructors telling me different places to go. Then through that, it’s
made me kind of explore other options and find out what I know.
(6A, 7)
Three types of learning resources emerged from the data. These were formal
and informal learning resources and initiative, which are explained in depth

below.

Formal Learning Resources

For the purposes of this study, formal learning resources are part of the
official campus structure. They include orientation programs, welcome week
activities, campus maps, web site, the student newspaper, as well as employees
of the university, such as faculty, advisors, staff, and TA’s. From formal
learning resources, the students gained a variety of information. One student
shared how specific university activities targeted at transfer students helped
with the transition to MSU.

During welcome week, they had special programs for transfer

students where you would learn about parking and those kinds of

things. And they had something where you meet your college or

something and I went there and that really helped explain

everything you could get involved in and they introduced people,

like the chairs and the professors. And that’s where I heard about

FCE club, the family and child ecology club. So I joined that and

that was really helpful because people that I met at orientation

were child development majors too, and so there were about two

or three of us and we started going to that together. That was

really helpful, too, with the transition. I think it went really well.

(17A, 3)

Faculty in major courses are helpful in relaying information about
upcoming events relevant to the major. This learning resource is more intensely

useful for students who have multiple major courses during the semester. “I

think having more classes in my major helps me to be more informed too

55

instead of just having one class because we have more opportunities for people
to tell you about things going on.” (17B, 2) In addition, residential programs at
MSU help to make the big place smaller.

I’m really glad I got into Lyman Briggs School, and they are really

helpful with just about any problem that comes up, you can get a

solution. They’re more than willing to help out... I think at MSU,

that one major advantage is that they have their residential

colleges. That gives you a group you can fall back on. (1A, 4)

The transfer orientation program at MSU was a one day program, which
included both general information sessions, as well as sessions broken down by
major. Orientation received mixed reviews from students. When asked about
orientation, one student responded, “Oh wow, it was an experience. I can’t say
I enjoyed it. Really tedious. I guess it was good to learn how the University
functioned in a sense. It was a long day.“ (20A, 3) Orientation gave students

the opportunity to meet other transfer students.

At orientation I was kind of nervous or whatever. But I got here
and I think it was really good that they do all transfer students at
one orientation because you really get to know people, and you
don’t feel very much alone when you see hundreds of people that
are doing the same thing you are doing. And I actually ran into a
lot of people that were people I had in classes at CC. I ran into
them at orientation or whatever, and we ended up having more of
the same classes. (17A, 3)

Some did not believe that orientation prepared them for the realities of campus
life. “They really didn’t seem to have that much for the orientation for what we
should expect type thing or what we’d be getting ourselves into... by coming
here.” (9A, 6) Conversely, others thought orientation covered information that
they already knew.

The orientation day, AOP here, lasted a whole day. I thought that

was a little bit long. Coming from a... community college or college

or school, there are things you already know about college and

you don’t really need to sit through again And the thing was
that they charged money for that, too. And I think the only thing

56

they need to keep there, that was actually very nice, was being

able to sit down there and talk with someone about your schedule.

That was the best part of the whole thing. (1A, 3)

Many students emphasized that the meetings with advisors and other students
in their major were the most useful part of the orientation.

At orientation, students were given a transfer credit evaluation form,
indicating how their community college credits translated to MSU credits.
However, students were still confused about transfer credit, especially the way
it was presented to students in a written form that was perceived to be very
complicated.

I think their orientation wasn’t very informative. They just

assumed that we knew everything. And we assumed that, the

paper that they showed us that said these classes transfer and

these don’t. That really didn’t tell me anything, even when they

tried to explain that. (ISB, 7-8)

Web sites, used before and after transfer, proved to be helpful resources
for many students to find campus information.

MSU makes it so easy to find information about the school. And

the website is fabulous. It’s really good and I have looked at so

many of them because I‘ve been researching grad schools already.

(27A, 7)

The MSU Transfer Course Equivalency web page was especially beneficial
because of the importance of course transferability to the students interviewed.

I used the MSU equivalency website to double-check to be sure

the credits were going to transfer. I then took the pages I printed

there, and came and talked to the advisor to make sure what the

web had told me was true and current. I did that almost every

time a semester started at the community college. (16A, 6)

Students reported that maps were also useful in learning to navigate the
campus. “I did the usual freshman transfer student map thing, where you walk

around with your map for the first two weeks or so.“ (SB, 6)

Academic advisors were another formal learning resource that two-thirds

57

of the students used to get information. “My advisor was a big help before I got
here and still he helped me out... I went to him a lot and asked him questions
about Study Abroad, co-ops and different things like that (7B, 7).” Another
student shared, “I’ve learned to go a lot to my counselors, either for chemistry
or for education with questions, especially this semester. I’ve probably stopped
in and seen both of them a couple of times this semester. They are helpful (4B,
8).” Advisors were also a strong learning resource prior to transfer for those who
took advantage of an on-campus visit before starting at MSU.

I came over here and talked to the advisors a couple of times.

They were really helpful they gave me information and I met other

people and that helped me even more, things like that. They

showed me how to get on the Internet and see what would transfer

so I would know before I took classes. (17A, 2)
Advisors provided a variety of information. For many, advisor e-mails were a
very helpful source of information for students about campus activities,
regulations, and deadlines. When asked how she learned about campus
services, one student replied:

I probably learned [about campus resources] when I talked to [my]

advisor, the CE advisor and I asked him a lot of questions about

stuff like that and he told me. And then he e-mails all the kids

sometimes just in general, things like scholarships and stuff,

information like that. (7A, 6)
Students were also relieved to meet with their advisor to map out a course plan
so they would know their timeline for graduation. When asked what things or
people helped the most with the transition and learning about MSU, one
student replied:

Well this semester my advisor now. He is great, ‘cause I switched

majors... He is so helpful. You make an appointment, he is so

friendly and stuff and he’ll go through [the major requirements].

I’m so happy, I got my schedule planned out for the next two

years, so I know exactly what’s going on, what I am going to be
doing that helps a lot. (9B, 10)

58

Some students developed deeper relationships with their advisors, while others
saw advisors as a learning resource that can be utilized in times of need.

The advisors that I’ve had have been very good, as far as making

sure I understood what I needed to accomplish to change [my

major], and what I would need for my degree, that kind of thing.

That helped me get to know the advisors. Unless you have a

problem, you don’t necessarily go to your advisor. So it kind of

introduced me to them. (12A, 8)

Overall, advisors were seen as a very helpful learning resource in terms of
campus, major, and career information and opportunities.

MSU is a decentralized environment, with services very spread out
throughout campus and academic units operate independently. One student’s
advising experience evidenced this.

I have to meet with three difi'erent advisors because they can‘t

answer questions about the other requirements. Lyman Briggs

can’t answer any questions about the natural sciences, and

natural sciences can’t answer any questions about them, and

neither can answer questions about premed. So I have to see

three people, so it’s a lot of correspondence. (1A, 6)

To varying degrees, formal learning resources proved helpful to students’
transitions.

There are also many examples when lack of information about formal
learning resources negatively impacted the students’ experiences. Finances
were a primary concern for the majority of “the students, and students were not
always aware of the true cost of schooling, which at times negatively influenced
their lives as students. Many students were caught off guard by the hidden
expenses that incur by being in school. For one student, lack of scholarship
information was problematic.

There is some scholarship information I would have liked to know

about. I would have liked to know a little more about the financial

end of the school, how much it really costs after tuition and
housing and all that stuff. (20B, 4)

59

Another area in which lack of knowledge had an impact was housing. For one
student, lack of a formal learning resource and information on how the local
housing market works led him to renew his housing contract, although he
preferred moving off-campus the next year. “I signed up to stay [on-campus]
next year because I didn’t realize that you had to find an apartment in
November for next year, so I’m hanging around here” (68, 2).

Some of the formal learning resources, such as Welcome Week activities,
were not specifically designed for transfer students and made the students feel

somewhat marginalized.

It kind of made me feel like a freshman again coming in. I mean
throughout our college of natural resources they had dinners and
stuff for the freshman and somewhat transfer students but it was
more geared towards the freshman. I was sitting there going OK,
and they’re sitting there talking saying, “yeah you’ll be here for
another four years.” But I was like, “No, I won’t. I’m not planning a
being here for that long.“ So it’s kind of geared more towards the
freshman. (9A, 3)

Transfer students missed out on formal learning resources that were available
to freshmen. Since the services available to new students varied for freshmen
and transfers, there were times that transfer students felt a disadvantage. For
example, some felt they could have benefited from the services and tours
designed for freshmen.

I think that during welcome week they had something for
freshman like a tour of the library and how to use the materials in
the library and things like that, which coming in from a
community college you do kind of know some of the things and
you know how to use their libraries, but I think if they would have
included transfer students in with that too, that would have been
really helpful. To have been taken on that tour, especially with
the size of this library, that would have been really helpful. It
would have brought those things up for new people, new students.
(178, 5)

In part because of the difference in services available, it was sometimes difficult

60

for transfer students to find the appropriate formal learning resource or to get
the necessary information they believed new freshmen were provided.

I know it’s kind of hard to take people on tours, of pretty much the

main areas, but that would have helped me, in the beginning, at

least, if someone gave me a tour... because in order for me to get

my parking pass for F lot, just ten minutes away from my dorm

room, I had to stand in line like at three in the morning to get my

parking pass, because my mom called and called and said, “How

do I get this parking pass?“ and no one would give her any

information. I think, even before you even go here, nobody really

wants to help you out, like with information. (158, 4)

Overall, formal learning resources assisted students in a variety of ways.
At the same time, lack of knowledge of formal learning resources had a negative

impact on some students.

Informal Learning Resources

Students talked a lot about people who were important in providing
information during the transition process but who were not university
employees. These resources were knowledgeable about the campus in a variety
of ways, including the academic, social, and physical environments of the
campus, so were important to categorize. Deemed “informal“ because they were
not university designees, they included roommates, classmates, students
known prior to arriving at MSU, alumni, as well as contacts at the community
college such as faculty and advisors.

Roommates were a primary source of information and support for
students, and one of the most commonly used informal Ieaming resources.

I was worried about finding my way around because it’s so much

bigger than anything I’ve ever been at before. But the day before

class started, my roommates took me around campus and showed

me where my classes would be so that I wasn’t that scared. (25A,
3)

61

Many students were very happy that they had friends that were already
students at MSU. These friends proved wonderful assets for the transfer
students.

I think it would have been different had I not known anybody
here, but because I did know so many people here I really
depended on them, on the people I already knew here, like my
friend We had so many classes first semester. He was pretty
much my guide as far as to where everything was. Because we had
the same classes together I just followed behind him like a little
puppy dog, everywhere I would go. (SB, 6)

Current students already knew the ropes, and it was easy for them to share
their experiences with transfer students, especially in terms of how campus
services work. As an example, one student benefited from his girlfriend’s
knowledge of the bus system.

I was introduced to the bus routes by my girlfriend, who rode the
bus a time or two, and I’d never ridden the bus until this
semester. So she took me on that, and I didn’t know how it
worked, but it was nice to have someone there to actually show
me, like, you give them your quarter, sit down, right as you get to
the stop, just pull the cord. I was like, that’s really nice. I wish
someone was there to show me that at the beginning of the year.
My learning experience for the semester: how to use the bus.
(1 1B, 5)

Informal learning resources were used over time. Knowledge was gained
throughout the year.

Students found out a great deal of information from casual interactions
with other students. Word of mouth was a heavily utilized informal learning
resource, especially in MSU’s large, decentralized atmosphere.

It is very difficult here to find out what’s offered to the students,

‘cause there is so much. You don’t know what building to go to,

who to speak to. The handbook helps a little bit, but it is still not

all in there. You kind of hear stuff word of mouth, oh, oh yeah I

didn’t know that existed. Even with my pharmacology class this

semester, there is a tutor, I guess, that works for free and I just

heard about it through word of mouth. And at CC that kind of
stuff usually got discussed in class or whatever. (20A, 8)

62

Word of mouth assisted with general information, classroom specifics, as well
as finding out about important unique opportunities.

I found the job I’m working at right now, just through word of

mouth. Somebody I knew in another lab at Natural Resources told

me somebody else needed an aide, so that’s how I found that. (63,

4)

Sometimes contacts outside the university directed the student to formal
resources on-campus.

I came and saw my advisor here.... I saw him the second year I

was at CC. The only reason I got introduced to him was because I

had connections with a high school ag science teacher that said,

“oh, you should talk to him”. (248, 3)
Overall, students felt they were greatly assisted by utilizing informal learning

resources throughout their time at MSU.

Initiative

Another type of learning resource that students utilized was their own
initiative. Part of transfer transition was not about what students could be told
or shown by others, or what they could read about. It was something they had
to experience and figure out for themselves. Initiative is something that
students seek out on their own, such as actively striking up conversations,
eavesdropping, wandering around, as well as trial and error. It also speaks to
students’ own motivation to seek out information and to do the work it takes to
be a successful MSU student. Initiative is an internal learning resource, as
opposed to formal and informal learning resources, which are people and things
found externally. One student demonstrated the importance of initiative.

I guess I’ve just been lucky. Just trial and error. I just guessed

and thinking maybe I should do this and it’s been right. So far I

haven’t screwed up. And I just keep eavesdropping on people and
seeing what everybody else is doing and I just ask questions and

63

try to read as much as I can, like anything that comes out on the
Web site and stuff. I try to look at the web sites at least once every
two weeks, the College of Ed and Human Ecology [web sites] and
try to check out things just to make sure there’s been like no
changes or anything like that. Really, that’s how I’ve learned how
to play the game I guess. Just eavesdropping, be aggressive and
try to find things out of my own, and not just let them come to me.
(313. 4)

Another student also emphasized the utility of initiative, including the
importance of seeking out information. When asked how she learned about the
environment at MSU, she reported a combination of informal learning resources
and initiative.

A lot of trial and error, like where to park I figured out by coming
in and trying it and where the computer labs are, I wandered
around till I found it or I asked people. Or my roommates would
give me tips. You don’t really think about these things very much
like where you can park at certain hours and stuff like that, little
stuff that it’s hard for a teacher or somebody to help you with that
kind of stuff. It’s kind of something that you just find out. Or how
the roads go which is kind of crazy sometimes, about which way to
go down or how to get from here to there, the fastest way and stuff
like that. It’s just all I learned about this year I guess. (24B, 4)

Initiative speaks to the proactive nature of the transition for students.
They found it necessary to seek things out on their own.

A lot of that stuff I think is me being proactive instead of anybody
sending me a letter saying, “hey, I’m your advisor, talk to me”,
which I don’t know if the College of Ed or any of the colleges are
like that. It would be nice if they were a little more helpful but on
the other hand I went on the website and I know what classes I
need to take and the order I need to take them in. (24B, 7)

It was also important to remain alert to find out vital information, and to
vigorously seek it out. One student describes how she learned new information:

Just by like listening to other people and I think eavesdropping is
such a big part of that because some my classes are with juniors
and seniors and last semester I was still a sophomore. But now I
know when you hit junior status you need to go and get your
packet and start taking your teacher certification tests. And so I
was like oh, nobody told me that but I just heard. So I was like,
alright, I’m going to be on top of that. So I keep my ears open and

64

listen to other people’s conversations just anywhere, like in the

library or anywhere. Or just ask people, I learned I can ask people

in my classes or my teachers. (38, 4)

Overall, initiative was vital for a successful transition. In addition,
students must actively seek them out and utilize formal and informal learning

resources. Table 2 illustrates the primary learning resources that students

utilized to learn about the academic, social, and physical environments at MSU.

Table 2. Learning resources students utilized to learn about MSU

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Formal part of campus Informal Self/Individual Effort

structure

Orientation Roommates Trial 8:. Error

Welcome Week Activities Classmates Eavesdropping

Faculty at MSU Students they knew prior Wandering around
to arriving at MSU

TA’s Alumni Striking up

conversations

Advisors at MSU Advisors at CC

Maps Faculty at CC

Web sites

Student newspaper

 

Connecting

Connecting is defined as the ways in which students are engaged within
the academic, social, and physical environments at MSU. Whereas learning
resources by themselves helped students to gather knowledge and provide vital
information about the environments, connecting represents a quality
relationship with someone, a person they got to know and interacted with, as
opposed to simply an information source. Connecting moves students towards a
sense of belonging within the classroom, the social structure, and the MSU
community overall. Students utilized a variety of settings as well as formal and
informal structures within the environment in order to connect with the MSU

community. Throughout the interviews, students reinforced a need to be

65

 

outgoing and proactive in order to interact and succeed within the various
environments at MSU. Meeting people was the first step to developing
relationships and thereby connecting. Types of connecting include Academic,
Social, and Physical. The data help trace patterns over time with the ways in
which students connected within the university environment. The following
relates how students were connecting to the academic, social, and physical

environments at MSU.
Connecting-Academic Environment

Academic connecting includes the ways in which students connect
within the classroom, and with faculty, classmates and advisors regarding
academic issues. Therefore, a variety of players are at work within the academic
environment, and assist as students connect. Academic connecting includes
formal structures, such as group projects, faculty walk-in hours, getting to
know instructors in class, and class discussions. In addition, examples of
academic connecting that are more informal or require initiative include
forming study groups and striking up informal conversations with classmates.

Connecting in the academic environment differed for students,
sometimes based on class size. Small classes often offered more opportunity for
interaction and class discussion, which enabled students to get to know and
develop deeper relationships with their professors and fellow classmates. For
some, increased opportunities for connecting in smaller classes led to higher
grades than in their large lecture courses.

It’s just a lot different than community college. I’m definitely still

finding that out. The smaller classes and the more I’m learning

and the more I’m into it and just better grades I’m getting. You
can see a big correlation between grades and class size, like big

66

time you can see the correlation. You can definitely see the
difference, I’m in the lecture halls for two or three of them and
those are my lower grades. And my TE classes, which have about
30 people in them, those are the ones I’m getting 3.5 and 4.0 in
just because I work so close with the professor and the doctoral
student; one of them is a doctoral student. I can work with her
and they are so energetic and they love so much what they are
doing, you can just tell they love it, and that makes a big
difference because one of the teachers you can just tell that they
are just doing it and they don’t really seem passionate about that,
which makes it hard to study. (3B, 1)

Others developed strong connections even in larger classes by connecting to
those directly around them, and by sitting in the front as a means of connecting
more easily to the instructor.

I sit right in the front, so all the people behind me, so I don’t even
realize it is a big class anymore. Just sit in the front, take my
notes and do my work and make friends with the people sitting
around me, ‘cause once you go to class no one really switches
their seating. There is no assigned seating, but no one ever
moves. Everybody sits in their same spot. You get to know the
people around you, maybe get together and study and stuff. And
then the class seems small. It seems like it is just those people
around you and the teacher, and it doesn’t seem so great and
overwhelming. (19B, 15)

TA’s were frequently utilized by students, and often made academic
connection easy due to their accessibility. TA’s were often in charge of smaller
recitation and lab sections, which facilitated connecting.

I think you become closer to the TA’s. You see them more often.

If you have questions, that’s who you go to to ask questions. They

kind of get to know your name, where the professors you probably

only see them once or twice a week. (4B, 5)

Students also connect to the academic environment by developing
relationships with faculty members outside of the classroom. One student notes
the positive impact of doing research with a faculty member.

He made me feel confident in myself. Because I was thinking why

did he pick me kind of thing and I was okay, well I’m a good

student, so I think that’s helped out a lot. He’s really a nice guy.
(7B, 8)

67

However, some students felt that they missed out on opportunities to deeply
connect with faculty since they were not at MSU their first two years. This was
especially difficult when needing letters of recommendation.

I’m having to get reference letters. They want you to have a couple
of them, and its really tough for me, because I missed out on two
years here, to go to instructors and say, “can you write me a
reference letter?” because he really doesn’t know me. I will have
two from CC but you know, there again when you’re just going for
two years and splitting, you don’t have a real good basis to get to
know instructors or professors to get reference letters from them
for you. That’s been I think the biggest disadvantage for me. (1A,
3)

One particular form of connecting that students enjoyed occurred within
their major. They liked that the courses in their major included students with
the same interests. This was a change from the community college where
students with an assortment of interests all took the same general education
courses. The focus in the major courses allowed students to connect with the
material as well as faculty.

The classes are actually larger but I’d say I interact more with the

material than I did at CC. The professors are really friendly, and

they are really available to you and they try to have you stop by in

their office hours. And the material seems to be a lot more

interesting. I guess a lot of the stuff at CC is probably a review

from high school, whereas now you are kind of interested in stuff,

it is more interesting. But I guess basics are out of my way too, so

it is, you know, I don’t have to take any more science; that’s not

my interest. Kind of in your field now. So I really enjoy my

classes. (298, 3-4)

Most importantly, relationships with fellow students in the classroom
assisted connecting with the academic environment as a whole. Students
reported noticeable changes after they got to know their classmates and felt
they had an academic support network.

I guess I just feel like because of my roommates and I’m more

involved in my major and I know more of the people. I feel like
they know me and they are concerned about me more whereas

68

last semester I just kind of felt like nobody would really care if I
didn’t go to class because nobody would notice. Whereas this
semester, people would notice and they would be like, “hey, why
weren’t you in class?” And that just goes along with my animal
science class. I have a few people I sit with now, whereas last
semester I didn’t really know the people in my class so I didn’t
really have anyone to sit with. So I just kinda sat there or
whatever. And that helps too because then if I do miss class I can
always get notes from them or they can fill me in and stuff. And it
makes me feel better because I feel like somebody cares about me.
Whereas last semester it was kind of like, I was just kind of here
and you know, I’m just really glad I made it through the semester.
(24B, 5)

Study groups and group projects also proved helpful for students to connect
academically. For example, students’ informal conversations with classmates
sometimes lead to the formation of more formal study groups that met outside
of class.

Most of the time, you go in the class, we sit in the same spot,

especially if it is only a small class and then you end up talking to

[fellow students]. So, I guess just kind of ask them questions like,

“Hey, do you understand what the professor was talking about

last Tuesday?” And they’ll ask you questions and you kind of just

start talking like “why don’t we just get a study group together?”
(14B, 8)

Overall, connecting within the academic environment enhanced students’
success in coursework and made them feel engaged in the academic life of

MSU.

Connecting-Social Environment

Connecting to the social environment includes the ways that students
are engaged in extracurricular activities and informal relationships with other
students outside the classroom. Some examples of social connecting that are a
part of the formal MSU structure include student organizations, intramurals,

spectator sporting events, plays, concerts, and speakers. Examples of social

69

connecting that are more informal or require initiative include conversations on
busses or in public areas, parties, bars, new friends, or MSU students known
before transferring. Many students already knew MSU students, and were able
to connect with them immediately upon arrival at the university. “I had some
friends down here, which it is nice to hang out with them” (4A, 3). Friends who
were already MSU students also helped the new transfer students to expand
their social circles and activities.

I have a good friend who is a mentor at Hubbard and he’s been

telling me to go to this and that and hang out over there and meet

a lot of people and I have a really good friend that’s in a band and

they’re all like from MSU so I’ve been going to see them. And

meeting people in the band and other bands has been fun. (19B,

2)

There are also many ways to connect socially through residence halls
and meeting students around campus, without being in formalized clubs.

I don’t really involve myself with the academic clubs as much as I

have and the social clubs as much as I did the semester before. I

kinda dropped out of the sunshine club where they put up posters

for people’s birthdays because I don’t have time to draw posters

and hang them all up anymore. It hasn’t affected my social life or

anything; I just don’t have the clubs anymore. (30B, 2)

Over one-half of the students were involved in traditional extracurricular
campus activities, which facilitated social interaction. Participating in clubs
associated with majors also facilitated connecting to future career goals.
Therefore, social connections sometimes lead to academic rewards, such as
internships and connections to faculty in an out-of-classroom environment.

I’ve gotten involved in three clubs now. I’m an officer in one of the

clubs, so I’ve met a lot of people that are in my field, and a lot of

professors in my field. I’m going to try to get an internship this

semester, hopefully. (6A, 4)

This student went on to say he acquired a part time internship during the

semester, which further connected him to faculty and career goals.

70

In terms of social connecting, many felt that they were trying to integrate
socially in a later timeframe than their native peers, which added to the
challenge of meeting people and developing quality relationships.

I think probably my biggest challenge, and I don’t know if you

would think of this as a challenge but the people I know who have

been here and this is their second-year or third-year here, just

kind of finding your niche. But so many people have known each

other already, and you know you kind of come onto the scene.

Making friends has been kind of, I don’t know it’s different. You’re

just kind of late. So meeting a core of people that I spend time

with or are really good friends with has been not so easy. (27A, 5)

Some academic programs facilitated social interaction due to smaller
class sizes that made getting to know classmates easy. In addition, students
had numerous opportunities to get to know each other because they were
taking multiple classes together each semester. “The nursing program is very
fraternal. I mean there are a small number of us and we do everything
together, so it is a great way to make a lot of friends” (20B, 2). For some
students, discussion of getting to know classmates was more prevalent during
the second interview. One student who did not report knowing many new
people during the first interview, had a different response when asked during
the second interview if he had gotten to know people:

Yeah. Especially through my chemistry major. We see each other

like every day between the two or three classes that we have a

semester together. So I’ve made a lot of friends that way. And

yeah, I still hang out with a lot of friends from [home] that are

down here. Pretty much the same amount of people. I think the

people I’ve met first semester, I’m getting closer with them, hang

out a little bit more. (4B, 2)

So, over time and with increased exposure, the student developed deeper
relationships with other students.

The size of the campus is seen as both an asset and a liability to

connecting within the community. At MSU, students spoke of a need to actively

71

seek out opportunities. One student explains:

Socially, I wish it could be better, but it might just be my
personality, too. I’m not real social, but sometimes, before I was
really looking at the size of the university as an opportunity for the
different things that you have available, but now I kind of see it as
an impediment to making strong relationships with people. It’s
really hard to find a tight knit group of friends, or people really
like you. Just being so many people, it’s really hard to find people
really compatible with you. So that’s one of the challenges I’ve had
to face. (68, 1)

Students reported that classmates involved in study groups or group projects
were a valuable social asset. However, students reported that it would be very
difficult to create a social network if one was not proactive and did not seek out
opportunities.

I have a group that I work with on projects and stuff in my
classes. Oh, they seem okay, but ...I think I have a hard time
actually coming out and, I know it is not like a date kind of
thing, just hanging out with people, but it is like saying, “hey, do
you want to go out some time?” I think I’m not like that. I just
feel weird doing that. I’m kind of like, what if they say no? (78, 3)

Another more outgoing student had a much easier time getting to know fellow
students by taking the initiative. When asked if she had met people on-campus,

she replied:

Really well. I think I see people that I have had in classes that I
don’t really have a problem going up to someone and introducing
myself, especially for group work and things like that. And I’ve
carried on relationships with people from last semester even to
this semester like phone numbers, e-mails, things like that.
Actually, meeting people is easier than I thought it would be.
Some people are kind of reserved, but most people are really
involved in school. There are so many things to do here that there
are lots of people doing one thing or another. So I think I’ve kind
of gotten into things here and there, and am meeting people very
well. (22A, 4)

A majority of the students commented on how friendly the campus was.
This made making social connections easier for students.

All in all, I’d say most peOple, most students, most staff are very

72

friendly and very helpful. That helped a lot I mean there are an

awful lot of students and faculty here, and I think that everybody

basically has the same feeling that most of us want to be here.

Most of us chose to be here. There’s a little bit of camaraderie,

kind of a kinship, that kind of thing. (12A, 4)

Remaining on-campus after class was an important way to connect, as it
provides opportunities to meet other students and develop relationships. For
example, students who live locally but return home each weekend find it
especially hard to connect to the social environment at MSU.

My boyfriend lives in Flint, so I always go back there on the

weekends. I don’t really ever hang out here. That’s kind of, I told

him that has to change so I can start hanging out here at least

one day on the weekend, so I can meet friends and what not. (7 B,

2)

The students in the study relayed that increased connection lead to
increased social satisfaction. Students who had not yet connected were more
dissatisfied. One student suggests to other transfer students, “Make
connections with people. It’s important to especially at such a huge college or
university. Make connections with people in your program or your classes
because the sooner you do that the more you’re going to enjoy everything” (24B,
6). Satisfaction increased by second semester for most students due to

familiarity, and the passing of time. This notion will be expanded upon in the

Familiarity section later in this chapter.
Connecting-Physical Environment

Connecting to the physical environment includes interactions with the
large campus environment and being a part of the larger campus culture and
community. The physical environment not only consists of the bricks and

mortar of the university but also the campus organizational structure in terms

73

of how the campus services and departments function and are organized,
campus logistics, overall campus culture, school finances, and parking.
Therefore, connecting to the physical environment means feeling tied to the
various cultural and structural aspects of MSU. Students connected to the
physical environment by visiting and spending time on-campus before and after
starting classes.

When I was at the community college I up came up for one day for
an overnight visit and stufi' and kind of explored because up to
that point I hadn’t been here. I already knew, like chosen I was
coming here but never visited the campus. I was like, “I think I
should go do that.” And then when I did that, that’s when I just
fell in love with the campus; it’s such a beautiful campus. (9A, 2)

For some, a profound connection to the physical environment struck them after
a bit of time at MSU. They felt a part of the MSU community, and appreciated
the campus culture.

It was a lot of getting used to, I mean. 0. K. I was walking on-
campus one day. This was not when I first got here, it was starting
to get cold out and I was like, “I cannot believe I’m here.” It is just
awesome. I was walking out of the Smith Center and there were
so many students. And so different from what I was used to. It
was just that feeling, it was just wow, I actually made it to a
university and there were all these people around me and there is
so much diversity here and so much to do here that I was liking it.
So I’ve had a very good experience since I’ve been here. I have
heard of people like after their first few weeks of school they left
because they couldn’t take it. But I’m very happy with my
decision to come here. (33A, 3-4)

For many, coming to MSU and connecting to the physical environment fulfilled
a longtime goal. They were very pleased to be a part of things at MSU.

I’ve always thought of MSU as some big school and eventually I
might get there. So now it’s kinda like interesting because now it’s
like I am actually here, actually doing what I said I was going to do
for the past however many years throughout high school, and it
was probably six years that I said yes I’m going to go to MSU. So
it’s kinda surreal like being here actually now doing it, rather than
saying for so many years yes, I’m going to transfer to Michigan
State. (24A, 8)

74

The size and structure of the campus creates a very different physical
environment from the community college, which allows students to connect in
new ways. Even for commuters, the presence of residence halls and the ability
to get to know on-campus students created a different physical landscape for
them, and unique opportunities to connect. One commuter recounts:

There’s just a lot more diversity of people, a lot more people.

That’s something that I really like about it is the people. There’s

always somebody around. Where like at CC you went to your

classes and then you left because it was a commuter college. You

didn’t stay at all. And so there’s a lot of people that know people I
guess that are living here. (108, l)

The campus diversity in terms of ethnicity and activities was something that
was salient and appreciated by the majority of the students, and added to MSU
being a very different physical environment for them.

I’m really interested in the diversity of the people. There are

people from all over the world that I’ve seen and met. And at

community colleges you kind of just get... the people from the

community, maybe just from a few miles around, that’s it. (22A, 5)
The physical facilities at MSU were conducive to students spending time
hanging out informally on-campus, in areas such as the Student Union and
International Center.

One of the things that’s different from community college life is

that at MSU there is a life on-campus that is outside of classes,

whereas at the community college, you would oftentimes go to

class, learn your stuff, have a fifteen or twenty minute break

before you go to another class, and then you walk five minutes to

the parking lot and walk to your car and go home to do homework

and stuff like that. So in that sense, it’s different. (16A, 2-3)

In contrast to the community college, because MSU was a residential
campus, thousands of students lived on-campus and spent the bulk of their

time there. One-half of the students who were interviewed lived on-campus, and

many connected to the overall campus through their residence hall. Residence

75

halls sponsor many types of programming for their students, and their hall
governments are another way that students can get involved.

I am living in McDonel Hall right now. ...It’s good and I like it a lot.

I do a lot with the community service and that type of thing is so

its kind of nice to have that extracurricular thing and still have it

where you’re living. (5A, 2)

Living on-campus or in an off-campus apartment with friends allowed students
to get to know their neighbors and to easily engage in conversations with other
students due to close proximity. Students living off-campus with relatives
received support and encouragement for their educational endeavors, but no
one they lived with had firsthand knowledge and day-to-day experience with the
campus.

The residence halls, which are an optimal location for connection, are
mandatory for freshmen, but optional for transfer students. Therefore, due to
the physical structure of housing regulations, transfer students did not
automatically have the physical proximity advantage that all freshmen had by
living on-campus. Some commuter students in the study perceived this as a
missed opportunity.

I kind of, in a way, wished that when I was a freshman that I did

come here first. That way I would have lived in the dorm and, you

know, the whole experience. And now I wouldn’t feel comfortable

moving to a dorm just because, you know, I’m a junior and that

just wouldn’t work out too well, I don’t think. (78, 4)

Overall, there are a variety of ways that students connected to the
academic, social, and physical environments utilizing both formal and informal
structures. The table below summarizes some of the more common avenues of

connecting. They also interrelate to the three different types of learning

resources as illustrated in Table 3 below.

76

Table 3. Means of connecting

 

 

Means of Connecting Formal Structure Informal or Initiative

Class (Academic) Group Projects Forming Study Groups
walk-in hours Striking up informal
Getting to know conversation*
instructor in class* *Size impacts this

Class discussions“
*size impacts these

 

Out of Class (Social) Student Organizations Conversations on busses,
Intramurals in public areas
Spectator Sporting Parties / Bars
Events Students they knew prior

Plays /concerts / speakers to arriving at MSU
New friends

 

 

 

 

Living On-Campus Hall government Proximity conversations
(Physical)

Off-Campus Apartment Proximity conversations
(Physical)

Off-Campus with Support / encouragement
relatives (Physical) for school, but no formal

connection with school

 

 

 

Familiarity

Familiarity is the third theme that emerged from the data. With
familiarity, students feel more complete with their transition into certain
aspects of the academic, social, and physical environments. Familiarity goes
beyond learning resources that provide initial information. It is taking that
information and internalizing it and making it their own. Familiarity is when a
student reiterates that they really understand and feel a part of various aspects
of MSU. It is moving from, “I just learned this information” to “I am familiar
with what I need to do and how things work”. It is a part of becoming socialized
within the environment, and having a solid understanding of the norms and
values within the academic, social, and physical environments of MSU.
Familiarity was much more prevalent in the second interview, since it often

takes time to become familiar and comfortable in circumstances. It is the end of

77

 

newness and a feeling of dissonance with information. Familiarity is when
students feel that they truly “know” the information. The more students are
exposed to information and the environments, the more comfortable they
become. In addition, prior contact with campus leads to smoother transition to
MSU and fewer surprises. Therefore, students who had prior contact with
campus were able to move to familiarity sooner. The overall data make clear
that transition is considered a process. In some ways, familiarity is the end of
that process, when level of comfort is high and students truly understand what
it entails to be an MSU student.

Familiarity is something that occurs over time, through repeated
exposure to information and situations, and increased levels of comfort.
Students had very different experiences their first few weeks than they did
during their second semester, largely due to familiarity. “I really didn’t know
what to expect just coming in, it was all new to me there are so much to take in
when I first got here last semester it was just, wow. It was a big adjustment.”
(9A, 2) After the initial shock, it got a bit better for students. “The first week of
being here was like God this sucks, but then I got used to it, got into a groove
and it was all okay.” (7A, 4) Another student concurs.

At first I think I may have been a little bit nervous maybe or a little

bit of tension about how things would go here. But that’s pretty

normal, and I got used to it pretty fast. I’ve gotten used to things

more. (1A, 4)

During the second interview there is a sense that the transition is more
complete for students into the MSU culture, and that students have moved
towards familiarity. Students feel more comfortable, happier. The most common

response to the opening question during the second interview of “how is

everything going?” is “much better.” When asked how second semester

78

compared to the first, one student replied:

I think I feel more comfortable in this atmosphere, knowing where

I’m going. Scheduling my classes was a lot easier than it was the

first time. I pretty much knew what to expect from the professors.

I think I was more comfortable talking to my fellow students in my

classes if I needed help or if I needed someone’s notes. (ISB, 2)

Her description portrays familiarity with the academic, social, and physical
environments at MSU. Other students also exemplified familiarity with MSU
during the second interview, to the point that they were very detached from
their community college experience. “I’ve been here for almost two semesters
now so I’ve kinda found that I’m forgetting what the community college
experience was like. I just get the gist of it but I’m pretty much just used to
this atmosphere here” (1B, 4). By the end of the second semester, memories of
expectations and anticipation of becoming an MSU student are not as sharp. “I
don’t remember exactly what I had expected so I can’t really compare it to now”
(138, 2). The theme of familiarity emerged due to the structure of the study that
included two data collection points. Having two interviews over time allowed for
comparative questions to be asked at both interviews, as well as reflective
questions in the second interview.

Focus tends to shift overtime as the transition feels more complete to the
students. Since they no longer have to expend as much energy in learning
about MSU, they are able to spend more time and energy on simply being an
MSU student. “Things have been easier in this semester. I just have a better
focus on what I need to get done instead of just being so busy off being away
from home.” (5B, 3) Familiarity assists the transition by helping students to

understand the environment. The majority of the students were not surprised

because they expected that there would be differences at MSU. However, they

79

did not always know all the specifics of those differences. They needed to find
out the details in order to move towards familiarity. Therefore, they had to
utilize learning resources, and connect within the environments, in order to
inevitably become familiar with the various aspects of MSU. Some of these
differences are illustrated below in the discussion of familiarity in terms of the

academic, social, and physical environments at MSU.
Fami Rarity-Academic Environment

Students become familiar with an assortment of academic issues in
different ways and at different rates. Familiarity can occur at a multitude of
times and in a variety of ways. If the student is familiar with the many
academic components for example, then their classroom experiences will
benefit. The timing of when students become familiar impacts the transition.
Sometimes the knowledge of how the academic system actually works only
comes after the first exam with a poor grade. Other times, when students are
comfortable and familiar with the perceived academic realities, they will perform
well. Therefore, familiarity impacts student transition and academic success in
a mixture of ways. The following section relays examples of familiarity or lack of
familiarity in terms of class size, faculty involvement, course expectations,
major requirements, and time to graduation.

The first few weeks varied for students, and spoke to their familiarity or
lack of familiarity with the academic environment.

[My] first couple of weeks were great. Like I said, CC actually

prepared me a little better than I was expecting. I was expecting

to step into class and it be like a whole new world, but really it

wasn’t. Other than class size, which I sat in the first couple of

rows, I really didn’t notice. I was lucky with my first group of
professors (20A, 3-4)

80

This student was able to become familiar and comfortable with the academic
environment at MSU fairly quickly. Other students considered the academic
environment at MSU significantly different from the community college, which
took some getting used to.

I would say I’m always amazed. I’m always amazed with classes.
It is so different than what’s offered at a community college as far
as sizes, as far as the teacher being more concerned with his
research project than being concerned with teaching the class, as
far as TA’s, which you don’t have [at a CC]. It is just a different
experience at’the community college. I mean it’s something you
adjust to, but it takes some time. I think first semester I was kind
of confused at times, what’s going on, you know. But right now, I
have to expect it. I feel comfortable with it now, I guess. (4B, 7)

Initially, the classroom environment was awkward for this student. However,
over time with increased exposure, the differences in the academic environment
became more comfortable. For others, class size was a bit overwhelming and
was often mentioned as the academic component with which students most
needed to become comfortable and familiar.

It’s very big. It’s just a lot of people. I started [classes] this

semester, and you go into the rooms, and there’s not even enough

seats for everyone to sit down on the first day, and just coming

from a small private high school, and then a small college, it’s just

amazing [to have] that many people in one class, learning. So

that’s been one of the hardest things to get used to. (1A, 3)
Another student’s experience demonstrates how familiarity occurs over time.
Eventually, MSU becomes what the students know, and is at the forefront of
their minds. During the first interview, when asked to compare MSU
academically to the community college, this student shared very specific
comparisons.

I have to Say that it was nice having the smaller classes at the

community college. It’s harder here because a lot of the

teachers are research based and that’s their main focus. And to

find a teacher who is just as interested in teaching as they are at
the community college level is hard. And I’ve had a lot of teachers

81

here where you could tell that here that they were just doing
research and they had to teach instead of just doing teaching
because they wanted to, so that was kind of the nicer thing about
being at the community college. But I mean the classes here are
good classes. Its the same workload but it’s harder to get an A
here than it was the at the community college. (5A, 2)

Conversely, during the second interview, when the same student was asked to
compare MSU to the community college, she replied:
I don’t know. It’s pretty much the same old, same old it’s hard
to say now because I’m so used to being here and it’s been almost
a year since I’ve been at the community college to really remember
everything. There’s pretty much not that much of the difference

but it’s just on a much, much larger scale here in every way. (5B,
8)

Over time familiarity became apparent for this student, and she was much
more comfortable with MSU’s academic environment at the time of the second
interview.

The majority of the students felt welcomed by faculty, but also
understood it was important to take initiative and actively seek out academic
resources, such as faculty.

I think both the atmospheres [of the CC and MSU] are both the

same, except that this one is a lot larger, more people, but both, I

found at both the community college and here, they are both very

willing to help as long as you make the effort. They’re not going to

say OK and then take you by the hand and do that, but if you

need the help, you can go see them and they are more than willing

to help you. (9A, 4)

This student’s comments show an in depth understanding of the realities
of student /faculty relationships at MSU, which was mentioned by others as
well. Overall, students in the study concurred that faculty are willing to help if
you seek them out.

Some students discovered a more demanding academic environment at

MSU, and that the nature of the class work was different. They often relayed

82

that MSU coursework expected a deep level of critical thinking.

I think they make you do a little more work here. I mean, even if

they’re reaction papers every week. We never had reaction papers.

Most of the time we just had tests and then the paper. Here, they

may have tests, and then a group project. I mean they do a lot of

group projects here. We never did group projects in community

college. Just more challenging, more critical thinking, rather than

everything cut and dried. (SB, 8)
Over time, students learned what was necessary to achieve academic success at
MSU. “I basically got into the groove for that class and each class and figured it
all out, just what they wanted” (13A, 3). Many students found that it was
important to keep up on course assignments. “That’s what I found out last
semester if you don’t stay on top of the stuff it’s really, really hard to try and
catch up (9A, 5).” Therefore, this increased familiarity helped her to be more
successful in her second semester coursework than she was in her first. At the
start of the second interview, when asked how everything was going second
semester, she replied:

Much better than last semester. I have gotten myself into a little

habit of studying more, which I didn’t do last semester, I didn’t

really care to barely study and you’ve got to study. You’ve got to

study, you’ve got to keep up on top of [everything]. If you do a little

a day it is a lot easier than trying to cram at the end, so which I

realize that. (98, 1)
Due to familiarity she was able to put a plan into action for second semester,
and reported that her grades were significantly higher. Many students partially
attributed the increased difficulty to taking upper level courses their junior
year. Therefore, they expected more difficult courses, yet did not know exactly
what they would be like.

There is more work involved I would say, but other than that, just

because the classes are getting harder than the freshman classes

you study like an hour a week, the junior level classes are study

like three or four hours a week type of thing. It takes more time,
but that’s understandable. (7A, 6)

83

Many students reported a posited difference between performance in first
semester coursework compared to second semester, as recounted by this
student:

Much better. I’m not struggling in my classes like I was. I knew
what to expect when I got back from break. It’s much better. I’m
actually looking at getting, I had a 2. 1 last semester but I’m
probably looking at a 3.25 or 3.5 this semester...l basically knew
that when I went to my lectures they were going to give me the gist
of stuff. They weren’t going to go into detail like they did at CC.
So I knew that before I went to class I should probably read this
chapter that I knew they were going to go over so that way if I had
any questions I would probably get it clarified through lecture
instead of waiting to go to lecture and then read the chapter and
then still have questions and not be able to ask them. So I
decided to start reading the chapter before I went to class. It
makes a big difference and makes things a lot easier. And I
knew more of what to expect. I kinda figured it out last semester
that it’s all a lot of self-learning instead of being taught. (30B, 1)

She relays a more thorough understanding of many aspects of the academic
environment, and the important components to be successful in the classroom
including how to approach coursework. Very few students had quite as
dramatic a change in grades, but all reported some type of shift in familiarity of
the academic environment throughout their time at MSU.

One situation that impacted several students in the study was time to
graduation. Many needed to extend their stay at MSU or take several summer
courses in order to graduate “on time”. This speaks to their initial familiarity
with MSU’s academic requirements and their knowledge of specific
requirements prior to attending MSU. For many, the coursework did not align
as well as hoped, or a major change impacted how their credits were counted.

[My biggest challenge is] trying to get everything scheduled

because I transferred, like some of my basic things I am playing

catch-up. So I’m in a class that’s all transfer students that are

playing catch-up. So I just really am taking all my required

classes. I have no free time to take any fun classes, is just
everything catching up. That’s another reason I had to go in the

84

summer, because for human ecology you have to do so many

sequenced classes and I wouldn’t be able to get them all done

because you can’t take them together. (38, 1)
In some cases, specialized programs were a factor in lengthening time to degree
completion. In some majors, the bulk of courses cannot be found at a
community college. Lack of familiarity with how specialized major requirements
played out at the community college and MSU lead to this student to need an
extra year of schooling.

The universities and the community colleges should talk to each

other, like about different degrees, and transferability, because I

found out just a week ago that I’m going to have to be here two

more years instead of one more year, and that’s really going to

hurt me financially. Because my major requires a lot of classes

that aren’t offered at CC, I ended up having to stay longer than I

thought I was. It would be neat to find out for what majors you

could really go to CC and not have to stay in college for five years.
(613. 3)

Lack of information also impacts plans for graduate and professional school.
Another student found he needed to change his timeline for applying to medical
school, because he did not fully understand all that the application process
entailed.

I’m behind because everyone here had a two—year start on me for

planning for that. So that’s a disadvantage and I’ve had to, I am

postponing med school for a year just so I can build up and be

equal to all the other people my age applying. (1B, 2)

Familiarity with major programs in general proved to be important to
students as they transitioned to MSU. Type of major (limited enrollment versus
open enrollment) did not appear to impact the transition in different ways. The
one exception is one student in the study who was not adequately aware of the
separate admissions process into the limited enrollment major she desired, and

was thus dissatisfied when she was denied admission into the major. Therefore,

her lack of familiarity with the academic admissions process impacted her

85

transition.
Overall, familiarity or lack of familiarity with the academic environment

impacted the transfer students’ experiences at MSU.

Fami liarity-Social Environment

Familiarity with the social environment relates to feeling comfortable
with social circumstances, and being firmly established socially. This is often
the end result of social connecting, when the connections are solidly in place,
and students feel well established. For some students, knowing native MSU
students gave them prior knowledge of the social environment at MSU, and
assisted with their overall adjustment. “I already have a couple of friends that
go to school here already so it wouldn’t be too hard on me trying to get adjusted
to a bigger college” (34A, 2). Therefore, the student was able to move to social
familiarity sooner because of the friends she knew ahead of time. Those that did
not have prior campus contacts wished that they did. When a student was
asked what she wished she would have known prior to arriving at MSU, she
replied: “In general, probably knowing more people, ‘cause that was the biggest
thing, not knowing that many people coming into a new surrounding in general”
(98, 8). Second semester, students feel a lot more established socially. This was
often attributed to the passing of time, which increased their level of comfort.

Now that I’ve been here for a semester I feel a lot more comfortable

doing things and I know some people on the polo team and stuff

like that. We made a couple friends and you know it seems better
I guess. But that comes with time. I’m sure that part does. (7A, 5)

Students became more interactive with the social environment over time. One
student spoke for many when he reiterated the importance of taking initiative in

order to become socially established at MSU, and thus move to social

86

familiarity.

The longer I’m here the more people I’m meeting and the more
acquaintances that I see, so it’s nice and it just takes time. I knew
it would, but people are open here and they’re outgoing people so
it’s pretty easy. And there are more extracurricular things to do
here than there are at a community college. I’ve noticed that. But
I didn’t really at first until I actually started participating more, so
that’s kind of neat. (18, 1)

Almost all of the students also reported feeling more a part of the social scene

during the second interview. Like others, this student notes an increased level

of comfort with the social environment during her second semester at MSU.
For last semester I think I have more friends now and I know more
people, because when I first come here I don’t know anyone. Now
I feel more comfortable. So I think that’s made the difference with
second semester. I feel more comfortable with them, like a part of
them. I’m more adjusted. So I feel more comfortable with second
semester. (288, 1)

Therefore, familiarity with the social environment was comforting and enhanced

the overall experience of MSU for the students.

Fami Rarity-Physical Environment

Familiarity with the physical environment relates to level of comfort with
the overall campus structure and culture. Familiarity was shown when
students articulated feeling a part of the campus community, and felt that part
of their transition to MSU was complete. Initially, the size of the campus
environment was overwhelming for many students.

I think the most vivid thing I remember is getting oriented on-

campus, just trying to find my way around. I wasn’t able to go on

the bus tour around campus, so it took me awhile to find which

roads, what they were named, and where they went, and where

they became one way. I think that largeness was the first thing

that struck me, and I can still remember it, how large it seemed.

(16A, 3)

For many, the perception of the size of campus shifted over time. This speaks to

87

increased exposure and time spent in the campus environment. Knowing more
people also impacted perceptions. The more familiar faces students saw around
campus, the more comfortable they were with the environment.

It’s still a big school, except that it does feel like it’s gotten smaller.

I see people everywhere I go now, so it doesn’t feel like it’s all that

big. (6A, 6)
Others were still impacted by the large size campus during the second
semester, but most at least felt settled in to the main parts of campus that they
utilized regularly. Despite some of its restrictions, campus size was seen as a

benefit in terms of the wealth of opportunities it provided both in and out of the

classroom.

At MSU. you get a different feel for things. There are a lot more

opportunities in the university setting and being on-campus,

which is just because MSU is 20 times bigger than CC. (24B, 6)
Familiarity and comfort with the physical environment settles in more so
second semester. During the second interview, many students reported having
a better idea of campus logistics.

I feel a lot better now about everything. I’m a lot more confident

about parking and stuff. I know which lots are which and I know a

lot more little tricks, which makes that a lot easier because I’m not

as fearful about things as I was last semester and I know more

that kind of little stuff that you learn as you go along. So I’m glad

about that. I have a better sense of the system and better sense of

belonging here and stuff than I did last semester. (24B, 5)
Commuters especially noted settling into a routine in terms of their commute to
campus. One student mentioned in the first interview that being a commuter
and just trying to find her way around campus was a struggle. When asked how

that was going during the second interview, she replied:

Pretty well. I don’t notice that anymore. I come here when I have
to, and I can come, like we have group work, like I came over here
on a Sunday once. So I don’t really notice it being a problem. I
think too because I am a junior and so I think that most people

88

have apartments or whatever so they’re driving here too. I see that
as less of a problem now than last semester. I don’t know if I’m
just getting used to it, or just accepting the fact that that’s what I
do. And I actually met someone in my classes too she’s from a
different town but she lives in [my home town] and she commutes
here too. So that’s been kinda neat to talk to her about it. I don’t
know if anything has changed or if it’s just me dealing with how it
is. (17B, 4)

The physical environment of MSU becomes what students know, and what is at
the forefront of their minds. As one student reflected, “I’ve been here for almost
two semesters now so I‘ve kinda found that I’m forgetting what the community
college experience was like. I just get the gist of it but I’m pretty much just
used to this atmosphere here (18, 4).”

Over time, students see advantages to some of the components of the
physical environment, including newfound freedom within the campus culture.

I’m not homesick anymore because I went home for winter break
and absolutely hated it, just because you come here and you’ve
got all the freedom and the responsibility of being on your own.
And then you go back home and they take that all away from you,
so it was I like, I didn’t like that. So I’m not homesick anymore
and this semester is going to go good, and I like my classes. (9A, 3)

In summary, one student’s experience demonstrates the experiences of
many as they transitioned from lost to familiar with myriad aspects of the
campus environment. When she shared how second semester was:

Probably better. Last semester, everything was really new. I was
lost and now I don’t get lost now. I know where everything is on
the campus now. I didn’t think I’d ever know where everything
was, but it is really not that difficult. It is easier to walk than it is
to drive, though. I have my own little, I don’t know how to say
it, a little system of how I do everything now. I’m more easily
relaxed and not as tough on me getting frustrated because I don’t
know where classes are and you know I was supposed to get this,
where, where is that store and stuff like that. I’ve lived here now,
so I know where even like going downtown and stuff, I know where
things are and I even have my own favorite coffee place now. (19B,
2)

Throughout her experiences, she transformed the campus into something that

89

was her own, that she felt a part of, including her own hangout. Once students
got settled into a routine, they felt a stronger sense of belonging. Overall,
familiarity with the physical environment of MSU’s campus was pivotal to the

“completion” of the community college transfer students’ transition to MSU.
Negotiating

The fourth theme found in the study was Negotiating. Negotiating is
defined as the ways in which students change their behavior and surroundings
in order to be more successful within the academic, social, and physical
environments of MSU. Negotiating can be an individual process in which
students change their own behavior. It can also be a process interrelated with
the larger campus context through the ways the students actively change their
surroundings and circumstances. It is an active process, as opposed to

Familiarity, which is more about understanding and internalizing information.
Negotiating-Academic Environment

Negotiating the academic environment was vital to success with
coursework. Students negotiated by changing their approach to coursework or
by changing their academic circumstances, such as the classes they took and
the major they selected. Academic success was related to negotiating as well as
familiarity, because the more information students had about the academic
structure, the more successful they were in navigating the system and being
actively involved in their academic experience. The students in the study found
that they needed to know information about how courses were structured as

well as academic expectations of faculty, and then adjust accordingly. Students

90

changed their academic behavior in a variety of ways. In addition, students took
into account their own learning styles and changed the academic environment
around them to be more conducive to their style and thus their academic
success. Several examples are explained below.

How students negotiated the large classroom environment varied for
students. Some modified where they sat in the classroom in order to change
their perceived chances of success. “All the classes, I always sit in the front
because I know I’ll do better there” (3B, 2). Over one-half of the students
mentioned that sitting in front and paying close attention in class was
beneficial. Also, it was important to utilize recitations as opportunities for in
class conversations, since it is often not possible to ask questions in class.
Another student reiterates the importance of adjustment in large classes as
well.

You can’t get a lot out of it with five hundred people in the class. It

doesn’t make for great conversation topic. I know that’s why they

break it up into smaller sections. I don’t think the large classes

have really hurt my grades or anything. I just have to adjust

differently, and listen more attentively. You know, not being able

to ask as many questions, just listening more, and sitting at the

front of the classroom in the center. (6A, 6)

Being flexible is important to the overall transition process. Some found
that it was important to seek out assistance with the academic demands.

When I have a problem in class, I got a tutor and it was just... I

never used tutors at my other school but now I feel like, I don’t

care, I need help. And I’ll admit that I don’t understand what is

going on and need someone’s help. (33A, 8)

Therefore, after assessing a need, the student changed their behavior and
negotiated the academic environment by seeking out tutoring, which is a formal

learning resource.

Almost all the students changed their study habits from those used

91

during their time at the community college, including a noteworthy increase in
studying and reading time, as well as sharpened time management skills. “I do
a lot more reading here and a lot more studying and have to write out all my
assignments for the week a lot more and just be a little more organized, I think”
(15A, 7).

The balance of work and academics was an ongoing process of
negotiation for many students. Some changes occurred for students upon
arrival at MSU.

Basically what I did at CC compared to MSU, actually at CC I
worked at the same time as going to school. Here, I actually
barely work now so I get more time for school, but I take bigger
loads here, too. It’s been right about the same amount of work.
(1A, 4)

Other changes did not occur until later, such as after the first test, or even after
the first semester grades arrived. Therefore, the events that served as trigger
points for change in the form of negotiating occurred at different times for
different students. When the change occurred impacted the student’s transition
as well as academic success. For example, one student reported having
academic difficulty during the first semester. When asked if he realized this
before the first. test, he replied:

No, not at all, it was a wake-up call. That’s why it was so
disappointing. I didn’t miss a class all semester, I went to every
class and I took notes. I had just pages and pages of notes and I
took the test and I got it back and I was just devastated. It would
have been something if I would have missed or just went three
times but I went to all the discussion groups and what not and I
just couldn’t believe that I did so poorly. So working with the TA
kind of made me focus, like yeah, you have all the notes but this
is how you need to apply them, something a little bit different. I
was more used to just taking notes and then the teacher would
ask you basically what you just took notes on the test, which is
writing down what you memorized basically. This was more
applying and analyzing and a little more critical thinking involved.
(14A, 7)

92

So, working with the TA greatly assisted him with his subsequent success in
the coursework. He negotiated the environment by seeking out his TA, a formal
learning resource, after he realized he needed additional help in class in order

to be successful.

One student found that he needed to change his work and living
situation in order to succeed academically.

It demands a lot more time. I worked full time and went to school
full time when I was at CC. Came to MSU and find out that your
study time is greatly increased. It is probably due to my program.
Nursing is a professional program, so we are expected to be at
school about 60 hours a week, whether it is class time or
independent study time. So, I had to cut back on my hours a lot,
had to move back home, which was a big bombshell, so it took a
lot of adjusting. (20A, 4)

Several other students were living at home for financial reasons, as well.
Another student also changed her study approach over time in order to be
successful academically and also work.
I started working this semester and I think at first I was like really
thinking it wasn't working out too well. I got my first tests back
and they were not good. But, then I studied more and I guess it
was kind of just getting to figure out what the professors wanted

and what you needed to know for the classes. Right now I think
I’m okay. (7B, 1)

Time management was a key strategy that impacted virtually all the
students’ transition to the academic environment at MSU. Students found ways
of balancing their time to do well in classes throughout their time here. One
student reported shifting her time management and study skills. At the
beginning of the second semester, when asked if she had done this shift
throughout first semester, she replied:

[A change in time management and study habits has] been more

this semester. I have been making sure that I’m ahead on my

work, just the same skills that I used at the community college. I
went from like a three-point something to like what I’m at now so

93

it’s a big adjustment. I make sure I go to the library a lot now and
I make time for the library whether I have to go when I get out of
work or whatever. (34A, 5)

It was confirmed during the second interview that she followed through with
this plan.

My study habits are picking up more. I’ve learned to apply myself
more, like make myself go to the library. Before I didn’t go to the
library as much but now I am going to library more. You know,
it’s just a different environment for a study habit or something like
that...It’s getting better. That’s all a part of the library experience
and just making yourself have time, allow time to study. Allow
time to continue to review your materials from class. That’s the
only way because if you cram it at the end, which everyone is
going to continue to learn until they say I can’t keep cramming. So
it’s just a good experience to go to the library to sit somewhere
quietly, you just have to do that. Whatever it takes for you to be
able to focus on your homework and study and whatever it takes.
(348, 1-2)

Another student’s experience illustrates both the themes of familiarity and
negotiating. Once he was more familiar with MSU, he was able to take action
and negotiate his time management in order to be academically successful. At
the beginning of second semester, he mentioned that he felt comfortable at
MSU. Based on this and other responses throughout the interview, he was
given the prompt, “it sounds like you didn’t necessarily feel that way when you
got here?” To this, he replied:

No, not at all. I thought I was getting my butt kicked all over the
place every time and I totally did not think I was supposed to be
here when I first got here because everybody else seemed to be
knowing where everything was at as far as buildings and where to
buy books. And at the community college it was this big and you
could walk across campus in five minutes and I knew where
everything was at. So I definitely felt like an outsider coming up
here because I didn’t know where everything was at and I wasn’t
doing very academically well.

When asked what he thought helped to change his situation, he responded:

Just to buckle down I guess, and just to know that if you work
your hardest and that you will get a lot out of it as long as you

94

work hard. I think I just thought it was better to stop worrying

about little stuff and stop looking two months in advance, and

start looking at what do I have to do today, what do I have to do

tomorrow, what do I have to do this week. I think I was getting

overwhelmed looking ahead. I’m like I have two papers due and a

test and I was like how am I going to fit this and so I think you

just have to look at everything one day at a time and that helps.

(14A, 8)

As opposed to changing their own behavior, some students found
solutions to situations by changing their academic setting. One student
recounts, “I changed my major. [I was in] Social work, but I couldn’t get
through anatomy” (25A, 1). She found that if she switched to the community
relations major, she could avoid anatomy, but still pursue a Master’s in Social
Work after graduation. Another student also found a way to change his
academic surroundings to be more to his liking.

Just the other day after I left [organic chemistry] lab, I touched my

eye and it swelled up. So I’m reconsidering taking any more labs

just because of health risks later in life. I switched from the

biochemistry major. I didn’t want to put myself [at risk], take any

more labs. Even though labs are easy, I didn’t really want to do it.

So I switched to physiology, which is basically along the exact

same lines, just no labs. (1B, 1)

Another student also changed her major to have more interesting biology
courses instead of additional chemistry courses, which were not as appealing to
her. She recounts that she knew if she were interested in the courses, she
would get better grades. “In order to help my GPA, I changed [my major] from
biochemistry to human biology” (3GB, 7). Therefore, students uniquely shaped
their academic environment to best suit their personal goals and styles.

Overall, students negotiate MSU by changing their behavior as well as

surroundings in order to create the unique academic environment that will help

to facilitate their educational success at MSU.

95

Negotiating-Social Environment

Students negotiated a variety of aspects on-campus to be more socially
involved, including formal and informal structures. Negotiating the social
environment included the changes that students made along the way in order
to meet fellow students and get involved in social activities. Being active in
campus activities was an important part of social negotiation and facilitated
friendships with other students. For some, the new social environment was a
challenge in that they needed to change their behavior and be outgoing to meet
more people. Students who did not make an effort to meet people were often
disappointed with their social situation. Initiative was a vital social negotiating
tool.

I think what I did was pretty good. Just to jump in to a bunch of
different things, then as you decide what you want to do, kind of
weed the other ones out. That was a good plan, because I know, I
have a lot of friends who just transferred here, too, ones living in
my hall, that really didn’t get involved in anything, and they don’t
really do anything. They just sit in their room and play computer
games all day, and don’t know anybody. They complain about not
knowing anybody, but they haven’t gone out and met anybody,
either. (6B, 8)

Socially, commuter students living at home in the study found it more difficult
to meet people unless they took initiative.

I guess one disadvantage of living off-campus is not getting to
meet that many people than if I lived on-campus in the dorm or
something, so that’s probably one negative side to living off-
campus... My social life isn’t exactly where I want it to be, but that
is understandable considering I don’t live here right in the area
and don’t get to meet everybody. Not that you can meet everybody
anyway but meet a lot of people, socialize and all that. I don’t take
the time, so it’s my own fault. (7A, 4)

This student’s situation stems both from the fact she lived off-campus, and also

from her motivation. Throughout the interviews, it appeared that it was

96

especially important for off-campus students to take initiative to get involved
and to meet other students.

There were also more informal ways that students were involved socially
on-campus, such as by talking to classmates and neighbors, or interacting with
students at informal social gatherings. A common trend was the need to be
outgoing in order to meet people. One student noted the following during the
second interview:

Socially, things are going pretty well. I made a lot of friends in my
classes. I pretty much stopped waiting for people to come up to
me and I started opening up a little bit more. I was kind of, I don’t
know, of afraid to do that before. I don’t know why, I just was.
But I started opening up more and that has increased my circle of
friends more. When I walk back to class now I actually see people
that I know and I say hi to them. It’s a nice feeling to know that
pretty much everywhere I go I know somebody. And it’s just
because I’ve opened up more instead of being more closed off.

And with the classes being so big, you don’t have the intimate
circles like I did at CC. So just whoever you sit next to just say,
“Did you get that? Hi, how are you doing?” Just opening more has
greatly increased my circle of friends. And I actually go out now; I
don’t spend all of my time in the dorm. (30B, 1)

Informal classroom conversations were especially important for one student
who commuted and had a very difficult time meeting people initially. The
classroom can be an important place for students’ social transition. During the
second interview, when asked what has impacted her the most throughout her
time at MSU, she reported:

Probably class sizes I would say. Learning how to cope when

there are 200 people in your class instead of 20. That’s probably

been the hardest part, the biggest difference. I’ve learned to sit in

the same spot in class every day because then you meet the

people around you, instead of sitting by strangers all the time like

I did last semester. (108, 2)

By sitting in the same seat, she was negotiating the academic environment, but

more prevalent was the impact to her social situation, since it allowed her to

97

meet people and develop relationships with fellow students. As other students
pointed out as well, sitting in the same spot in a large class helped to give it a
small class feel. This also shows the creativity of transfer students; something
as simple as sitting in the same seat has made all the difference for her.

Students’ living arrangements provided a variety of opportunities to
interact with the social environment, which varied depending on their
individual living situation: on-campus, off-campus apartment, or commuting
from home. For some, changing the living situation assisted with their social
interactions.

I haven’t made as many friends here yet but I think I will now,

because I just switched dorms at the beginning of the semester.

Before I was in McDonel, which has a lot of international students,

and it was really hard relating to them, especially because a lot of

them didn’t speak English very well. But now I moved to Akers,

and there are a lot of people that are in the ag education and in ag

communication, which is what I am doing, so I know a lot more of

the people, so that helps. I mean, we hang out a lot more, I know

a lot more people. It’s really fun, I’m really glad I switched dorms.
(24A, 3)

 

For others, largely those living on-campus, the social environment was initially
so enticing that it distracted from academics. Therefore, they needed to
negotiate by being less socially active in order to do well in classes.
I have to say I’ve definitely cut back socially. I kind of got that out
of my system first semester. I still go out like on the weekends but
I’ve cut down pretty much to only weekends... I have a horse now
that I take care of so I do that instead on weeknights. And all my
friends’ schedules changed so were kind of in and out at different
times, so we’re not all there at the same time, which makes things
easier as far as staying focused on school. So it’s much better all
the way around. It was definitely an adjustment. (5B, 1)
Overall, students negotiated the social environment both in and out of
the classroom, and utilized formal and informal structures to meet people.

Students were, in general, more satisfied the more they were connected socially

98

to others at MSU. Negotiating was a key tool for facilitating social interaction,

and thus overall satisfaction.
Negotiating-Physical Environment

Students felt that MSU’s physical environment was quite different than
that of the community colleges students attended. As one student suggested,
“Obviously campus size is a big difference. It takes a long time to get between
two places” (29A, 4). Therefore, negotiating the physical environment of the
campus and dealing with campus logistics was a salient experience for many of
the students. Several reiterated the importance of understanding how to get
around campus. “Just watch where you cross the street and make sure you
look both ways at least ten times before you jump out” (30A, 7). The physical
environment also includes parking as well as in general, students’ physical
living space. In terms of negotiating the social environment, living arrangements
were mentioned in terms of how they relate to students’ social situations. Here,
they are included in a more general way referring to housing as a facility. In
addition, finances and tuition are considered part of the physical environment.

Parking is an ongoing challenge for many transfer students. Although not
directly asked about it, almost every student mentioned issues surrounding
parking. One student captured many students’ perception of the parking
system overall, stating, “The parking police was kind of a shock when I got here,
that they would be so crazy with the parking tickets. I thought they’d be a little
bit more laid-back about that, but I guess not” (233, 2). The student found he
needed to be more cautious about when and where he parked in order to avoid

tiCkets. Considering the structure and regulations surrounding parking, many

99

 

had to make similar changes. “I’m dissatisfied with parking too. I don’t like that,
especially now that they tore down that parking structure. Now we’re really
screwed. There is no place to park. But I just take the commuter bus now.”
(7 B, 9)

The following student’s experience speaks to both familiarity and
negotiating. Once she was more familiar with the transportation issues on-
campus, she was able to negotiate her behavior accordingly.

The one thing that stands out is that people on bicycles like to run
you over, if you don’t have a place to go. The other thing that
stands out is that, in the very beginning, I didn’t know about the
commuter lot either. In the very beginning, I was parking all the
way, like, on Orchard Street where there’s free parking. You just
park on the side of the street or whatever. It doesn’t have a time
limit or anything. I was trucking it twenty minutes into class,
which I didn’t like, because by the time I got to class, I was all
sweaty and hot and everything, you know? Now I park in the
commuter lot. I pay the forty dollars to get the pass to park in the
commuter lot, and I pay the twenty-five cents to take the bus in.
Then I walk around campus, and take the bus back to the
commuter lot. (18A, 15)

She used an informal learning resource, her mother, to find out about the
commuter lot. Her mother called for her to find out all the details on parking
and the bus system.

The physical surroundings also impact the academic life, especially new
living arrangements away from home. One student found that she needed to
change due to living with friends in an apartment, as opposed to living with her
parents.

I realized it throughout the semester, but just like I said, I wasn’t

applying myself. I wasn’t making myself [get up for class and

study]. You know, when you [are] in college especially when you

have an apartment, dorm whatever, you are your own person.

Your teachers are not going to call you and tell you to get up.

Your parents are not going to say for you to get up. You have to

do that on your own. And that’s really a discipline within yourself
basically. It’s just something that you have to make yourself do.

100

(34A, 4)
Some students wanted to change their living arrangements to be more
conducive to their overall success.
When you’re living in the room with someone else, that’s like you
never have privacy, and so I’m going to get a single next year. I
like having a roommate, but sometimes I just need my own time to
myself. (33A, 7)
As noted in discussions of learning resources and connecting, roommate
relationships have a great impact on students’ overall transition. This was so

profound for one student that changing roommates made the difference

between wanting to leave and wanting to remain a student at MSU.

 

Especially about roommate thing, that was one of the biggest
problems. That was the start of it, not having a roommate that I
got along with, and then being homesick put on top of that, and
then just one thing after another, not liking the classes, it was just
all downhill. There was one point when I was talking with my
mom and just like, “ don’t want to be here, I want to go home, get
me out of here.” And then, things got better for a little bit. But
since I switched rooms, everything has been good since. So that
makes a big difference. (9A, 3)

The financial constraints of attending MSU lead several students to
significantly shift their focus to living on a strict budget as a form of negotiating

the physical environment.

[At MSU I have] a lot of focus on work and trying to pay off bills. I
had bills at home but I made a whole lot more money working
because I didn’t have the extra $5000 a year that I have to pay for
board and food and all that other stuff, it was just school, which
was also cheaper. So, it definitely taught me how to live a long
time off of not much. (5B, 3)

Overall, negotiating the physical environment proved to be a vital

component for successful transition for the community college transfer

Students.

101

Integrating

For some students, a deeper theme of integrating emerged, which
encompasses a shift in perception that relates back to the student’s identity.
Data within the theme of integrating are very reflective of Tinto’s (1987) theory
of freshmen integration. While Tinto’s theory encapsulates the academic and
social campus environments, the data in this study also also portrayed a third,
the physical environment. Within this study, integrating occurred after students
had a deep understanding or familiarity with the academic, social, and physical
environments at MSU due to interactions over time. Familiarity is about
students having a full grasp of information about the academic, social, and
physical environments and being comfortable with the information and making
it their own. Integrating takes this a step further. For some students, by being
familiar with the information, they are able to move and reflect on changes in
themselves as a result of being a student at MSU. For many, their time at MSU
was an opportunity to reflect and refme their future goals. After the initial
settling in, they have more time to contemplate larger issues and reflect. Or,
integrating may be due to the actual act of transition, of learning about MSU
and being comfortable with the environment. It is the relation between the
students and MSU that creates an opportunity for this shift in perception or
identity to occur. Examples of integrating found in this study included new
perceptions of the classroom environment and what it means to be a student,
new perceptions as a result of exposure to diversity, and identity shifts in terms
of “becoming” a Spartan. Once students are comfortable with the environment,
they are able to be open to potential opportunities for integrating.

I think last semester I didn’t really understand, I mean, I didn’t

102

I...

have an outlook for my future, and I think this semester it just
kind of set into more of a reality. I’ve learned more about my
situation, and thought more about future goals, so that’s a
difference. (68, 7)

Before integrating can occur, students need to be familiar with the academic,
social, and physical environments of MSU. Once they have the basics down,
they are able to reflect at a deeper level. One student explained:

I think that last semester I had to learn to adjust, so this semester
I know where more things are as far as buildings, and places to go
to get help, or just to where you can find your stuff at. It was just
like an adjusting thing last semester. And now it’s starting to, I’m
putting the adjusting to action. Even though it’s not completely
complete as far as knowing where everything is. I’m just like
almost completed as far as adjusting completely to the whole
college experience here. (34B, 1)

Throughout the second interview, this student recounts how she is putting the
“adjusting to action” by becoming self-motivated, living on her own, and
changing her study habits. Since it includes a newfound insight and shift in
perception, it can be considered an example of integrating.

I learned to accept others for who they are, but at the same time
keep your identity. I met a lot of people this semester actually,
through different groups that I have decided to join and in classes
and stuff like that. I learned to apply myself more in class. I
learned to just ask the person next to me a question, and if they
were studying. Because it is better to study with someone in your
class, you know if you are on the same level or if they have a
higher level of you in the classroom. (34B, 1)

She “becomes” a different type of student. She also discussed a shift in
vieWpoint towards other people, which can be considered an example of
integrating. When asked for more detail about her comment on accepting
others, she elaborated:
For instance, I see a more diverse set of students down here. I met
a female who, she was like different but it didn’t change the way
her personality was, it didn’t change the way she acted towards

me or anything. For instance, she had really short hair and it was
an ethnical type thing for her, and she was an African-American

103

 

girl but I had never really seen anything like that at the

community college. Everyone here has their own identity and own

culture. Just because they do, don’t mean you shouldn’t get to

know them because what they know maybe can help you out in

the future. I learned that she’s a really nice person and just

because she’s different don’t mean anything at all because she’s

going to treat people the same as if she had regular clothes on or

whatever. I liked that. It’s really diverse down here. (34B, 1-2)
Of note is that the interviewee was African American as well. This interaction
helped to expand her perspective that there is great diversity and individual
identity within and among groups. Her ability to expand her perception of
others and keep her own identity intact shows an overall change in her during
her time at MSU. It was through her experiences at MSU that this was able to
occur, yet it was not until after her initial adjustment to the university that this
was possible for her. Arriving at MSU, the first priority was to learn the basics
of the academic, social, and physical environments and to move to familiarity.
When this was accomplished, she, and others that were interviewed, had the
time and energy to move on to higher forms of reflection and growth. Once
students are familiar with MSU, the day-to-day components of being a student
take up less time and energy, which leaves them open to reflect and grow.

Some of the transfer students reported that the overall experience at
MSU has been a life-changing event. One student summarizes:

It has just been rewarding, it has been a struggle, but a good kind

of struggle. I’m learning a lot about growing up in the sense of

careerwise. Learning things I want to do, learning new things

about nursing that I didn’t know existed. Had great interactions

with not only people I know, but just strangers on-campus as far

as saying hello. (2GB, 6)
For some, the environment at MSU assisted with development as a person. One

student demonstrated many growth aspects from her experiences at MSU,

which she attributes to being a part of the campus community. When asked

104

about her overall satisfaction or dissatisfaction with her experiences at MSU,
one student replied:

I am satisfied. I really enjoy it. Like I said it’s harder here because
of the different strains other than academic, as far as financial
and that type of thing. It would be easier to stay at home but I
think that the experience that I’m getting here as far as learning
how to be more humble in my spending and that type of thing is
really something that is going to help me in the end, and as far as
keeping better track of things like that. So I definitely think that
coming to the University, you learn to be more responsible with
what you do, and just more careful. Like I was thinking about it
last night. It was nice out and I wanted to go for a walk but then
you realize that you can’t always do that. And the campus, I never
feel unsafe on-campus, but living in a suburban area you don’t
have to think about it. There’s not as many people there and I
think that makes the big difference too. So I think that I would
definitely be satisfied with getting a different perspective of things
and realizing in how many areas I was sheltered before. I never
even realized that I was. That you can’t really realize it until you
go someplace else. (SB, 6)

 

There tends to be a stronger sense of community membership at the time of the
second interview, as well as a shift in identity for some. One student identified
herself by noting, “I am a Spartan”.

I feel like I am more a part of a community and I feel like, I don’t
know, I can identify myself better. At CC I was kind of like where
am I going, what am I doing, I’m not really sure. I haven’t been
accepted. I was just existing. Here I feel like I am a Spartan, I am
in the College of Ed, I am a child development major. I feel like I
can identify myself and I know more about myself and the
direction I am headed. I know for sure because I’m taking the
classes and I’m doing the time. I’m on my way. So overall I feel
like I am more happy and more satisfied here. I got good grades
there and I was glad for my academic performance but here I feel
like closer to my mission, closer to the end here. So I’m more
satisfied overall. (38, 9)

Change in perception occurred over time for some students. One student felt so
overwhelmed by her new situation, especially concerning roommate conflicts
and homesickness that she almost decided to leave. Her initial experiences

provide a context for the shift in perception that occurred later for her.

105

There was a lot of personality conflicts the first two months I was

in school, a lot of them, and that added to how hard it was to be

away. I know at least once I had my bags packed and was ready

to go. I didn’t know what else to do. (30A, 3)
She also had firm plans to go home for the summer. This is in sharp contrast to
the experiences she reports during the second interview, including having a

new roommate.

I’m definitely happier this semester than last semester. I’ve gotten
over my homesickness and kinda just dealt with the fact that I’m
not going to have my family around me all the time and I’m not
going to have my boyfriend there when I get home. It’s probably
made things a lot easier, because I don’t have to worry about them
coming home and interrupting. It’s kind of made things a lot
easier not to have them around me all the time. It’s made me a lot
more independent and a lot less, I can’t think of the word. But I’m
definitely more independent. I don’t really rely on them for much
of anything anymore. And I like that, that feeling of independence
a lot. So I’ll probably end up staying up here next summer, so I
can get two jobs and make lots of money to pay off the debt I’ve
accumulated this year. Next summer I’ll probably just stay up
here because it will be easier. (30B, 2)

Her experiences at MSU changed her and fostered a sense of independence that
she did not possess prior to her time at MSU. This shift can be considered an
example of integrating.

The diversity of the campus impacted many students, as it was their first
exposure to a variety of cultures. It is interesting to note that although the
literature often touts the strong diversity found at community colleges (Griffith
85 Conner, 1994; Laanan, 1998), the vast majority of the students in this study
attended community colleges that had predominately white student
populations. Campus diversity created an opportunity for students to rethink
some of their previous experiences, to grow as a result of increased exposure at
MSU, and to further reflect on their own beliefs. Some students chose to do this

and thus experienced integrating, while others did not. The following student

106

utilized campus diversity as an opportunity for personal growth.

I think just being up here is a different cultural environment,
much more culturally diverse from where I come from. And so
having to deal with those issues, and I guess my CEP [diverse
learners] class has opened me up too. But that’s been the biggest
thing that I’ve noticed because where I come from it’s basically all
white, and when I went to the community college it was all white
too. So having to deal with that diversity. It’s been fine. I’m more
aware of how to deal with that in the classroom and stuff. I think
a lot of that comes from my CEP class too. (218, 2)

Another student had a similar experience through her interactions with her
roommate’s family and others in her residence. The diversity and exposure to a

variety of viewpoints helped her to broaden her perspective on life.

 

So I think that the biggest thing that has changed me is my
experience and the way I view life and stuff now, the way I view
things. It’s opened my eyes a lot more to seeing what really goes
on out there in the real world because I had been to all these
places, I’ve dealt with different people of different ages. But coming
here I see this is a country style, not in the country but a lot of
people here are agricultural majors and stuff that’s nothing that
I’ve ever been exposed to before in my life. Not having to deal with
different people, like 40 different people are my floor. This is an
experience I would want my kids to have because it’s a really good
experience to have. It’s just learning new things about different
areas of life that I really didn’t know about. I guess my roommate
is from a dairy farm. I have been out to her farm and I talk to her
parents and I see how that life is. Just from being from the
city and you don’t see that kind of thing, so just different people
and different attitudes. Freshman here are like showing me, a 21-
year-old, how to wear makeup and stuff. I don’t wear makeup, I
don’t even deal with that. I just realized that when you live in the
dorm you are closer to people than you realize and you actually
see a lot into their lives than you would normally see into their
lives if you were at home. I just sit back and look and I was like
there is so much that these people have dealt with that I have
never dealt with. There’s also a lot of things that they’ve dealt
with that I would never want to deal with in my life either. I’m not
religious or anything and how like these are my views or anything.
I have my own standards and different things that I see I judge
people by what I see about them, but then I get to know them
better. Like one of the basketball players I thought he was really
arrogant until I got to know him and he’s really nice. But it was an
eye opener to me, getting to know the different things in life that
you would never know about. (33B, 3-4)

107

Living on-campus facilitated the development of deep relationships with a
variety of people and exposure to different experiences, which greatly impacted
her overall viewpoints.

Overall, the theme of integrating showed the richness of experiences and
growth that occurred for many, but not all, of the transfer students throughout
their first year at MSU. Many considered the stories above, which appear to be
examples of integrating, as the culminating experiences within their overall

transition to their new environment.

Advice For Future Transfers

The students in the study had a great deal to say when asked to offer
advice for future transfer students. The following are some of the

recommendations they had to offer.

Have Prior Contact With MSU 8- Visit Campus

Many students emphasized the importance of early contact with the
campus. One student’s advice captured a deep understanding and familiarity
with the academic, social, and physical environments at MSU.

Take the time to visit professors in the program that you’re going
to be involved in. Go on a tour of the University, tour the library.
Realize that it’s structured differently, that you’re going to be in
classes with a lot more people, which is going to be both good and
bad. You’re going to have more of a support group if you open up
your eyes and open up your arms and take in the other students
around you. And it’s also going to be different in the fact that
your professors may be non-accessible, may have more than one
class to teach, they may be involved in research, so they may be
only on the University two days a week. It’s something that I’m
pondering working with at a community college somewhere
advising transfer students, just because I found different ways to
make my transition smooth. I can see it being difficult for other
people. So tour the campus, get to know the campus, embrace

108

 

the new friends that you make and don’t let the differences
overwhelm you. Accept them for the way the University is, and
change the parts of you that you can to work within the system
because the University is very much a system. It’s an institution
not in a bad way but everything is regulated by multiple groups of
people and when you want to do something you have to work with
those multiple groups of people. (168, 6)

Connect With an Advisor 8; Gain Transfer Course Equivalency

Information

Connecting with an advisor was a pivotal part of the early transition
process for many students. Those that were not in contact with an advisor
ahead of time wished that they had been. This allows for an opportunity to
learn the specifics of their major program.

My advice would be to definitely talk to an advisor before you get
here both at the community college and here. And just to get to
know as many different people as you can and have fun while
you’re down here and study hard because it’s difficult, especially
because of both the academic transition and social transition.
(258, 4)

Many students emphasized the importance of getting specific transfer
course equivalency information well ahead of time. This could be done by
visiting an advisor, or by looking on MSU’s web site, where there is a
comprehensive transfer course equivalency page. One student relayed the
advice that he offered to his brother who was planning on transferring:

“One thing that you can do so that you save your time, your
money, everything, is to go meet with the advisor from the college
you’re going to.” He knows the programs he’s going into. I said,
“Go to that college this summer. Meet with the advisor and work
out a plan for what you need to do, and have them initial it,
because then when you go back, say, "This is what you told me."
You said when I transferred, these were the credits I was going to
get. Have them initial it.” I didn't do that, and because of that, I’m,
like, eighteen credits behind, and that’s a lot. (32B, 6)

Overall, many students reiterated the advantages of meeting with an advisor

109

and finding out specific transfer credit information.

Live On-Campus

There was strong support from commuters as well as residential
students to live on-campus. It helped to facilitate connection to other students
as well as the campus culture. Those that did not live on-campus felt more
disconnected, and had to take more initiative to connect and learn about MSU.
A student living in a residence hall suggested, “Live on-campus because I can
see it would be really, really hard to integrate yourself into the school while
living off-campus, because you’re kind of immersed in it [living on-campus]”
(13B, 2). A commuter student agreed as well.

From all the people that I have talked to, they say that they

absolutely hated living in the dorms, and would never do it again,

but they are glad they did it their first year to meet people and

what not. So I’d say I kind of regret not going in the dorms at least

the first semester. But I have enough friends down here from [my

hometown] that occupy my time enough, and mainly friends from

class and what not. But no, not as far as extracurricular activities.

(4A. 4)

Fourteen students, out of the final sample of thirty, lived on-campus in
the residence halls. Some of the students lived in McDonel Hall, which is
targeted towards transfer and international students, while the rest were
scattered in the other residence halls throughout campus. Some students found
McDonel Hall less conducive to social interaction than other halls.

It’s harder to meet people in McDonel than in other halls.

Because I’ve hung out and other halls, [I noticed] all the doors are

open whereas in McDonel everybody shuts their doors and it’s

really quiet. It is better for studying and academics but as far

socializing it’s not what I would expect. (13A, 2)

McDonel was quite different from many students’ expectations.

It’s quiet. It’s not at all like what they show on television with the

110

 

doors all open and people walking around. That’s not at all what

it’s like. Everybody’s doors are pretty much closed all the time.

It’s a nice quiet hall; you can get a lot of studying done. (30A, 2)

So, although the students recommended living on-campus, whether or not it is
best to cluster all transfer students into one hall is in question.

In general, similar to those living ofi-campus with friends, connecting
tended to be easier for the on-campus students. Academically, they had easy
access to study groups. Socially, the halls often made it easier to meet people
and learn from fellow students. Access to student organization meetings and
functions was also eased by students’ on-campus living arrangements. The
physical environment was easier to navigate since they did not have to
commute to campus. They had easy, 24-hour access to campus facilities, such
as the library, and could attend meetings and campus events with ease.
Parking still impacted them when they wanted to go home or to work, but it was
not the daily stressor that it was for the commuter students. Overall, students

in the study saw strong benefits to living on-campus, or if that wasn’t possible,

to live with fellow students in an local neighborhood adjacent to campus.

Understand the Parking System

Parking was a salient issue for almost all of the students in the study,
since the parking situation at MSU was incredibly different than at the
community colleges. Among the many successions for understanding the
parking system, one student captured a common piece of advice related to
parking.

worry about getting a parking pass too. I was worried about

student loans and where I was going to live and I had all these

different aspects of things that I had to pull together and a few
things got overlooked and parking was one of them. When you get

111

here and when you talk to people, parking is a huge deal. But not
knowing that, I mean at the community college you just drove
there and parked and there was always room to park there. You
didn’t have to worry about that. (238, 4)

Get Involved On-Campus

Several students relayed the benefits of campus involvement, and
suggested that future transfer students get involved as a form of connecting to
campus and to assist with the overall adjustment process.

Somehow, try and make that adjustment as quickly as possible.

‘Cause the quicker you adjust, the easier school is going to be in

getting involved and that’s another big thing that to do is just to

try and get involved in, you know, find out what your interests are

and do something that you enjoy. (9B, 13)

Things MSU Can Do To Help

Although not specifically asked, some of the students offered advice to
MSU about actions the university could take to assist with the transition
process. One suggestion was a mentoring program that would allow new
transfer students to connect with a fellow student through a formal project.

Another area that was often mentioned was that of strengthening contact
between the advisors at the community college and MSU, as well as MSU
contact with students while they were at the community college. One student
suggests:

The universities and the community colleges should talk to each

other, like about different degrees, and transferability, because I

found out just a week ago that I’m going to have to be here two

more years instead of one more year, and that’s really going to

hurt me financially. Because my major requires a lot of classes

that aren’t offered at Community College, I ended up having to

stay longer than I thought I was. It would be neat to find out for

what majors you could really go to Community College and not

have to stay in college for five years. (68, 3)

Overall, the transfer students in the study had good advice to offer to

112

 

future transfer students, as well as MSU. This information could be utilized to

assist students in the subsequent years.

Summary

The five main themes, woven together, give a sense of the transition of
community college transfer students throughout their first and second
semesters at MSU. The themes help to create snapshots of the transition, while
also coming together to paint a more complete picture of the primary aspects of
their transition. Finally, the advice for future transfer students from the
participants assists with creating interventions that can be implemented by
community colleges, four-year universities, and transfer students themselves.

The meaning of these findings is discussed in detail in Chapter 5.

113

 

CHAPTER FIVE

CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS

Overview of the Study

Little extant literature addresses the full picture of the process of
transition for community college transfer students over time at their new four-
year institution. Most community college transfer students expect to succeed
academically at their new four-year institutions due to their previous college
experience. Similarly, the university structure assumes that students do not
need as much assistance with transition as freshmen, and does not provide a
great deal of structured transition programming, such as extended orientation
and campus visit programs. Despite these assumptions, the culture and
expectations of four-year institutions are vastly different from community
colleges. Many students experience “transfer shock” (Hills 1965), which is
defined by a drop in grade point average at the new four-year institution. In
addition, a larger percentage of native students persist to graduation than
transfer students (Bulkley, 1974; Hills, 1965). However, the transfer shock
literature does not tell the full story of transfer student transition. Academic
performance is only one part of students’ experiences, and grades are the result
of a complex process that has occurred throughout the semester. The transfer
shock literature shows information on academic grades, but not on how these
grades were achieved within the academic environment of the four-year
university. In addition, the literature is relatively void of research on the
transition that transfer students undergo within the social culture and physical

environments of the four-year university, including how these various

114

experiences interact with one another within the transition process for transfer
students.

A great deal of research has been conducted on freshman transition and
success issues, as well as transition issues for K-12 students. However, a more
limited body of research is available about transfer student transition and
success. There is not a clear sense of whether or not transfer students
experience transition similarly to or different from freshmen. From availability
of campus services, it appears that universities may believe transfers have
limited adjustment issues but the literature is unclear. Traditional transition
programming, such as orientation are much more comprehensive for freshman
than for transfers. In addition, the studies on transfer students have focused on
academic gains or losses, but have not dealt with transfer students’ stories of
their process of transition, and how they became a part of the university
community over time.

There is concern within higher education regarding the increased
enrollments in the community colleges and thus increased numbers of transfer
students to four-year institutions (Cejda, 1997; Hills, 1965; Oliver, 1995; Watt,
1930). It appears four-year universities will continue to see increased numbers
of applications from community college students wishing to transfer. Therefore,
it is important that the community college transfer student transition process
be studied further.

Townsend’s (1995) and Laanan’s (1998) work begins to paint a clearer
picture of the experiences of transfer students, but more needs to be done,
especially in terms of longitudinal data or studies with more than one data

collection point. The desire to better understand community college transfer

115

student transition leads to the development of many research questions that

call for further investigation. The research question guiding this study was:

0 What is the nature of transition for community college transfer students

over their first semester at a large, four—year university?

More specifically:

0 How do transfer students’ experiences change between their first and second
semester at MSU?
0 How are the experiences similar or different for on- and off-campus

students?

Using a qualitative research design with two data collection points, I studied
how a group of community college transfer students proceeded through their
first year at a four-year university. King’s (1999) Consequential Transitions was
used as a theoretical framework for the study, and helped to provide a broad
lens for keeping in mind the developing relationship between the students and
their new environments while assessing the data. Thirty-five community college
transfer students were interviewed in January of their second semester at
Michigan State University about their community college experiences and their
first semester at MSU. Thirty students returned in late March or early April of
this same term to recount their second semester’s experiences, to reflectively
compare their time at the community college to their time at MSU, as well as to

compare their first semester at MSU to their second semester. Their stories led

116

to the development of five main themes: Learning Resources, Connecting,
Familiarity, Negotiating, and Integrating. Differences were also noted in terms of
living arrangements. In addition, students in the study ofi’ered advice to future
transfer students. Suggestions made by those in the study included having
prior contact with MSU, visiting campus, connecting with an advisor, gaining
transfer course equivalency information, living on-campus, understanding the
parking system, and getting involved on-campus.

The study presented the unique opportunity to gather data in two time
frames. This provided the ability to ask comparative questions in both
interviews in order to measure change over time. The time lapse also enabled
more reflective questions to be asked in the second interview, which greatly

assisted in the development of the themes of familiarity and integrating.

Review of the Themes and Additional Findings

The five themes that emerged from the data were Learning Resources,
Connecting, Familiarity, Negotiating, and Integrating. They were assessed
within three different environments: academic, social, and physical. The
academic environment included interactions in class, with faculty both in and
out of the classroom, study groups, advisors, as well as information on career
opportunities. The social environment included both formal and informal
interactions with other students outside of the classroom through student
organizations, parties, residence halls, apartment complexes, common areas
on-campus, etc. Finally, the physical environment not only consisted of the
bricks and mortar of the university but also campus structure in terms of how

the campus services and departments function and are organized, campus

117

 

logistics, overall campus culture, and parking. In addition, the physical
environment included the finances that are required for schooling, since tuition
and other expenses can be considered a structural requirement.

The themes come together as a more holistic, comprehensive picture of
the variety of components that were present for the students in the study within
their transition to MSU. Formal and informal learning resources, the first
theme, were vital for students to find out critical information. Formal learning
resources were a part of the official structure of MSU, and included orientation,
faculty, student affairs professionals, and advisors. Informal learning resources
were comprised of unofficial individuals who knew a great deal about MSU,
such as friends and alumni. Initiative, or the gathering of information on their
own, was pivotal to students’ overall success. Connecting, the second theme,
was concerned with the development of relationships with others in the
academic, social, and physical environments. The third theme, familiarity was
comprised of taking the basic information that students gathered to the level of
internalizing the information, when students felt more comfortable with the
environments. Negotiating, the fourth theme, occurred when students adjusted
their behavior and surroundings as necessary in order to be successful within
the academic, social, and physical environments. Finally, for some, integrating
occurred, which was a developmental change as a result of the students’
relation to the three environments, similar to Tinto’s (1987) theory of freshmen
integration, but including physical environment integration as well. Knowledge
of the physical environment enhances the existing literature, and our
understanding of transition. Integrating often included a shift in perception or

identity. Additional findings woven into the themes included transition

118

differences based on where students lived, be it on-campus, in an off-campus
apartment with friends, or off-campus with relatives.

The themes generally move from a basic to a more comprehensive,
internalized sense of the academic, social, and physical environments of the
four-year university. At the same time, many things happened in parallel to
each other. Students moved through the different themes throughout their time
at MSU, and the themes are not entirely linear, especially since students are
moving through three different environments. The following is a schema that
shows how students move across all of the environments, and is an example of
how students can traverse through the various themes. At the most
fundamental level, learning resources are vital for collecting basic information.
After initial contact with individuals who may have served as learning
resources, it is possible to develop deeper relationships with them and thereby
move to connecting. It is also essential to have the basic information in order
for students to know how to effectively negotiate the environment, and actively
and intentionally change their behaviors or surroundings in order to be more
successful. Familiarity is inherently “stronger” than the mere information that
learning resources provide; it is being comfortable with the information, and
can include becoming a part of the four-year university community. Finally,
integrating can only occur after familiarity has been reached. It is only then
that experiences can be further reflected on, which can lead to a shift in
perception or identity. Therefore, each theme is individually important to the
transition of community college transfer students, but can also be looked at as
a more inclusive package of components within the transition. The various

themes will be individually and collectively woven into the implications

119

discussed below.
Implications

The themes do not imply one right or wrong way to approach transfer
student transition. Rather, the lived experiences of the students in this study
provide a way of thinking about transfer, and the transitions that these
students face over time more complexly. The themes provide a framework for
understanding community college transfer student transition throughout the
first year at a four-year university. By utilizing this frame, community colleges,
four-year universities and the students themselves can better understand the
process and thus promote the development of interventions to assist with the
process over time. The themes show a set of skills that may be helpful to
students in transition. The results of this study have broad implications for the
ways in which transfer student transition is perceived by students, faculty, and
administrators at both community colleges and universities.

There are three key stakeholders of the results of this study: transfer
students, community colleges, and four-year universities. Transfer student
transition is a collaborative process between the three, working together to
assist with the transition. Therefore, specific suggestions for the three groups
are woven into the discussion areas below. The heart of the theoretical
framework of this study, King’s (1999) Consequential Transition, focused on the
relation between person and environment. In line with that notion, the
implications for this study emphasize the relationships between the three
constituencies.

The suggestions are not to negate the important, developmental

120

transition process or to side step it, but rather to help it to begin sooner, thus
ending the feeling of being a newcomer to the environments sooner. That way,
students can feel a sense of membership rather than attend to feelings of
newness for as long. This will assist students by freeing up energy for the
reaching their goals at the four-year university.

Integrated discussion and implication areas follow, and include overlying
structural considerations, traditional institutionally-based transition
programming, increased learning connections, and community college and four-
year university advising implications. Finally, other areas of application will be

discussed.

Overlying Structural Considerations

There are a few areas that are important to be mindful of when
considering implications of transition and interventions for transfer students.
One is looking more closely at the theme of negotiating, especially as it
interweaves with the other four transition themes. Another is the notion of
membership; are there ways to help transfer students feel like a part of the
community sooner, that is in MSU’s case, “Become a Spartan”? In addition, the
academic environment as well as the campus structural differences between
community colleges and four-year universities are important to keep in mind in
order to develop appropriate programming for each unique campus. These
broad discussion areas provide a context for the more specific implication

sections that follow later in the chapter.

Negotiating. Negotiating was pivotal to the overall transition process for

students, and is defined as strategies the students used to shape their

121

behavior, experiences, and surroundings in order to be more successful at the
four-year university. Negotiating was a key component for moving through all
the themes. The themes as a whole meld the important steps that students take
in order to be successful within their transition to MSU. The negotiating that
was portrayed was very dynamic between the students and their environments,
and showed that students had quite a bit of control in changing their behaviors
and environments in order to be academically successful. The data presented
an empowering portrayal of transfer student transition is consistent with the
study’s theoretical framework of consequential transition (Beach, 1999),
positing that the relation between individuals and their environments is
dynamic, and that both the individual and the activity play key roles in the
relationship. This is in contrast to frames such as person-environment fit
(Lewin, 1935), which places the person in a stagnate environment over which
they have little control. The data showed that the environment was far from
immovable for these students. Transition is not just something that happens to
students; they have control over the process. They may not have control over all
the components, but they do have control in how they choose to act in
accordance to their individual situation, such as where they live (within
financial constraints), who they live with, their major, what classes they take,
who they seek out for help, and how they spend their time. There are certain
aspects of the four-year university that are unchangeable, such as overall size
and location. However, the internal workings, as evidenced by the students’
experiences, are often negotiable. This is a very different perspective than
previous studies that show that students do not have control over much of the

situation, and have to cope with what is given to them (Aspinwall 85 Taylor,

122

1992). Coping in the traditional psychological sense was not seen in the
students in this study. Overall, the premises and assumptions of the traditional
coping literature as well as the person-environment fit literature did not hold for
the students in this study. Additional future research that looks at the
environment as dynamic and the students as empowered will be important to
further refine this new look at the environment.

It is important for prospective and current transfer students to realize
early on that they have control over many components of their circumstances.
Student mentoring programs as well as professionals at both community
colleges and four-year universities need to give students this information, in
order to better inform them about the possibilities for their transition process.
Having this knowledge helps students to prepare for and traverse their
transition process. It helps to prepare them for the realities of the four-year
university while keeping in mind that they do have some power over their own
situation. Suggestions on how each of these parties can assist will be discussed

later in this chapter.

“Becoming a Spartan.” Astin (1993) found that frequent peer group
interaction and strong sense of community impacted positively on students’
educational attainment. Similarly, many students in this study stressed the
importance of feeling a part of the campus community, and how this greatly
impacted their satisfaction and success. The site of the study was a campus
where membership is a strongly held value, and communicated in many ways
to students. Therefore, when considering programmatic efforts, are there ways
to help transfer students become familiar and feel a sense of belonging sooner?

Harnessing this feeling of membership can help move students through

123

components of the transition and ease the possible repercussions of not
knowing about the academic, social and physical environments. This can
happen in a variety of ways. In this study, a pivotal part of the process of
moving to familiarity and in some cases, integrating, was the feeling of
“becoming” a Spartan, which for many meant full membership in of the MSU
community. When do transfer students “become” Spartans? The themes of
familiarity and integrating help to frame interventions that increase feelings of
membership and potentially speed up the process for transfer students.
Familiarity is related to feeling a part of things, and inevitably, membership in
the four-year university community. Integrating also plays a key role in
membership, as it includes a shift in identity. If we can create ways to have the
transition happen more smoothly, it will increase satisfaction and retention and

the overall success of transfer students in reaching their goals.

Four-Year University Academic Environment. The academic
environment portrayed by the students in this study was quite different from
some who consider the four-year university almost Darwinian in its approach to
academic success for both transfer and native students, that only the strongest
will survive (Boice, 1992; Townsend, 1995). In contrast, the students in the
study painted a picture of a demanding yet fair academic environment. The
students felt welcomed by faculty and knew that instructors cared about their
success. However, students learned from faculty that they had to use their own
initiative to seek out help when needed. The academic environment did not
handhold, but it was not “sink or swim” either. Although some have reported a
level of competitiveness in the four-year university classroom, experienced by

lack of willingness of fellow students to help each other, and limited comfort in

124

asking questions in class (Kuznak, 197 2; Townsend, 1995), the students in this
study reported friendly classmates with a willingness to work in groups on
projects. Overall, it is interesting that the perceptions of the academic
environment differed for students in this study when compared to the results of
others such as Townsend, yet it is difficult to tell which factors led to the
friendly perceptions of the academic environment, since this study only
encompassed one four-year university campus, and students who were retained

by the institution for the second term.

Campus Structure. We need to look at how the individual components
of the university can assist and facilitate various aspects of the transition. At
the same time, we need to make the transfer process more comprehensive and
streamlined. This study showed that campus organizational structures and
differences between community colleges and four-year institutions can affect
transition and transfer processes in many ways.

For example, community college structures and campus organization
tend to be centralized. At the heart of the community college mission is the goal
of serving broad audiences in a personalized way (Griffith 8r. Conner, 1994). The
total full-time enrollment at community colleges tends to be smaller, staff to
student ratios are smaller, and the personal attention to individual students
may be greater at community colleges than four-year universities. Often, they
are structurally set up in a “one-stop shopping” structure, in which students
have access to a variety of services within one centralized location and therefore
seem to be more holistic environments.

Conversely, four-year universities are more segmented; student services

are often very decentralized. It is hard for students to “split” parts of themselves

125

at four-year universities in order to survive within a structure of separate
pockets of offices and services. This is a possible reason why some students
struggle at the four-year university. They must find out about and thrive in
many different pieces of campus life that encompass the academic, social, and
physical environments at the university. Therefore, as we develop programming
for transfer students, it is important to prepare students and assist them with
the realities of a decentralized campus structure. The decentralized
environmental impact can be softened by participation in a living-learning
option at the four-year university, and by developing an advising relationship in

which the advisor serves as guide for navigating the decentralized system.

Witional Institutionally-based Wflon Programming

Many types of programming are currently done at community colleges
and four-year universities to assist with student transition. Based on this
study, the following are specific suggestions of how such programs could be
implemented or improved upon within community colleges and four-year
universities. These ideas would be helpful in the specific example of MSU, and
could be utilized by other four-year universities, as well.

Transfer Admissions and Campus Visits. A primary concern with
transfer admissions is the timing of application and acceptance to the four-year
university. It is imperative that the admission process takes place in a timely
fashion that allows students to visit campus ahead of time, and attend the
regularly scheduled transfer orientation. Enrollment pressures may sometimes
cause four-year universities to admit students very late in order to meet yield,

but this practice negatively disadvantages transfer students.

126

Four-year universities need to take an active role in interacting with
community college transfer students before, during, and after transfer. For
example, admissions trips to community colleges could be expanded to include
academic advisors along with admissions officers. It is impractical to have
advisors from all possible majors, but if advisors from the most common
transfer majors could rotate through visits, this would be very helpful to the
prospective transfer students at the CC. If they met an advisor at an
information fair on their own campus, students would likely be more
comfortable setting up a campus visit to MSU to talk to the advisor in greater
depth.

Students in the study strongly suggested visiting campus and meeting
with an advisor ahead of time as a means of smoothing over surprises,
increasing awareness of campus services, and beginning a relationship with an
academic advisor. Universities could encourage prospective transfer students
more directly to visit campus, especially if they do not make a concerted effort
to formalize campus visits for transfer students. Widespread programming for
freshmen campus visits is commonly in place, but the same effort is not given
to transfer students. Customized programming could facilitate early connecting
to the academic, social, and physical environments and provide students with
opportunities to seek out housing information, peer mentoring information, and

to get a sense of campus life.

Orientation. Orientation is a formal learning resource existing in some
form at most colleges and universities that could be enhanced to provide even
better service to transfer students. For some of the students in this study,

connecting with fellow students at orientation laid the foundation for future

127

friendships that carried over to the school year. There is also the opportunity
for more in-depth knowledge of the student’s major and advisor to be gathered,
which enhances the knowledge gained from earlier campus contact and visits. A
handout developed from the transfer advice students gave in this study could
be distributed and used to facilitate discussions with students about the
perceived realities of the university, and the strategies for transitioning to the
academic, social, and physical environments. One concern some students have
in terms of orientation is the very name of the program, since they have already
been oriented to college. Students may be more receptive of the program if it
was called something other than orientation, such as Transfer Day. Overall,
existing orientation programs could be enhanced to further assist community

college transfer students with their transition to the four-year university.

Transfer Orientation Seminar Courses. Transfer orientation seminar
courses are potential tools for facilitating transfer student transition. A variety
of models are suggested that can be customized to meet the needs of individual
community colleges and four-year universities. Possibilities include pre-transfer
seminar courses taught at the community college or four-year universities, as
well as orientation courses taught at the four-year university taken by students
during the first semester after transfer.

A pre-transfer orientation course taught at the community college could
facilitate the understanding and early use of learning resources at the
university. The course could help students begin connecting to the academic,
social, and physical environments of the university by including detailed
information of each, and giving the students hands-on experience through

campus tours, visits to various facilities at the four-year university campus,

128

and making appointments with university advisors. Advisors typically meet with
prospective students regardless of admission status. Therefore, students in the
pre-orientation seminar would have access to advisors. Many students
suggested that prior contact with MSU was helpful or would have been helpful.
The orientation course would be a formal structure of prior contact. It would
also be an additional way that the community college and the university could
collaborate. By taking place on the community college campus, community
college advisors and transfer center staff could be involved with the course,
which would help to develop stronger bonds between community college and
four-year university staff.

An alternative approach for feeder schools in close proximity to the four-
year university would be to hold the pre-orientation seminar course on the
university campus. This would allow students to experience first-hand parking
and campus logistics, yet on a smaller scale than they will experience during
their first full-time semester at the four-year university. Increased exposure to
the four-year university campus community will help students feel a part of
things and possibly move to familiarity sooner.

Another effort that four-year universities could undertake is to develop a
transfer orientation seminar. Freshmen orientation seminars have had a great
deal of success in assisting freshmen with adjustment to college (Fidler 8r
Fidler, 1991). It is projected that a seminar designed exclusively for transfer
students would have comparable results. However, orientation seminars are
typically not considered for or tailored to transfer students. Depending on the
logistics of the individual situation, this course could be in addition to or

instead of one offered at the community college. Such a course would be taken

129

during a transfer students’ first semester at the university, and would meet
weekly throughout the term, similar to freshmen orientation courses. Early use
of learning resources, connecting and familiarity with the university, can help to
facilitate student satisfaction sooner within the new university environment.
Although it costs them a credit, time, and money, an orientation seminar would
be an excellent way for students to move to familiarity during their first
semester. It would give them an opportunity to connect with fellow transfer
students, so they do not feel alone in the process as well as access to several
formal learning resources. A transfer orientation seminar would inform transfer
students about the environment and ‘survival strategies’.

The transfer orientation seminar at the four-year university can take
many forms, depending on the individual structure of the campus environment
and the timing of student transfer. At smaller institutions, a university-wide
course may be appropriate. For larger institutions, there are advantages to
offering separate courses for individual colleges or majors. The students in the
study reported the value of connecting to students in their major who shared
similar interests as well as academic requirements. The students also recounted
the excitement of finally taking courses of interest in their major at the four-
year university, as opposed to the general education courses often taken at the
community college. Therefore, an orientation course housed in their major
would be appealing. It presents the opportunity for departments to customize
the information presented to be the most beneficial to their academic majors.
Departments could also utilize the seminar to introduce the students to the
department faculty, who are valuable formal learning resources, allowing

students to connect to the academic environment in a timely fashion. Also, a

130

major specific seminar enables students to find out about possible research
opportunities with faculty, which further enhances their academic connections.
Timing of transfer may differentiate which type of course would be more
beneficial as well. For students transferring fewer credits, a general university
course may be more appropriate, while students transferring in more credits
may prefer a course tailored to their majors. Overall, a transfer orientation
seminar course could be a valuable tool to introduce students to learning
resources, and assist students in moving from connecting to familiarity, and

possibly, to integrating.

Increased Learning Connections

Four-year universities can play a pivotal role in transfer students’
transition processes. Beach (1999) suggests, “We need to figure out how identity
making...can become an institutionally sanctioned part of acquiring knowledge
and skills in classrooms in ways that it currently is not, but is in most other
activities in which students participate” (p. 132). This idea can be expanded in
the university environment to include the total campus experience. Students
reported that informal learning resources, such as friends who were native MSU
students, were the most highly utilized resource for learning about the
academic, social, and physical environments of the university. This is similar to
the findings of Robbins and Tank (1995), who report that college students use
informal support networks more than formal support services, such as
counseling centers. Therefore, programs providing opportunities for peer
interaction may prove beneficial. Native students convey valuable information

about the perceived realities of the four-year university and campus services, as

131

well as portray how important it is to be proactive within the campus.
Therefore, creating more opportunities for informal networking with other
students is beneficial to transfer students. Student organizations, mentoring
programs, and special networking sessions at both the community college and
four-year universities are some examples of informal networking opportunities
that may just need to be more strongly encouraged, or developed if they are not
in place. Native students and transfer students who have already completed a
year at the four-year institution could be recruited to interact with prospective
and current transfer students in a variety of ways. Some specific examples are
elaborated on below.

Campus Involvement. Being involved on campus is a great way to
connect to the social environment at the four-year university (Astin, 1984).
Many of the students in the study concurred with Astin’s findings and
advocated being involved in campus activities as a way to connect to and feel a
part of the university. Academically related clubs provide information about
internships and career opportunities, and serve as resources about the
academic field, which help solidify students’ interest in the area. As noted by
many students in the study, it is a means of getting to know fellow students.
This can be done in both formal and informal ways, through student
organizations, sporting events, or establishments in the local community.
Overall, it is important that students interact with peers outside of the
classroom environment in order to develop or solidify quality relationships,
which will provide them with informal learning resources, help them with

connecting, and inevitably move them towards familiarity.

Mentor programs. Informal learning resources, primarily friends, were

132

highly utilized by transfer students. A formal peer mentor program may
facilitate the use of informal learning resources, as well as assist with
connecting to peers. This allows transfer students to connect and feel a part of
the four-year university by getting to know fellow students who have prior
experience with the university’s academic, social, and physical environments.
Formal mentoring programs would be in line with Astin’s (1993) suggestions for
fostering peer groups by including a “foundation on which identification can
occur...[and] provide opportunities to interact on a sustained basis (p. 423).”
Student mentors can be native students as well as transfer students who
already made a successful transition to the four-year university. New
community college transfer students would have a great deal to gain from both
types of students.

At MSU, a mentoring program for new freshmen and transfer students
within the Lyman Briggs School residential program is underway. One of the
students in the study was taking part in it, and the student made sure that
transfer students were included and would be assigned to mentors along with
incoming freshmen. The student was very excited at the prospect of giving back
to incoming transfer students, and hoped that the program in the future would

help to facilitate the transfer process for other new students.

On-campus living. Consistent with Astin’s (1993) findings, student
experiences in the study differed for on- and off-campus students. The advice is
clear from the students that were interviewed in the study: live on-campus.
They indicated that living on-campus increased opportunities to integrate into
the academic, social, and physical environments. This was especially true

within the social environment, in helping students find their niche faster.

133

Similar to Astin’s (1984) results, students in the study who lived on-campus
were more likely to be involved in extracurricular activities. The students
attributed this to the close proximity of campus events and student
organization meetings, as well as encouragement from neighbors in the
residence halls to attend the activities. Those that did not live on-campus were
still strongly advantaged if they lived with other MSU students. This provided
immediate access to an informal learning resource, and a connection with a
pre-established social network through getting to know their roommate’s
friends. Townsend (1995) relayed that commuter students may have fewer
opportunities to integrate into a university’s social system. The students in this
study concur with Townsend’s findings. By comparison, commuter students
had to go more out of their way to connect to the social environment. This was
similar to Townsend’s findings that commuter students had to work harder to
integrate into the university social system.

Living-learning options are an ideal way for transfer students to be
introduced to the overall campus and become a virtually instant member of a
subset of campus community. Living-learning options can take many forms,

, and be based. on any number of special topics pertinent to students at that
particular four-year institution. For example, Lyman Briggs School (LBS), a
science-based living learning option on MSU’s campus, created a unique
opportunity for one student in the study that he highly recommended to others.
LBS provided for a situation in which the academic, social, and physical
environments could be blended into a manageable microcosm within Holmes
Hall where LBS is housed. In general, the way that living-learning options

provide student services is closer to that of the centralized service models at

134

community colleges. Similar to Terenzini et al.’s (1996) findings, living—learning
options would be a method of allowing out-of-class experiences to influence
student learning. Overall, transfer students’ transitions would be benefited by
access to and participation in living-learning options.

Implications of the recommendation to live on-campus exist for the four-
year university as well. On-campus housing is not always available for transfer
students at every four-year university. This exclusionary practice by some
institutions should be closely examined, as it is likely disadvantaging transfer
students. Other four-year institutions may choose to cluster transfer students
into one building. For some students in this study, living with many other
transfer students worked out well, while others found the targeted transfer and
international student hall not as socially open as others. While it is clear the
students in this study found living with other students beneficial, it may not be
the best situation to have all the transfer students together. It appears that
living-learning options should be presented to transfer students as viable
options for on-campus housing. Four-year university and community college
officials through advising and transfer admissions counseling can share advice

in terms of beneficial living arrangements with the students.

Community College and Four- Year University Advising Implications

The results of this study have wide-spread implication for academic
advising, including collaboration efforts between community college and four-
year university advisors, the application of the themes to advising practice, as

well as the overall benefits of academic advising for students.

135

Collaboration between Community College and Four- Year University
Academic Advisors. Many of the students in the study suggested that further
communication between the community college and the four-year university
would have been helpful. They purport that increased knowledge and
information about university programs and transfer credits would help
community college advising to be more productive. Augmented institutional
linkages to address these transfer concerns could be implemented in a variety
of ways. For example, four-year universities could sponsor programming at
community colleges, such as information fairs, meetings with CC advisors, as
well as a pre-transfer orientation course taught at the CC for students planning
to transfer to the four-year university the following semester.

Communication between community college and four-year university
advisors is also critical to providing information relevant to student transfer.
Programming and structures should be in place to help facilitate the
establishment and maintenance of relationships among advisors. For example,
at present, MSU holds information sessions with community college advisors
that help facilitate communication. These could be expanded to include
increased opportunities for advisors from all institutions to mingle and share
information. The students’ perceptions were that more needed to be done to
communicate information. Therefore, increasing community college advisor
attendance at university information meetings would be helpful. A culture
needs to be established in which community college advisors feel comfortable
calling university advisors for specific information when working with students.
Therefore, knowledge of exactly who to contact is critical. Development of such

a culture can be assisted through advisor interactions at information meetings

136

and fairs held at both the community college and the four-year university.

Overall, increased communication and collaboration between community
colleges and four-year universities, especially in terms of advising, would greatly
assist in potentially smoother transitions that can lead to increased satisfaction
and retention of community college transfer students.

Application of the Themes to Advising Practice. The data from this
study can assist academic advisors in offering sociocultural coping strategies to
students during the process of the advising relationship that will help transfer
students transition to the university. The themes convey potential issues in
transition that advisors can discuss with their students, and help to emphasize
that there is not one “right” way to approach and go through transition. The
students in this study all had experiences related to the themes, yet they
approached the themes in very different ways. Negotiating is an especially
poignant example. All of the students negotiated in one way or another, but the
variety of ways this occurred was quite extensive, from sitting in the same seat
in class each day in order to meet people, to changing majors in order to avoid
taking laboratory courses, to taking the bus in order to avoid dealing with
parking on-campus. Therefore, there is no cookie cutter way to transition to the
four-year university. However, having a better understanding of the themes
allows practitioners to convey the themes to students in a broad way,
emphasizing that they can be utilized to fit each students’ unique transition
experience, and to help facilitate that process. The academic advisor can play a
key role in conveying the broad-based skills that emerged from this study, and
help students think about and prepare for the potential transition issues

conveyed by the themes that may arise.

137

Advisors can use the themes within their advising practices, not only
with transfer students, but also native students. Advisors can help their
students to seek out formal and informal learning resources, as well as to help
students see a need to be proactive and take initiative. Advisors are also in a
position to help students connect through the advising relationship, as well as
through other relationships that students develop as a result of seeking out
learning resources. Advisors can help students see that seeking out learning
resources has more potential than just getting information, and can also lead to
developing relationships. Therefore, advisors can assist all of their students by

having a sense of transition issues as relayed in this study.

Benefits of Academic Advising for Students. Meeting with an
academic advisor ahead of time is of special importance. Many of the students
who were not in touch with advisors ahead of time were very disappointed with
how their courses transferred. Many students were also disappointed that it
was going to take additional time or a great deal of summer courses to graduate
on time. Prior contact with an academic advisor would help to clear up these
transfer credit issues. Armed with this information, the students can then
negotiate their environment to optimize reaching their academic goals in a
timely fashion. One example of such negotiation prior to actually arriving at the
university would be a student’s decision to change their courses during the last
semester at the community college to more appropriately fit academic course
planning goals and articulation agreements at the university. Meeting with a
university advisor before transferring will help to confirm or deny their interest
in the major. If they find they are not interested, the students can negotiate the

environment by changing their major sooner, which will assist in a timely

138

graduation. Overall, the more information students have, the easier the
transition will be.

Dissemination of knowledge is one area where advisors can be especially
helpful to students. Although the campus structure of the four-year university
is often fragmented, academic advisors can serve as guides to help put the
pieces together. Students often looked for advisors to give specific advice, which
assisted in moving students to familiarity. lnevitably, the students must
experience campus life for themselves in order to move through their transition.

However, advisors can provide information to get them on the right path sooner.

Ideas For Future Research

The study has provided knowledge of the process of transition for
community college transfer students throughout their first year at MSU.
However, it leaves many questions unanswered that could be the subjects of
future research.

Interviewing students before as well as very soon after transfer may
produce different results from this study. Having ‘in the moment’ data as
opposed to retrospective information may glean different results. Also, having
information beyond the second semester may prove useful to see long-term
retention and overall success of the transfer student. This would also help in
seeing if any interventions continue to be valued over time.

It would be quite interesting to take a closer look at how proactive the
transfer student is, and potentially look at locus-of-control, in terms of seeing if
students believe that they hold power or if events are left to chance. Some

students were very actively engaged in interacting with the college environment,

139

while others thought that things were happening to them. This difference in
perception could be further explored.

It would also be intriguing to study non-traditional aged students in
order to compare their experiences to the more traditional aged students in this
study. A comparative study between native freshmen and transfer students
looking at the similarities and difi‘erences in their transition process to the
university would also assist in further understanding both groups. It is still
unclear whether the process of transition was related to the developmental
place or maturity level of the transfer students. Therefore, comparative studies
of transfer students as well as native freshmen and native juniors may offer
more information about whether or not general maturity plays a role in
transition.

Another possibility for future research is mapping out the decision to
transfer including all the social, financial, and academic factors that impact the
decision. This would provide a more thorough context of the student’s situation
before transfer and potential transition issue differences.

The sample in this study was diverse in terms of ethnicity and gender, and was
similar to the overall diversity of MSU as a whole. However, no analysis was
done to look at similarities or difference of experience or transition based on
gender or ethnicity. In addition, no data were gathered in terms of the sexual
orientation of the students in the study. Therefore, it will be important for
future studies to provide further insight into these areas.

The process of transition as outlined in this study could also speak to the
transition experience of new masters and doctoral students within their

program. Masters students are transitioning from the expectations and

140

structure of undergraduate courses to the new demands of graduate school.
Doctoral students have prior knowledge from their master’s programs similar to
transfer students’ prior knowledge from the community college. Many have
concerns surrounding how to find information, how to connect, what changes
they need to make to succeed, and finally, feeling a part of their new
community. Further research would need to be conducted to see if the model
outlined above holds true for masters and doctoral students.

Throughout the study, especially in terms of the integrating theme, an
overarching finding was that a shift in identity sometimes occurred during the
transition. However, a more thorough study looking specifically at identity
development and identity transformation would be very helpful in order to delve
more thoroughly into this topic. The implications could be quite profound for

how transfer students are looked at in the future.
Conclusion

Overall, the implications of the study point to what community colleges
and four-year universities can do to facilitate transition, and also to what
students can do to help their own transition process. Initiative is a key
component of the transition process. Students in the study were clear that
transfer students must seek out and utilize resources on their own. Help will
not always come to them; students must go to the help. The students in this
study became competent citizens of MSU, who were well on their way to
reaching their long-term goals. They were committed students who took a great
deal of responsibility for their education, including a considerable individual

financial investment. There is a great deal that the transfer students can do to

141

help facilitate their own transition process. If future transfer students follow
through with the advice offered by the students in this study, their overall
transition process could benefit greatly.

The process of transfer student transition looks very different in this
study than in the results of other studies. It does not deal with credits; it does
not deal with numerical grade point averages. Rather, it captures the overall
experiences of community college transfer students as they proceed through
their first year at a four-year institution. In the future, it is important that this
process approach be carried further with continuous studies at other four-year
institutions, as well as studies starting with students while they are still at the
community college. This will help to paint an even clearer picture of the process
of transition as a developmental model with identity transformation

implications.

142

APPENDICES

143

APPENDIX I

INTERVIEW QUESTIONS

144

QUESTIONS FROM INTERVIEW ONE
(Introduce myself and the study)
Tell me about your high school experience
How would you describe the academic environment at your high school?
Tell me about your community college experience
0 How did you decide to attend the community college?
0 Who did you go to for support for making it through school?
0 Any social involvements?
o How would you describe the academic environment at the
community college?
Tell me about your decision to transfer to Michigan State University
(MSU)
o What were you looking forward to?
o Orientation?
What concerns did you have about coming to MSU, if any, and how do
you feel about those now? Biggest challenge?
Tell me about your experiences at MSU
o How would you describe the academic environment at MSU?
0 Have your perceptions about MSU changed since you arrived? If
yes, how?
0 How did you think you’d do academically, and how are your
classes going so far? Study habits, time management?

0 Where are you living?

CI Please describe a specific problem, preferably school related, and the

ways it has impacted you, ways you have approached the situation, how

145

you strived to resolve it, key players in the situation, etc.

0 Any further comments you would like to add overall?

146

QUESTIONS FROM INTERVIEW TWO

(Reintroduce myself and the study)

D How are things going this semester?

0 Academically?
o Non-academic, Anything out side of class, Social network, social
involvement?
0 How do they compare to last semester?
How do your experiences here compare to those at cc?
Last semester, you said that your biggest challenge was _. How is it
now?
Other challenges, still working on or that feel more resolved?
What has impacted you the most /been most significant throughout your

time here?

D Any surprises, i.e. something you weren’t expecting?

0 Anything you wish you would have known?

Last time we talked, you had mentioned as a specific problem

you had to resolve. Can you tell me about that now that more time has passed?

0

Who do you go to for support for making it through school? Has this
changed? How?

What things or people helped you the most with your transition to MSU?
In thinking about your overall satisfaction with your experiences at MSU,
in what ways are you satisfied or dissatisfied?

What advice would you offer to future transfers? Specific strategies?

Any further comments you would like to add overall?

147

APPENDIX II

RECRUITMENT EMAIL AND PARTICIPAN T CONSENT FORM

148

RECRUITMENT E- MAIL

Dear Transfer Student:

As a community college transfer student attending MSU, you have a unique set
of experiences. We are calling on you for assistance in gaining a better sense of

the experiences of community college transfer students over time.

Participants are needed for a study that is concerned with gaining a better
understanding of the transition issues of community college transfer students.
The study hopes to gain insights into the experiences that transfer students
have as new MSU students. It will provide you with the opportunity to tell your
story and reflect on your experiences. It is hoped that the knowledge gained
from the study will be used in the future to develop intervention programs that

will assist future transfer students with their transition.

Participants will be interviewed on two occasions over time during spring
semester on campus for one to one and a half hours per interview about their
experiences as transfer students at MSU, including social and academic aspects

of their transition.
We understand your time is valuable. You will receive a $20 GIFT

CERTIFICATE to the MSU BOOKSTORE after the second interview, in order to

encourage participation and compensate you for your time.

149

If you are interested in assisting with this study, please respond to this email,
indicating your willingness to participate in the study, and to be contacted for
interviews. Please indicate dates and times that are best for you in the

upcoming weeks to interview.

Your participation is completely voluntary, and you can stop participating at
any time you wish. Your responses will remain confidential. Your privacy will be

protected to the maximum extent allowable by law.

The final, comprehensive results of the study will be shared with MSU Office of
Admissions and Scholarships, and will hopefully assist with future interactions
with transfer students. The data supplied to Admissions will maintain the

confidentiality of the participants, and will not identify specific students’ names.

If you have any questions about the study, feel free to contact Catherine Flaga
at (517) 353-9833 or flagg@,msu.edu or Dr. Marilyn Amey at amev(a),msu.edu.

Your cooperation is greatly appreciated, and will assist future transfer students

to MSU.

Sincerely,

Catherine T. Flaga Marilyn Amey

Doctoral Student Associate Professor

Department of Educational Admin. Department of Educational Admin.
Michigan State University Michigan State University

150

PARTICIPANT CONSENT FORM

The study you are being asked to participate in is concerned with gaining a
better understanding of the transition issues of community college transfer
students. I hope to gain insights into the experiences that transfer students
have as new MSU students. It will provide you with the opportunity to tell your
story and reflect on your experiences. The knowledge gained from the study
may be used in the future to develop intervention programs that will assist
future transfer students with their transition. The final, comprehensive results
of the study will be shared with MSU Office of Admissions and Scholarships,
and will hopefully assist with future interactions with transfer students. The
data supplied to Admissions will maintain the confidentiality of the

participants, and will not identify specific students’ names.

During the interview session, you will be asked questions about your
experiences as a transfer student at MSU, including social and academic
aspects of your transition. The interview will last approximately one to one and
a half hours. In addition, you will be contacted during the spring semester to
set up a follow-up interview, which will last approximately one to one and a half

hours.

You will receive a $20 gift certificate to the MSU Bookstore after the second
interview, in order to encourage participation and compensate you for your

time.

151

The interview will be tape-recorded. The information I collect from you
will not be used in any way that would reflect on you personally. What you
say to me will be held in confidence, and I will not use your real name in
any reporting of data. Your privacy will be protected to the maximum

extent allowable by law.
Your participation is voluntary, and you can discontinue at any time. You have
the option to ask that the tape recorder be turned off at any point during the

interview.

If you desire further information about this research, you may contact:

Catherine T. Flaga Marilyn Amey

Michigan State University Associate Professor

103 Natural Science Building Department of Educational Admin.
East Lansing, MI 48824 Michigan State University

(517) 353-9833 (517) 432-1056
flag§@pilot.msu.edu amey@msu.edu

If you desire further information about participants’ rights as human subjects
of research, you may contact: David E. Wright, Ph.D., Chair of the University

Committee on Research Involving Human Subjects (517) 355-2180

If you are willing to participate in this study, please sign below.

 

152

 

By signing, you agree to participate in this study. You verify that the purposes
of the study have been explained to you, and that your name will not be used in
any analyses or report of the data. You also grant permission to be quoted in
any reports that are written about this study, provided that your name is not

used in these reports.

Full Name (please print) Date

 

Signature

 

153

REFERENCES

Algera, J. A. (1983). “Objective” and perceived task characteristics as a
determinant of reactions by task performers. Journal of Occupational
Psychology, 56(2), 95-107.

Anderson, S. A., 85 Fleming, W. M. (1986). Late adolescents’ home-leaving
strategies: Predicting ego identity and college adjustment. Adolescence,
21(82), 453-459.

Aspinwall, L. G., and Taylor, S. E. (1992). Modeling cognitive adaptation: A
longitudinal investigation of the impact of individual differences and
coping on college adjustment and performance. Journal of Personality
and Social Psychology, 63(6), 989-1003.

Astin, A. W. (1984/1999). Student involvement: A developmental theory for
higher education. Journal of College Student Development, 40(5), pp. 518-
29.

Astin, A. W. (1984, July). Student involvement: A theory for higher education.
Journal of College Student Personnel, 25(4). pp. 297-308.

Astin, A. W. (1993). What matters in college? Four critical years revisited San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Baltes, P. 8., Staudinger, U. M., 8:. Lindenberger, U. (1999). Lifespan
psychology: Theory and application to intellectual functioning. Annual
Review of Psychology, 50, 471-507.

Barker, R. G., 8:. Gump, P. V. (1964). Big school, small school. Stanford, CA:
Stanford.

Barone, C., Trickett, E. J., Schmid, K. D., 85 Leone, P. E. (1993). Transition
tasks and resources: An ecological approach to life after high school. In
L. A. Jason, K. E. Danner, 8:. K. S. Kurasaki, (eds.), Prevention and school
transitions (pp. 179-204). New York: Haworth.

Bartlett, C., 8:. Abell, P. (1995). Understanding the transfer students—Or are we?
(Eric Document Reproduction Service no. ED381200)

Beach, K. D. (1999). Consequential transitions: A sociocultural expedition
beyond transfer in education. In Review of Research in Education, Vol 24.
American Educational Research Association.

Betts, N. M., Dirkx, J ., 8r Ruud, J. (1993). Using a critical incident technique to
develop nutrition information materials for adults with low literacy skills.
Journal of Nutritional Education, 25(4), 208-2 12.

Boice, R. (1992). The New Faculty Member. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

154

Brookfield, S. D. (1995). Becoming a critically reflective teacher. San Francisco:
Jossey-Bass.

Bronfenbrenner, U. (1979). The ecology of human development. Cambridge, MA:
Harvard.

Bulkley, K. V. (1974). A study of the academic achievement and graduation rate
of transfer students to Michigan State University from two-year and four-
year institutions. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Michigan State
University, East Lansing, Michigan.

Caplan, R. D. 85 Van Harrison, R. (1993). Person-environment fit theory: Some
history, recent developments, and future directions. Journal of Social
Issues, 49(4), 253-75.

Causey, D. L. 85 Dubow, E. F. (1993). Negotiating the transition to junior high
school: The contributions of coping strategies and perceptions of the
school environment. In L. A. Jason, K. E. Danner, 85 K. S. Kurasaki,
(eds.), Prevention and school transitions (pp. 59-81). New York: Haworth.

Cejda, B. D. (1997). An examination of transfer shock in academic disciplines.
Community College Journal of Research and Practice, 21, 279-288.

Clark, K. K., Bormann, C. A., Cropanzano, R. S., 85 James, K. (1995). Validation
evidence for three coping measures. Journal of Personality Assessment,
65(3), 434-55.

Cohen, A. M., 85 Brawer, F. B. (1989). TheAmerican community college. 2nd
Edition. San Francisco: Jossey Bass.

Cohen, F., 85 Lazarus, R. L. (1979). Coping with the stresses of illness. In G. C.
Stone, F. Cohen, 85 N. E. Adler (Eds.), Health psychology (pp. 217-254).
San Francisico: Jossey-Bass.

Costa, P. T., Jr., 85 McCrae, R. R. (1985). The NEO Personality Inventory manual.
Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources.

De Rivera, J. (1986). The “objective-behavioral” environment of Isidor Chein.
Environment and Behavior, 18(1), 95-108.

Delvin, A. S. (1996). Survival skills training during freshman orientation: Its
role in college adjustment. Journal of College Student Development, 37(3),
324-334.

Denzin, N .K. 85 Lincoln, Y.S., (Eds) (1994). Handbook of qualitative research.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Diaz, P. E. (1992). Effects of Transfer on Academic Performance of Community

College Students at the Four-Year Institution. Community Junior College
Quarterly of Research and Practice, 1 6(3), 279-9 1 .

155

Donaldson, J. F., 85 Graham, S. W. (1999). A model of college outcomes for
adults. Adult Education Quarterly, 50(1), 24-40.

Dougherty, K. J. (1992). Community Colleges and Baccalaureate Attainment.
Journal of Higher Education, 63(2), 188-2 14.

Daugherty, K. J. (1994). The contradictory college: The conflicting origins,
impacts, and futures of the community college. New York: State University
of New York Press.

Eagan, A. 85 Walsh, W. B. (1995). Person-environment congruence and coping
strategies. Career Development Quarterly, 43(3), 246-56

Eaton, J. S. (1994). All access is not equal: the need for collegiate education in
community colleges. In Arthur M. Cohen (Vol. Ed.), New Directions for
Community Colleges: Vol. 86. Relating Curriculum and Transfer (pp. 3-11).
San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Flanagan, J. C. (1954). The critical incident technique. Psychological Bulletin,
51(4), 327-57.

Fidler, P. P. 85 Fidler, D. S. (1991). First national survey on freshman seminar
programs: Findings, conclusions, and recommendations, Columbia, South
Carolina: University of South Carolina. (ERIC Document Reproduction
Service no. ED343519)

Folkman, S. 85 Lazarus, R. S. (1985). If it changes it must be a process: Study of
emotion and coping during three stages of a college examination. Journal
of Personality and Social Psychology, 48(1), 150-70.

Freud, A. (1937). The ego and the mechanisms of defense. London: Hogarth.

Gallagher, D. J. (1996). Personality, coping, and objective outcomes:
Extraversion, neuroticism, coping styles, and academic performance.
Personality and Individual Differences, 21(3), 421-429.

Goldman, B. A. 85 Mitchel, D. F. (1996). Directory of unpublished experimental
mental measures. Washington DC: American Psychological Association.

Graham, W. K. (1976). Commensurate characterization of persons, groups, and
organizations: Development of the trait ascription questionnaire (TAQ).
Human Relations, 29(7), 607-22.

Graham, 8., 85 Dallam, J. (1986). Academic probation as a measure of
performance: Contrasting transfer students to native students.
Community/ Junior College Quarterly of Research and Practice, 1 0, 23-24.

Griffith, M., 85 Connor, A. (1994). Democracy’s open door: The community college
in America’sfizture. Portsmmouth, NH: Boynton/ Cook.

156

Hampton, G. (1991). Caping with person-environment incongruence. Journal of
Applied Social Psychology, 21(15), 1277-92.

Hayes, J. 85 Allinson, C. (1993). Matching learning style and instructional
strategy: An application of the person—environment interaction paradigm.
Perceptual 85 Motor Skills, 76(1), 63-79.

Hills, J. R. (1965). Transfer shock: The academic performance of the junior
college transfer. Journal of Experimental Education, 33(Spring), 201-2 16.

Holahan, C. J ., 85 Moos, R. H. (1981). Social support and psychological distress:
A longitudinal analysis. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 90, 365-370.

House, J. S. (1981). Social structure and personality. In Morris Rosenberg 85
Ralph Turner (Eds.), Social Psychology: Sociological Perspectives (pp. 52 5-
61). Basic Books.

Jason, L. A., Weine, A. M., Johnson, J. H., Warren—Sohlberg, L., Filippelli, L. A.,
Tumer, E. Y., 85 Lardon, C. (1992). Helping transfer students: Strategies
for educational and school readjustment. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Kelley, H. H. (1991). Lewin, situations, and interdependence. Journal of Social
Issues, 47(2), 211-33.

Kindermann, T. 85 Skinner, EA. (1992). Modeling environmental development:
Individual and contextual trajectories. In J. B. Asendorpf 85 J. Valsiner
(Eds.) Stability and change in development (pp. 155-190). London: Sage.

Kuh, G. D. (1996). Guiding principles of creating seamless learning
environments for undergraduates. Journal of College Student
Development, 37(2). pp. 135-48.

Kuznik, A. (1973). Reverse transfers from university to community college.
Journal of College Student Personnel, 13(3), 250-253.

Laanan, F. S. (1998). Beyond Transfer Shock: A Study of Students’ College
Experiences and Adjustment Processes at UCLA. Unpublished doctoral
dissertation, University of California, Los Angeles.

Laanan, F. S. (1996). Making the transition: Understanding the adjustment
process of community college transfer students. Community College
Review, 23(4), 69-84.

Lazarus, R. S., 85 Folkman, S. (1984). Stress, appraisal, and coping. New York:
Springer.

Lewin, K. (1935). A dynamic theory of personality. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Lopez, F. G. (1991). Patterns of family conflict and their relation to college
student adjustment. Journal of Counseling 85 Development, 69, 257-260.

157

Michigan State University (1999). Facts in brief? Academic Year 1 999-2000.
Author.

Miles, M. B., 85 Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded
sourceboolc Thousand Oaks: Sage.

Mullen, Edward J. (1976). Evaluating student leaming: Baccalaureate programs
and the community college transfer student. New York: Council on Social
Work Education.

Nickens, J. M. (1972). "Transfer Shock" or "Transfer Ecstasy?”. Paper presented
at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research
Association, Chicago, Illinois, April 6, 1972.

Oliver, C. (1995). The Community College Open-Door Philosophy: What Negative
Outcomes Have Developed? (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No.
ED 388 345).

Panel of Community College Faculty and Administrators (1996). Personal
correspondence.

Parkes, K. R. (1986). Coping in stressful episodes: The role of individual
differences, environmental factors, and situational characteristics.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51, 1277-1292.

Pascarella, E. T., 85 Terenzini, P. T. (1991). How college affects students. San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Patterson, J. M., 85 McCubbin, H. I. (1987). Adolecent coping style and
behaviors; Conceptualization and measurement. Journal of Adolecence,
10, 163-186.

Rice, K. G., FitzGerald, D. P., Whaley, T. J., 85 Gibbs, C. L. (1995). Cross-
sectional and longitudinal examination of attachment, separation-
individuation, and college student adjustment. Journal of Counseling &
Development, 73, 463-473. Richardson, R. C., Jr., 85 Doucette, D.
S. (1980). Persistence, performance and degree achievement of Arizona’s
community college transfer in Arizona’s public universities. Tempe:
Arizona State University Department of Higher and Adult Education.
(ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 197 785).

Robbins, P. R., 85 Tanck, R. H. (1995). University students’ preferred choices for
social support. The Journal of Social Psycholoy, 135(6), 775-776.

Robson, H. N. (1956). Success and failure of small-school superintendents:
Factors contributing to the success or failure of school superintendents as
determined by the use of the critical incidents technique. Laramie, WY:
University of Wyoming Curriculum and Research Center.

158

Seidman, I. E. (1991). Interviewing as qualitative research: A guide for
researchers in education and the social sciences. New York: Teachers
College.

Siemens, C. H. (1943). Predicting Success of Transfer Students. Junior College
Journal, September, 1943, 24-28.

Glaser, B., 85 Strauss, A. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory. Chicago:
Aldine.

Suelzle, M., Singleton M. 85 Rosenfeld, R. (1983). Impact of the fit between
students and universities: A comparison of three Chicago area
universities and their student bodies. In Alan Kerckhoff. Personal Change
Over the Life Course (pp. 155-81). JAI Press.

Suls, J ., David, J. P., 85 Harvey, J. H. (1996). Personality and coping: Three
generations of research. Journal of Personality, 64(4), 71 1-735.

Terenzini, P. T., Pascarella, E. T., 85 Blimling, G. S. (1996 / 1999). Students’ out-
of-class experiences and their influence on learning and cognitive
development: A literature review. Journal of College Student Development,
40(5), pp. 610-623.

Tierney, W. G. (1997). The parameters of affirmative action: Equity and
excellence in the academy. Review of Educational Research 67(2). pp.
165-96.

Tinto, V. (1987 ). Leaving college: Rethinking the causes and cures of student
attrition. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Tinto, V. (1988). Stages of student departure: Reflections on the longitudinal
character of student leaving. The Journal Of Higher Education, 59(4), 438-
55.

Townsend, B. K., McNerny, N., 85 Arnold, A. (1993). Will this community college
transfer student succeed? Factors affecting transfer student
performance. Community College Journal of Research and Practice, 1 7.
pp. 433-43.

Townsend, B. K. (1995). Community college transfer students: a case study of
survival. The Review of Higher Education, 18(2), 175-193.

Watt, R. R. G. 85 Touton, F. C. (1930). Relative scholastic achievement of native
students and junior college transfers at the University of Southern
California. California Quarterly of Secondary Education, 5, 243-248.

Wertsch, J .V. (1985). Vygotsky and the social formation of mind Cambridge,
MA: Harvard University Press.

159

Valentiner, D. P., Holahoan, C. J., Moos, R. H. (1994). Social support,
appraisals of event controllability, and coping: An integrative model.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 66(6), 1094- 1 102.

Vygotsky, L.S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological
processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

160

IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII

lWWWIHIHWL

34 2649 ;