View in EDS HTML Full Text PDF Full Text

The Role of First-Year Seminars and First-Year College Achievement for Undeclared Students

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Title: The Role of First-Year Seminars and First-Year College Achievement for Undeclared Students
Language: English
Authors: Pickenpaugh, Emili N. (ORCID 0000-0002-3150-6667), Yoast, Summer R., Baker, Amanda, Vaughan, Angela L.
Source: Higher Education: The International Journal of Higher Education Research. May 2022 83(5):1063-1077.
Availability: Springer. Available from: Springer Nature. One New York Plaza, Suite 4600, New York, NY 10004. Tel: 800-777-4643; Tel: 212-460-1500; Fax: 212-460-1700; e-mail: customerservice@springernature.com; Web site: https://link.springer.com/
Peer Reviewed: Y
Page Count: 15
Publication Date: 2022
Document Type: Journal Articles
Reports - Research
Education Level: Higher Education
Postsecondary Education
Descriptors: First Year Seminars, Academic Achievement, College Freshmen, Nonmajors, At Risk Students, Student Participation, Research Universities, Grade Point Average, School Holding Power
DOI: 10.1007/s10734-021-00729-0
ISSN: 0018-1560
Abstract: It is commonly stated in both literature and news outlets that undergraduate college students, who are undeclared (i.e., have not declared a major), are at a higher risk of dropping out or underperforming compared to students with declared majors. However, research supporting this belief or literature citing possible supportive interventions is scant and outdated. The small amount of research conducted thus far mostly examines the role of advising in supporting these potentially at-risk students. The present study investigated whether undeclared students at a mid-sized public research university in the USA represent a higher risk than their declared peers, as well as whether participation in a first-year seminar (FYS) minimizes these risks. Findings indicate undeclared students may be at higher risk than their declared counterparts and participation in a research-based academic FYS improved academic outcomes for these students. Results included average first-term GPAs 0.4 points higher and approximately 10% greater retention to the second year as compared to undeclared non-participants.
Abstractor: As Provided
Entry Date: 2022
Accession Number: EJ1333546
Database: ERIC
Full text is not displayed to guests.
FullText Links:
  – Type: pdflink
    Url: https://content.ebscohost.com/cds/retrieve?content=AQICAHj0k_4E0hTGH8RJwT4gCJyBsGNe_WN95AvKlDbXJGqwxwGdn9LjVUipgZds625z62ouAAAA4zCB4AYJKoZIhvcNAQcGoIHSMIHPAgEAMIHJBgkqhkiG9w0BBwEwHgYJYIZIAWUDBAEuMBEEDIDqop1ERHhB1gdSuQIBEICBm_UmzaIpndate0CAPu-wfZjODYSp4bkMxvKiOS7ZI6TjcAKWOzs_lr6uiCmLUMIXMDKiMWukNTTG06YA7iF7pw0Fut4igWERKZS15Z6uYiaPdGpSblvz6BYjiPXby5kY5K0aH3kOjn9k1chSk3bNWbRxKWAa94zSQOSD58q2GundpkV56Xh9oqkpGAtvAQCQZxk4bKXxTvnDaJbQ
Text:
  Availability: 1
  Value: <anid>AN0156503016;hie01may.22;2022Apr27.06:30;v2.2.500</anid> <title id="AN0156503016-1">The role of first-year seminars and first-year college achievement for undeclared students </title> <p>It is commonly stated in both literature and news outlets that undergraduate college students, who are undeclared (i.e., have not declared a major), are at a higher risk of dropping out or underperforming compared to students with declared majors. However, research supporting this belief or literature citing possible supportive interventions is scant and outdated. The small amount of research conducted thus far mostly examines the role of advising in supporting these potentially at-risk students. The present study investigated whether undeclared students at a mid-sized public research university in the USA represent a higher risk than their declared peers, as well as whether participation in a first-year seminar (FYS) minimizes these risks. Findings indicate undeclared students may be at higher risk than their declared counterparts and participation in a research-based academic FYS improved academic outcomes for these students. Results included average first-term GPAs 0.4 points higher and approximately 10% greater retention to the second year as compared to undeclared non-participants.</p> <p>Keywords: First-year seminar; Undeclared students; Retention; Achievement</p> <p>It is often stated that undeclared college students are at a higher risk of dropping out of higher education or for performing more poorly than their declared counterparts (Mangan, [<reflink idref="bib21" id="ref1">21</reflink>]; Reynolds et al., [<reflink idref="bib29" id="ref2">29</reflink>]). Despite these claims, the literature on the subject is sparse and little is known about the experience and outcome of the undeclared college student population. The majority of research around potential interventions is focused on the role of advising and tutoring in helping undeclared students select a major as opposed to their performance or how they navigate the experience (Ellis, [<reflink idref="bib9" id="ref3">9</reflink>]; Harris et al., [<reflink idref="bib14" id="ref4">14</reflink>]; Jurgens, [<reflink idref="bib17" id="ref5">17</reflink>]; Legutko, [<reflink idref="bib19" id="ref6">19</reflink>]; Reinheimer & McKenzie, [<reflink idref="bib28" id="ref7">28</reflink>]). In fact, some studies examining first-year student experiences exclude the undeclared population altogether (Allen & Robbins, [<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref8">1</reflink>]; Beattie & Thiele, [<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref9">4</reflink>]). Research examining this potentially high-risk population is outdated and results are conflicting. The present study aims to address this gap in the literature by directly comparing undeclared students with declared students. Additionally, the study examines the impact of a first-year seminar on undeclared students at a mid-sized, public, 4-year research degree university that is an emerging Hispanic serving institution. Our participant sample included 15% undeclared, 40% first-generation, and 36% students of color.</p> <hd id="AN0156503016-2">Literature review</hd> <p></p> <hd id="AN0156503016-3">Retention and academic success</hd> <p>When considering the retention of undeclared students, previous research leaves more questions than answers. Orndorff and Herr ([<reflink idref="bib25" id="ref10">25</reflink>]) suggested that undeclared students have lower levels of certainty about their careers, interests, values, and abilities, but did not speak to related retention rates or academic performance. Other researchers discovered that undeclared students often view their status as a disadvantage (Reynolds et al., [<reflink idref="bib29" id="ref11">29</reflink>]). However, there have been mixed results surrounding the impact of major choice on student retention. Notably, one study stressed that undeclared students graduated at the same rate as declared peers (Kroc et al., [<reflink idref="bib18" id="ref12">18</reflink>]). Another older study found no significant differences between undeclared students, decided students, or multiple change students (Anderson et al., [<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref13">2</reflink>]). Conversely, a national study identified that undeclared students are less likely to persist through their freshmen year than those who declared a major; however, it focused on familial and environmental differences in major choice as opposed to how to identify significant risk, or support undeclared students (Leppel, [<reflink idref="bib20" id="ref14">20</reflink>]). Overall, comprehensive literature examining the outcomes of undeclared students is lacking, and the question of whether undeclared students are truly at risk of higher attrition rates and lower academic performance still remains. Furthermore, if this student population does face an increased risk of attrition or poor academic performance, they may not be getting what they need from the institution.</p> <p>Within the research that examines promoting student retention and academic success, the majority discussed implications of declaring a major, receiving advising or tutoring, or engaging in career counseling, although not directly related to the undeclared population (DesJardins et al., [<reflink idref="bib8" id="ref15">8</reflink>]; Reinheimer & McKenzie, [<reflink idref="bib28" id="ref16">28</reflink>]). Researchers at the University of Iowa investigated the effects of major type on student retention and completion of a 4-year bachelor's degree (DesJardins et al., [<reflink idref="bib8" id="ref17">8</reflink>]). While findings demonstrated clear implications of major choice on related factors, undeclared students were not included as a participant group as the focus was namely on those who declared a major. This trend of excluding or not specifically examining undeclared students in undergraduate research is detrimental. Not only is the risk level for these students unknown, but it is also unclear how to support them.</p> <hd id="AN0156503016-4">Underrepresented students</hd> <p>While the literature on undeclared students leaves many unanswered questions, previous research does clearly demonstrate that first-generation college students (Radunzel, [<reflink idref="bib26" id="ref18">26</reflink>]) and students of color (Museus et al., [<reflink idref="bib24" id="ref19">24</reflink>]) do face unique risk factors in higher education that can impact their persistence and academic success. First-generation college students may have received inadequate preparation for higher education, face financial constraints, and have lower confidence in their abilities to succeed (Costello et al., [<reflink idref="bib7" id="ref20">7</reflink>]; Evans, [<reflink idref="bib10" id="ref21">10</reflink>]; Unverferth et al., [<reflink idref="bib35" id="ref22">35</reflink>]). Studies have demonstrated that first-generation students have less information when applying for college than those whose parents have obtained a bachelor's degree or higher (Houle, [<reflink idref="bib15" id="ref23">15</reflink>]). Others have demonstrated that first-generation students are more likely to attend high schools with lower overall GPA's (Cerezo & McWhirter, [<reflink idref="bib5" id="ref24">5</reflink>]). Many first-generation students report lower levels of self-efficacy in their academic performance when entering college (Garriott et al., [<reflink idref="bib11" id="ref25">11</reflink>]) and often come from families with a lower socioeconomic status (Willingham, [<reflink idref="bib40" id="ref26">40</reflink>]). In the present study, students are classified as first-generation if they select on their admissions application that neither of their parents hold a bachelor's (4-year) degree.</p> <p>Students of color face minority stress factors (Wei et al., [<reflink idref="bib39" id="ref27">39</reflink>]), changes in familial engagement and support (Sarubbi et al., [<reflink idref="bib31" id="ref28">31</reflink>]), and racial discrimination (Hall et al., [<reflink idref="bib13" id="ref29">13</reflink>]). Studies have shown that students of color report lower levels of belongingness, especially on campus that lack culturally inclusive environments (Museus et al., [<reflink idref="bib24" id="ref30">24</reflink>]). Often, students of color also face the additional challenges of being a first-generation college student for 54% of first-generation college students are students of color (RTI International, [<reflink idref="bib30" id="ref31">30</reflink>]). These barriers are all in addition to the difficulties of adjusting to college.</p> <p>However, no studies were located that specifically address how being an undeclared first-generation student or undeclared student of color might impact the challenges these students face. Being undeclared and in one, or both, of these higher risk groups for retention and academic success could exacerbate the difficulties and barriers of these students. Students that already do not have the same role models or understanding of the higher education experience and then enter into college without a declared major might doubt their purpose and ability to succeed. We do not know for certain if this increases the risk of retention and academic success for the literature has not yet examined these factors together.</p> <hd id="AN0156503016-5">Interventions and the role of first-year seminar courses</hd> <p>Of the few studies that have specifically considered undeclared students, one qualitative study discovered themes of stress, uncertainty, and the helpfulness of first-year seminar courses within undeclared and first-generation student populations, which indicated potential areas of risk and how to accommodate them (Glaessgen et al., [<reflink idref="bib12" id="ref32">12</reflink>]; Reinheimer & McKenzie, [<reflink idref="bib28" id="ref33">28</reflink>]). However, the study also addressed the students' reported hesitations around utilizing an academic advisor, one of the few interventions proposed in relevant studies (Reinheimer & McKenzie, [<reflink idref="bib28" id="ref34">28</reflink>]). One study did look at the potential benefits of a first-year seminar for undeclared students (Tampke & Durodoye, [<reflink idref="bib33" id="ref35">33</reflink>]). Researchers found that while undeclared students did enter college at a higher risk for retention, those undeclared students that participated in an FYS were more likely to continue college into the spring than those that did not. These researchers also noted the limited body of literature and called for further research. Ultimately, there is very limited research identifying programs or interventions outside of advising and tutoring that have the structure and potential to benefit undeclared students as a larger population.</p> <p>If this population is in fact at a higher risk of dropout and poor academic performance, there is limited literature discussing ways to provide targeted support. Reinheimer and McKenzie ([<reflink idref="bib28" id="ref36">28</reflink>]) examined the impact of tutoring with undeclared students and found that the intervention had a positive impact on retention and graduation rates but not on their GPA or the declaration of a major. In fact, the study found that undeclared students who received tutoring took longer to declare a major (Reinheimer & McKenzie, [<reflink idref="bib28" id="ref37">28</reflink>]). Jurgens ([<reflink idref="bib17" id="ref38">17</reflink>]) concluded that a number of counseling and career-related interventions increased career certainty and decreased career indecision of undeclared participants but did not speak to subsequent retention or long-term academic performance. Rask ([<reflink idref="bib27" id="ref39">27</reflink>]) focused on the impact of grades on a student's decision to pursue a major, but no distinction was made between declared and undeclared student outcomes. Research on this population continues to be unclear and presents conflicting results.</p> <p>Alternatively, significant research demonstrates the impact of first-year seminar (FYS) courses on student success rates, GPA, and retention (Jamelske, [<reflink idref="bib16" id="ref40">16</reflink>]; Swanson et al., [<reflink idref="bib32" id="ref41">32</reflink>]; Vaughan et al., [<reflink idref="bib36" id="ref42">36</reflink>], [<reflink idref="bib37" id="ref43">37</reflink>]). Jamelske ([<reflink idref="bib16" id="ref44">16</reflink>]) suggested that undeclared students are an at-risk population, though they were not specifically studied. The research concluded that the FYS positively impacted student GPAs, and when the course was taught in a goal-compatible format, significant impacts on retention were observed. Additionally, Rask ([<reflink idref="bib27" id="ref45">27</reflink>]) found that within STEM fields, first-year seminars helped students declare a major but the research did not examine the lasting implications for these students in terms of grades or retention. Literature supports the implementation of FYS programs in students' transitions from high school to college and consistently concludes that students who participate in a FYS typically have significantly higher retention and graduation rates than those who do not participate (Miller & Lesik, [<reflink idref="bib22" id="ref46">22</reflink>]; Vaughan et al., [<reflink idref="bib36" id="ref47">36</reflink>], [<reflink idref="bib37" id="ref48">37</reflink>]; Vaughan et al., [<reflink idref="bib38" id="ref49">38</reflink>]). Related research also concluded FYS as efficacious in supporting first-generation students, students of color, and those conditionally admitted to a university (Swanson et al., [<reflink idref="bib32" id="ref50">32</reflink>]; Vaughan et al., [<reflink idref="bib38" id="ref51">38</reflink>]; Vaughan, LaLonde, & Jenkins-Guarnieri, [<reflink idref="bib36" id="ref52">36</reflink>]). With this understanding, FYS is seen as a relatively well-established intervention with the potential to serve as an effective means in supporting the retention and academic success of undeclared students.</p> <hd id="AN0156503016-6">Purpose</hd> <p>Given the current gap in the literature evaluating the risk of undeclared students, as well as the growing evidence for the efficacy of FYS on traditionally at-risk student populations, there is an opportunity to assess the program's effectiveness for bolstering undeclared student retention and academic success. An FYS program that allows for the comparison of undeclared students to declared student populations might illuminate reliable differences between undeclared students and those committed to a major, and provide a rationale for targeting this student population as they enter the collegiate environment. In addition, there is also an opportunity to assess the effectiveness of FYS on the undeclared population as well as other subgroups. The research-based academic first-year seminar (FYS) analyzed in the present study includes a rigorous academic curriculum as well as specific assignments tailored to major and career choice. The purpose is to encourage students to explore their options and build confidence and self-efficacy around academia and future challenges. These assignments are meant to benefit all students, and especially to allow undeclared students the opportunity to explore and align with a major. Given the inclusion of a major and career unit within the FYS, investigation into the impact of the curriculum on career-related decision-making could prove invaluable to the undeclared population and beyond. If undeclared students are in fact at a higher risk of attrition and poor academic performance, involvement in a targeted FYS could provide a necessary and useful intervention to promote retention, career decision-making, and academic success. The following are the research questions addressed in the study:</p> <p></p> <ulist> <item> Research question 1: Do undeclared students achieve the same academic outcomes (i.e., first-term GPA and second-year retention) as their declared peers?</item> <p></p> <item> Research question 2: Are there differences in academic outcomes between undeclared FYS participants and non-participants?</item> <p></p> <item> Research question 3: Are there differences in academic outcomes between undeclared FYS participants and non-participants who identify as either first-generation students or students of color?</item> </ulist> <hd id="AN0156503016-7">Methods</hd> <p></p> <hd id="AN0156503016-8">Participants</hd> <p>After receiving approval from the Institutional Review Board, information from university data sets was collected from five cohorts (<emph>N</emph> = 9891) of entering first-time, full-time students from fall 2013 to fall 2017. The number of undeclared students over the 5 years was 1486 and the number of FYS participants was 2217 students. The number of students who were undeclared and participated in the FYS was 440 (see Table 1). Demographic data (i.e., sex, first-generation status, and student of color identity) and first-term GPA were collected from university data sets at the end of each first semester. First-generation identity was determined during the application process. Students were identified as first generation if they selected that neither parents nor guardians had earned a 4-year degree. Ethnicity and/or race was also determined during the application process. Students were identified as a student of color if they selected any option (i.e., African American, Native American, Pacific Islander, Asian or Hispanic) other than white. Credit loads were collected at the census date (i.e., after add/drop period concluded) during each of the following fall semesters (beginning of students' second year) to show continued enrollment at the university. This institution is a medium-sized, public 4-year research university.</p> <p>Table 1 Number of students and student subgroups fall 2013–2017</p> <p> <ephtml> <table frame="hsides" rules="groups"><thead><tr><th><p><italic>n</italic> (%)</p></th><th><p>2013</p></th><th><p>2014</p></th><th><p>2015</p></th><th><p>2016</p></th><th><p>2017</p></th><th><p>Total</p></th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td><p>All students</p></td><td><p>1899 (100)</p></td><td><p>1870 (100)</p></td><td><p>1699 (100)</p></td><td><p>1780 (100)</p></td><td><p>1736 (100)</p></td><td><p>9891 (100)</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Undeclared students</p></td><td><p>301 (16)</p></td><td><p>278 (15)</p></td><td><p>262 (13)</p></td><td><p>309 (15)</p></td><td><p>336 (16)</p></td><td><p>1486 (15)</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>First-generation students (FGS)</p></td><td><p>726 (38)</p></td><td><p>677 (36)</p></td><td><p>750 (38)</p></td><td><p>893 (43)</p></td><td><p>882 (43)</p></td><td><p>3928 (40)</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Students of color (SOC)</p></td><td><p>647 (34)</p></td><td><p>673 (36)</p></td><td><p>746 (38)</p></td><td><p>750 (36)</p></td><td><p>789 (38)</p></td><td><p>3605 (36)</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Female students</p></td><td><p>1222 (64)</p></td><td><p>1253 (67)</p></td><td><p>1263 (64)</p></td><td><p>1349 (65)</p></td><td><p>1382 (67)</p></td><td><p>6469 (65)</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>FYS participants</p></td><td><p>395 (21)</p></td><td><p>426 (23)</p></td><td><p>434 (22)</p></td><td><p>477 (23)</p></td><td><p>478 (23)</p></td><td><p>2210 (22)</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Undeclared FYS participants</p></td><td><p>76 (4)</p></td><td><p>100 (5)</p></td><td><p>71 (4)</p></td><td><p>94 (5)</p></td><td><p>99 (6)</p></td><td><p>440 (4)</p></td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <hd id="AN0156503016-9">FYS program</hd> <p>This FYS is a 16-week, 3-credit research-based academic seminar that is included as an elective within the general education requirements. Although there are some students who are required to take the course (e.g., first-generation TRIO students supported by grants funded by the US government), most students self-select into the course. Students across all university majors (e.g., business, nursing, history, education, undeclared, etc.) participate in the seminar. Over the 5 years, there ranged 15 to 23 sections of the seminar. Class sizes ranged from 15 to 25. It is an academically rigorous course based on the educational psychology discipline (i.e., learning sciences). Students first learn about the theories and the literature that supports these theories and then learn how to apply them in their current educational experiences. Topics include goals, motivation, information processing, and comprehension monitoring theories as well as some practical topics such as time management, wellness, and educational planning. It is also a writing-intensive course that includes a research project with a formal research presentation at an open forum where the university community can attend.</p> <p>Another relevant course element is the major and career unit. This includes a career interest survey (iStart Strong Inventory, a comprehensive career survey), 2- or 4-year educational planning, career research (delivered in partnership with the university career services unit), written reflection on potential career choices and personal and professional goals and concludes with students sharing their findings with their peers in class. The purpose of the unit is multi-faceted. For students who have chosen a major, the unit helps these students either confirm their choice based on realistic information and analysis of "good fit" with their goals or realize that another career/major choice is better suited. For undeclared students, it gives them the tools to examine the many choices using again, realistic information, all in the context of their goals and what they want to accomplish.</p> <p>The curriculum is highly coordinated where every section has the same syllabus, schedule of topics, readings, and major assignments. Instructors are doctoral students in specific disciplines (e.g., psychology, education, and counseling) selected through a competitive process. Before teaching, the entire instructor team completes a week-long comprehensive training in the summer and then two hours every week concurrently during the semester. Ongoing and concurrent training is essential to fidelity and ensuring similar delivery of course content to all students. The overall philosophy of the course and program is to challenge students to successfully complete college-level academic tasks with scaffolded support from instructors.</p> <p>Two other factors to consider that are related to the research design are the curriculum and grade distributions. During the research period (2013–2017), the curriculum remained stable where there were only minor revisions. Syllabus and major assignments remained the same during this time. Furthermore, previous versions of the first-year seminars at this institution were more of an extended orientation model and tended to have grades that were either an "A" for attending and participating or an "F" for non-attendance. Conversely, this research-based academic FYS tended to have a normal distribution of course grades similar to most other college-level academic courses.</p> <hd id="AN0156503016-10">Data analysis</hd> <p></p> <hd id="AN0156503016-11">Research question 1</hd> <p>The first set of analyses were included to provide more information about undeclared and declared students as a whole. The results could potentially have a different meaning if undeclared students were more academically prepared (i.e., higher index scores) or included fewer at-risk students. This initial analysis compared the population numbers of all declared and undeclared students to determine if the groups were similar or different in terms of percentage of first-generation students and students of color as well as average index score (Colorado Department of Higher Education, [<reflink idref="bib6" id="ref53">6</reflink>]). Index score represents a combination of high school GPA and college entrance exams (e.g., ACT) calculated by the state and is used by institutions state-wide to assess entering academic preparedness. The average index score for this population was 105.7± 15.75 (range was 62 to 144 where a score of 94 was the minimum required for standard admissions).</p> <p>For the percentage of first-generation students and students of color, a chi-square test of homogeneity was used to assess differences between the proportions in the two groups. A Welch's <emph>t</emph>-test (due to assumptions of homogeneity of variance being violated) was conducted to assess differences in average index scores.</p> <p>To assess differences in achievement outcomes, an ANCOVA was used to determine differences in first-term GPA between declared and undeclared students. The covariate was the index score. Another chi-square test of homogeneity was used to measure differences in the proportion of students who persisted to the second year.</p> <hd id="AN0156503016-12">Research questions 2 and 3</hd> <p>These analyses were conducted to evaluate the effects of undeclared students participating in the FYS. Each of the analyses described for research question 1 was repeated, except one, where the two groups were undeclared FYS participants and non-participants. An independent samples t-test (rather than Welch's <emph>t</emph>-test) was conducted for the average index score. Final analyses assessed student outcomes for FYS participants and non-participants who are first-generation students (FGS) and students of color (SOC).</p> <hd id="AN0156503016-13">Results</hd> <p>For each of the analyses, assumptions were assessed. All assumptions for the chi-square test of homogeneity were met including that all expected cell counts were greater than five. All of the assumptions for independent samples <emph>t</emph>-tests and ANCOVAs were met except for the comparisons between undeclared and declared students' average index scores. The assumption of homogeneity of variances was violated, as assessed by Levene's test for equality of variances (<emph>p</emph> <.001). As a result, Welch's <emph>t</emph>-test was conducted for this specific analysis.</p> <hd id="AN0156503016-14">Research question 1</hd> <p></p> <hd id="AN0156503016-15">Population differences between undeclared and declared students</hd> <p>The chi-square test of homogeneity showed significant differences in the proportion of first-generation students (FGS; <ephtml> <math display="inline" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"><msup><mi mathvariant="script">X</mi><mn>2</mn></msup></math> </ephtml><emph>=</emph> 3.79<emph>; p</emph> =.05) and students of color (SOC; <ephtml> <math display="inline" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"><msup><mi mathvariant="script">X</mi><mn>2</mn></msup></math> </ephtml><emph>=</emph> 25.52<emph>; p</emph> <.001) between undeclared and declared students where undeclared students included a higher proportion of students who are typically at greater risk for academic struggles. See Table 2 for each of the proportions.</p> <p>Table 2 Proportion (%) of students and average index scores in declared and undeclared groups</p> <p> <ephtml> <table frame="hsides" rules="groups"><thead><tr><th /><th><p>Declared</p></th><th><p>Undeclared</p></th><th><p><italic>p</italic> value</p></th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td><p>First-generation students</p></td><td><p>39%</p></td><td><p>42%</p></td><td><p>.05</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Students of color</p></td><td><p>35%</p></td><td><p>42%</p></td><td><p><.001</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Average index scores</p></td><td><p>108</p></td><td><p>99</p></td><td><p><.001</p></td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <p>When assessing differences in index score (i.e., entering academic preparedness) between the two groups, Welch's <emph>t</emph>-test showed that undeclared students, on average, had a significantly lower index score representing poorer entering academic preparedness as compared to declared students [<emph>t</emph>(2252) = -27.09, <emph>p</emph> <.001]. See Table 2 for average scores.</p> <hd id="AN0156503016-16">Student academic outcomes</hd> <p>The one-way ANCOVA showed that undeclared students had a significantly lower first-term GPA as compared to declared students [<emph>F</emph>(<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref54">1</reflink>, 9888) = 15.10, <emph>p</emph> <.001]. Table 3 includes the means and adjusted means for the first-term GPA. The chi-square test of homogeneity also showed significant differences ( <ephtml> <math display="inline" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"><msup><mi mathvariant="script">X</mi><mn>2</mn></msup></math> </ephtml><emph>=</emph> 48.89<emph>; p</emph> <.001) in the proportion of students who persisted to their second year between undeclared and declared students where undeclared students were retained at a rate almost 10% less (see Table 3).</p> <p>Table 3 Declared and undeclared students ANCOVA analyses and persistence differences</p> <p> <ephtml> <table frame="hsides" rules="groups"><thead><tr><th /><th colspan="7"><p>1<sup>st</sup> Term GPA</p></th><th colspan="3"><p>Persistence</p></th></tr><tr><th /><th><p><italic>n</italic></p></th><th><p><italic>M</italic></p></th><th><p><italic>SD</italic></p></th><th><p><italic>R</italic><sup><italic>2</italic></sup></p></th><th><p>Adjusted <italic>M</italic></p></th><th><p><italic>SE</italic></p></th><th><p><italic>95% CI</italic></p></th><th><p><italic>%</italic></p></th><th><p><italic>h</italic></p></th><th><p><italic>p</italic></p></th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td><p>Undeclared</p></td><td><p>1486</p></td><td><p>2.26</p></td><td><p>1.08</p></td><td rowspan="2"><p>0.27</p></td><td><p>2.58</p></td><td><p>.02</p></td><td><p>[2.53, 2.63]</p></td><td><p>61</p></td><td rowspan="2"><p>.09</p></td><td rowspan="2"><p><.001</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Declared</p></td><td><p>8405</p></td><td><p>2.74</p></td><td><p>1.06</p></td><td><p>2.68</p></td><td><p>.01</p></td><td><p>[2.66, 2.70]</p></td><td><p>70</p></td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <p>Note. All ANCOVA tests were significant at the <emph>p</emph> <.001 level</p> <hd id="AN0156503016-17">Research questions 2 and 3</hd> <p></p> <hd id="AN0156503016-18">Population differences between undeclared FYS participants and non-participants</hd> <p>The chi-square test of homogeneity showed no significant differences in proportion of first-generation students ( <ephtml> <math display="inline" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"><msup><mi mathvariant="script">X</mi><mn>2</mn></msup></math> </ephtml><emph>=</emph> 1.13<emph>; p</emph> =.288) or students of color ( <ephtml> <math display="inline" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"><msup><mi mathvariant="script">X</mi><mn>2</mn></msup></math> </ephtml><emph>=</emph> 0.115<emph>; p</emph> =.774) and the independent samples t-test showed no differences in average index score (<emph>p</emph> =.882). See Table 4 for proportions and averages.</p> <p>Table 4 Proportion (%) of students and average index scores in FYS and non-FYS groups</p> <p> <ephtml> <table frame="hsides" rules="groups"><thead><tr><th /><th><p>FYS undeclared</p></th><th><p>Non-FYS undeclared</p></th><th><p><italic>p</italic> value</p></th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td><p>First-generation students</p></td><td><p>44</p></td><td><p>41</p></td><td><p>.288</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Students of color</p></td><td><p>42</p></td><td><p>43</p></td><td><p>.734</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Average index scores</p></td><td><p>99</p></td><td><p>99</p></td><td><p>.882</p></td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <hd id="AN0156503016-19">Student academic outcomes</hd> <p>The one-way ANCOVA showed that undeclared FYS participants had a significantly higher first-term GPA as compared to non-participants [<emph>F</emph>(<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref55">1</reflink>, 1483) = 23.97, <emph>p</emph> <.001]. Table 5 includes the means and adjusted means for the first-term GPA. The chi-square test of homogeneity also showed significant differences ( <ephtml> <math display="inline" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"><msup><mi mathvariant="script">X</mi><mn>2</mn></msup></math> </ephtml><emph>=</emph> 11.43<emph>; p</emph> =.001) in the proportion of students who persisted to their second year between participants and non-participants where FYS students were retained at a rate 10% higher (see Table 5).</p> <p>Table 5 FYS and non-FYS ANCOVA analyses and persistence differences</p> <p> <ephtml> <table frame="hsides" rules="groups"><thead><tr><th /><th><p><bold><italic>n</italic></bold></p></th><th><p><bold><italic>M</italic></bold></p></th><th><p><bold><italic>SD</italic></bold></p></th><th><p><bold><italic>R</italic></bold><sup><bold><italic>2</italic></bold></sup></p></th><th><p><bold>Adjusted</bold><bold><italic>M</italic></bold></p></th><th><p><bold><italic>SE</italic></bold></p></th><th><p><bold><italic>95% CI</italic></bold></p></th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td><p>FYS undeclared</p></td><td><p>440</p></td><td><p>2.46</p></td><td><p>1.05</p></td><td align="center" rowspan="2"><p>0.14</p></td><td><p>2.46</p></td><td><p>.05</p></td><td><p>[2.37, 2.55]</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Non-FYS undeclared</p></td><td><p>1046</p></td><td><p>2.18</p></td><td><p>1.08</p></td><td><p>2.18</p></td><td><p>.03</p></td><td><p>[2.12, 2.24]</p></td></tr><tr><td /><td /><td /><td><p>FYS</p></td><td><p>Non-FYS</p></td><td><p><italic>h</italic></p></td><td><p><italic>p</italic> value</p></td><td /></tr><tr><td><p>Undeclared persistence</p></td><td /><td /><td><p>68%</p></td><td><p>58%</p></td><td><p>.10</p></td><td><p>.001</p></td><td /></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <p>Note. All ANCOVA tests were significant at the <emph>p</emph> <.001 level</p> <hd id="AN0156503016-20">Undeclared first-generation student outcomes</hd> <p>The one-way ANCOVA showed that undeclared first-generation FYS participants had a significantly higher first-term GPA as compared to non-participants [<emph>F</emph>(<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref56">1</reflink>, 621) = 13.79, <emph>p</emph> <.001]. Table 6 includes the means and adjusted means for the first-term GPA. The chi-square test of homogeneity did not show significant differences ( <ephtml> <math display="inline" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"><msup><mi mathvariant="script">X</mi><mn>2</mn></msup></math> </ephtml><emph>=</emph> 3.47<emph>; p</emph> =.063) in the proportion of students who persisted to their second year between participants and non-participants; however, FYS students were retained at a rate 7% higher (see Table 6).</p> <p>Table 6 FYS FGS and non-FYS FGS ANCOVA analyses and persistence differences</p> <p> <ephtml> <table frame="hsides" rules="groups"><thead><tr><th /><th><p><bold><italic>n</italic></bold></p></th><th><p><bold><italic>M</italic></bold></p></th><th><p><bold><italic>SD</italic></bold></p></th><th><p><bold><italic>R</italic></bold><sup><bold><italic>2</italic></bold></sup></p></th><th><p><bold>Adjusted</bold><bold><italic>M</italic></bold></p></th><th><p><bold><italic>SE</italic></bold></p></th><th><p><bold><italic>95% CI</italic></bold></p></th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td align="left"><p>FYS FGS undeclared</p></td><td align="left"><p>194</p></td><td align="left"><p>2.35</p></td><td align="left"><p>1.13</p></td><td align="left"><p>0.12</p></td><td align="left"><p>2.32</p></td><td align="left"><p>.08</p></td><td align="left"><p>[2.12, 2.47]</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Non-FYS FGS undeclared</p></td><td><p>430</p></td><td><p>1.96</p></td><td><p>1.11</p></td><td /><td><p>1.97</p></td><td><p>.05</p></td><td><p>[1.87, 2.08]</p></td></tr><tr><td /><td /><td colspan="2"><p>FYS FGS</p></td><td colspan="2"><p>Non-FYS FGS</p></td><td><p><italic>h</italic></p></td><td><p><italic>p</italic> value</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Undeclared persistence</p></td><td /><td colspan="2"><p>64%</p></td><td colspan="2"><p>57%</p></td><td><p>.07</p></td><td><p>.063</p></td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <p>Note. All ANCOVA tests were significant at the <emph>p</emph> <.001 level</p> <hd id="AN0156503016-21">Undeclared students of color outcomes</hd> <p>The one-way ANCOVA showed that undeclared students of color FYS participants had a significantly higher first-term GPA as compared to non-participants [<emph>F</emph>(<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref57">1</reflink>, 625) = 15.02, <emph>p</emph> <.001]. Table 7 includes the means and adjusted means for the first-term GPA. The chi-square test of homogeneity showed significant differences ( <ephtml> <math display="inline" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"><msup><mi mathvariant="script">X</mi><mn>2</mn></msup></math> </ephtml><emph>=</emph> 5.30<emph>; p</emph> =.021) in the proportion of students who persisted to their second year between participants and non-participants and FYS students were retained at a rate 10% higher (see Table 7).</p> <p>Table 7 FYS SOC and non-FYS SOC ANCOVA analyses and persistence differences</p> <p> <ephtml> <table frame="hsides" rules="groups"><thead><tr><th /><th><p><bold><italic>n</italic></bold></p></th><th><p><bold><italic>M</italic></bold><bold>a</bold></p></th><th><p><bold><italic>SD</italic></bold></p></th><th><p><bold><italic>R</italic></bold><sup><bold><italic>2</italic></bold></sup></p></th><th><p><bold>Adjusted</bold><bold><italic>M</italic></bold></p></th><th><p><bold><italic>SE</italic></bold></p></th><th><p><bold><italic>95% CI</italic></bold></p></th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td><p>FYS SOC undeclared</p></td><td><p>183</p></td><td><p>2.40</p></td><td><p>1.04</p></td><td rowspan="2"><p>0.12</p></td><td><p>2.36</p></td><td><p>.08</p></td><td><p>[2.21, 2.51]</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Non-FYS SOC undeclared</p></td><td><p>445</p></td><td><p>1.99</p></td><td><p>1.10</p></td><td><p>2.01</p></td><td><p>.05</p></td><td><p>[1.91, 2.11]</p></td></tr><tr><td /><td /><td colspan="2"><p>FYS SOC</p></td><td colspan="2"><p>Non-FYS SOC</p></td><td><p><italic>h</italic></p></td><td><p><italic>p</italic> value</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Undeclared persistence</p></td><td /><td colspan="2"><p>66%</p></td><td colspan="2"><p>56%</p></td><td><p>.10</p></td><td><p>.021</p></td></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <p>Note. All ANCOVA tests were significant at the <emph>p</emph> <.001 level <sups>a</sups>Mean GPAs below 2.00 mean that these students, on average, were on academic probation after their first semester</p> <hd id="AN0156503016-22">Discussion</hd> <p>As a thought for many years now (Mangan, [<reflink idref="bib21" id="ref58">21</reflink>]; Reynolds et al., [<reflink idref="bib29" id="ref59">29</reflink>]), the current study provided evidence that undeclared students are at a higher risk for attrition and lower GPAs. These findings challenge previous notions that there are no significant differences between declared and undeclared students (Anderson et al., [<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref60">2</reflink>]). Additionally, the current study demonstrated the impact that an FYS can serve to mitigate lower levels of retention and first-term GPAs for undeclared students. These findings were exceptional when considering the potential additional risk for undeclared students of color and first-generation college students. Although an appropriate analysis was used to help minimize bias, it is important to interpret these results with the knowledge that many students self-selected to take this course.</p> <p>Results suggest that overall, undeclared students enter at a higher risk than declared students as they had significantly lower first-term GPAs and were much less likely to be retained to the second year (over a 10% difference in retention rates). These findings contradict those suggesting undeclared students graduate at the same rate as declared peers (Kroc et al., [<reflink idref="bib18" id="ref61">18</reflink>]) and align more closely to results that undeclared students are less likely to persist to a second year (Leppel, [<reflink idref="bib20" id="ref62">20</reflink>]). Considering the datedness of these studies, the present findings are more applicable to the potential risk current undeclared students are facing.</p> <p>Although knowing that undeclared students are at a higher risk is helpful and important, it is difficult information to apply as very little research has examined successful interventions for these students. The present study has found participation in a FYS significantly improved academic outcomes. Undeclared students who participated in the FYS had significantly higher GPAs and were much more likely to persist to the second year of college (some differences also 10% higher). These findings parallel student assertions that a FYS provides tangible support through themes of stress and uncertainty reported in the first year (Glaessgen et al., [<reflink idref="bib12" id="ref63">12</reflink>]). Additionally, undeclared first-generation students and students of color who participated had significantly higher GPAs and were much more likely to persist into the second year of college.</p> <p>It has been established that FYS courses improve student success, GPA, retention, and graduation rates (Jamelske, [<reflink idref="bib16" id="ref64">16</reflink>]; Miller & Lesik, [<reflink idref="bib22" id="ref65">22</reflink>]; Swanson et al., [<reflink idref="bib32" id="ref66">32</reflink>]; Vaughan et al., [<reflink idref="bib36" id="ref67">36</reflink>], [<reflink idref="bib37" id="ref68">37</reflink>]). However, until now, literature has not shown evidence that these findings can be applied to undeclared students. Though it is difficult to say what specifically is helpful to the students, these findings suggest that targeting these students to take an FYS could improve outcomes.</p> <hd id="AN0156503016-23">Implications for programs</hd> <p>As described previously, intentional FYS curriculum design and instructor training and development can provide the basis for effectively supporting students including undeclared students, who comprise, according to this study, a larger percentage of students who historically have been at additional risk (i.e.., first-generation students, students of color, and lower high school GPAs and college entrance exams) as compared to their declared peers. Although tutoring and career counseling have also been helpful in supporting undeclared students (Jurgens, [<reflink idref="bib17" id="ref69">17</reflink>]; Reinheimer & McKenzie, [<reflink idref="bib28" id="ref70">28</reflink>]), it is most likely more cost-effective to serve larger numbers of students through FYS programs rather than hiring sufficient numbers of staff in these offices. Furthermore, universities that do not require an FYS as part of first-year programming could consider requiring the seminar for this group of students. In addition to promoting greater academic success and retention, an intentional and comprehensive major and career unit within the FYS would allow students to make informed choices around majors more quickly while being strategic with course selection. It is also less likely that faculty and other staff will object as the students would not currently be within their school or college. Students who do go through this process and select majors might be more likely to remain in the major due to the thoughtful and informed process of selecting the major, further research is needed to examine the impact of this level of intentionality.</p> <hd id="AN0156503016-24">Curriculum implications</hd> <p>Another consideration in designing curriculum that most likely is helpful to undeclared students is the consistent messaging around goals, goal-setting, and motivation. In structuring curriculum, the semester starts with a goal-setting unit to direct efforts and focuses on incoming freshmen. This is followed up with a career and majors' unit around the same time as motivation to assist students in finding passion and purpose. These are purposefully placed right before they register for spring courses. Although this study cannot confirm that the curriculum around these concepts contributed to their success, it is likely to consider that helping undeclared students create useful goals and developing awareness around their motivation would be key to their achievement, similar to other students (Bandura, [<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref71">3</reflink>]; Morisano et al., [<reflink idref="bib23" id="ref72">23</reflink>]). The difference being acknowledging a potential divergence in priorities for these students and some hesitation about their current efforts. For some students, this may lead to extreme perspectives of, "why should I continue if I do not know what I want to do." These students may also receive these same sets of messages from family and friends, especially if they are first generation (Terenzini et al., [<reflink idref="bib34" id="ref73">34</reflink>]). In the first semester, helping students reframe their purpose by still creating academic and educational goals that align with personal values and long-term life goals can help to minimize feelings of futility. Faculty can also normalize "being undeclared" and instill excitement about the opportunities available at this point in students' educational experiences.</p> <p>A specific unit designed around majors and careers within the FYS may also be helpful not only for the undeclared student but for all students. Again, this study cannot confirm the effectiveness of including this type of curriculum, but it is likely to benefit students. As mentioned previously, for declared students, this unit helps them confirm and strengthen their choice while for undeclared students, it helps them begin the process of linking interests and goals to potential majors using tools and resources available. In this particular study, this FYS unit included multiple facets and included cooperation with several offices including the university's career services department and professional advisors from several schools and programs. In addition to helping students within this unit, introductions to these offices and resources set the foundation for future connections, which may be needed as students continue their education.</p> <p>Broadly, the unit begins by surveying students that focuses on identifying their interests. Students then research using online tools (e.g., O'NET, a website with detailed descriptions of a variety of occupations) around two of their interest areas. The unit concludes with students writing a short paper sharing the information they discovered and discussing how these careers align with their future personal and professional goals. Once completed, class time is used to let students share their information.</p> <p>For declared students, this unit encourages them to explore their decided major, but also to explore other areas. Students who feel passionate about their declared majors are even more confident in their decisions, and those who are not as confident in their declared major realize a change may need to be made. Undeclared students are given a significant opportunity to explore their options. Undeclared students who find an occupation they really like later decide to declare themselves into a major; those who do not find an occupation or major they identify with are able to understand how to explore their opportunities going forward. In fact, when assessing undeclared student responses in this assignment for the past 2 years, 38% had narrowed their choices to some areas of interest and approximately 47%, made a decision about a particular major. This means 85% walked away from this unit with a specific direction or choice. Additionally, a couple of student quotes from the assignment illustrate the impact of completing the unit:This has affected my career choices because it has given me clarity. It first helped me find my path bit by bit by seeing who I really am and what I like to do. This has also helped me find where I belong on a major and career geared for me and my values, which is important for the biggest decision of life.What was the most helpful in thinking about a specific career path was this assignment, because it helped me compare my top choices within my chosen field, which was a great next step after I solidified my field from the Inventory.</p> <hd id="AN0156503016-25">Limitations and future research</hd> <p>The primary limitation to this research is that this study was conducted with one institution; however, this institution is similar to many other mid-size universities with high populations of underrepresented students (e.g., first-generation students, students of color).</p> <p>Another limitation is the self-selection of students into these courses and lack of randomization. Yet, the analyses showed that FYS undeclared participants were statistically the same as undeclared non-participants in terms of proportion of students with potentially additional risk (i.e., first-generation students and students of color) as well as the same index score representing entering academic preparedness. Furthermore, the longitudinal design and the inclusion of 5 years of data provide more substantial evidence. However, to further account for potential self-selection bias, future research could incorporate quasi-experimental designs using propensity scores to calculate matched control groups. Going further, hierarchical propensity scores could also strengthen the results by allowing matching at both the student level (e.g., gender) and college or program level (e.g., student-faculty ratio; Vaughan et al., [<reflink idref="bib36" id="ref74">36</reflink>], [<reflink idref="bib37" id="ref75">37</reflink>]).</p> <p>Collecting additional longitudinal achievement data such as graduation rates would also provide evidence and some insight into the long-term effects of supporting undeclared students in their first semester. Furthermore, the use of mixed-methods designs would provide additional qualitative information about the specific elements of the FYS (e.g., curriculum and topics) and the major and career unit that were most helpful to students as well as identifying any potential gaps in support. Interviews and focus groups with students, including underrepresented students, would provide valuable feedback.</p> <hd id="AN0156503016-26">Conclusion</hd> <p>The findings from this study contribute to the literature by providing current evidence that undeclared students are at additional risk for attrition and lower academic performance when entering college. Additionally, participation in a rigorous FYS course with a specific curriculum can improve academic and persistence outcomes for these students including undeclared first-generation students and students of color. As such, an FYS program provides a fiscally promising intervention for improving undeclared student outcomes in their first year by providing support and intervention to a large proportion of entering students by using fewer resources.</p> <hd id="AN0156503016-27">Declarations</hd> <p></p> <hd id="AN0156503016-28">Conflict of interest</hd> <p>The authors declare no competing interests.</p> <hd id="AN0156503016-29">Publisher's note</hd> <p>Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.</p> <ref id="AN0156503016-30"> <title> References </title> <blist> <bibl id="bib1" idref="ref8" type="bt">1</bibl> <bibtext> Allen J, Robbins SB. Prediction of college major persistence based on vocational interests, academic preparation, and first-year academic performance. Research in Higher Education. 2008; 49; 1: 62-79. 10.1007/s11162-007-9064-5</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib2" idref="ref13" type="bt">2</bibl> <bibtext> Anderson BC, Creamer DG, Cross LH. Undecided, multiple change, and decided students: How different are they?. NACADA Journal. 1989; 9; 1: 46-50. 10.12930/0271-9517-9.1.46</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib3" idref="ref71" type="bt">3</bibl> <bibtext> Bandura A. Toward a psychology of human agency. Perspectives on Psychological Science. 2006; 1; 2: 164-180. 10.1111/j.1745-6916.2006.00011.x</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib4" idref="ref9" type="bt">4</bibl> <bibtext> Beattie IR, Thiele M. Connecting in class? College class size and inequality in academic social capital. The Journal of Higher Education. 2016; 87; 3: 332-362. 10.1080/00221546.2016.11777405</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib5" idref="ref24" type="bt">5</bibl> <bibtext> Cerezo A, McWhirter BT. A brief intervention designed to improve social awareness and skills to improve Latino college student retention. College Student Journal. 2012; 46; 4: 867</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib6" idref="ref53" type="bt">6</bibl> <bibtext> Colorado Department of Higher Eduation. (n.d.). Calculate your index score. Retrieved from https://highered.colorado.gov/Academics/Admissions/IndexScore/Default.asp. Accessed Nov 2018.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib7" idref="ref20" type="bt">7</bibl> <bibtext> Costello M, Ballin A, Diamond R, Gao ML. First generation college students and non-first generation college students: Perceptions of belonging. Journal of Nursing Education and Practice. 2018; 8; 12: 58-65. 10.5430/jnep.v8n12p58</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib8" idref="ref15" type="bt">8</bibl> <bibtext> DesJardins SL, Kim D, Rzonca CS. A nested analysis of factors affecting bachelor's degree completion. Journal of College Student Retention. 2003; 4; 4: 407-435. 10.2190/BGMR-3CH7-4K50-B5G3</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib9" idref="ref3" type="bt">9</bibl> <bibtext> Ellis KC. Academic advising experiences of first-year undecided students: A qualitative study. NACADA Journal. 2014; 34: 42-49. 10.12930/NACADA-13-001</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Evans, N. J. (2019). Psychosocial, cognitive, and typological perspectives on student development, in student services: A handbook for the profession (4th ed.). Jossey-Bass.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Garriott P, Hudyma A, Keene C, Santiago D. Social cognitive predictors of first- and non-first-generation college students' academic and life satisfaction. Journal of Counseling Psychology. 2015; 62; 2: 253-263. 10.1037/cou0000066</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Glaessgen TA, MacGregor CJ, Cornelius-White JHD, Hornberger RS, Baumann DM. First-generation students with undecided majors: A qualitative study of university reacculturation. NACADA Journal. 2018; 38; 2: 22-35. 10.12930/NACADA-16-030</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Hall M, Williams R, Penhollow T, Rhoads K, Hunt B. Factors associated with discrimination among minority college students. American Journal of Health Behavior. 2015; 39; 3: 318-329. 10.5993/AJHB.39.3.4</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Harris RC, Rosenberg L, Grace O'Rourke ME. Addressing the challenges of nursing student attrition. The Journal of Nursing Education. 2014; 53; 1: 31-37. 10.3928/01484834-20131218-03</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Houle JN. Disparities in debt: Parents' socioeconomic resources and young adult student loan debt. Sociology of Education. 2014; 87; 1: 53-69. 10.1177/0038040713512213</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Jamelske E. Measuring the impact of a university first-year experience program on student GPA and retention. Higher Education. 2009; 57; 3: 373-391. 10.1007/s10734-008-9161-1</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Jurgens JC. The undecided student: The effects of combining levels of treatment parameters on career certainty, career indecision, and client satisfaction. The Career Development Quarterly. 2000; 48; 3: 237-250. 10.1002/j.2161-0045.2000.tb00289.x</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Kroc, R, Howard, R, Hull, R, & Woodard, D. (May, 1997). Graduation rates: Do students' academic program choices make a difference? Paper presented at the Annual Forum of the Association for Institutional Research, Orlando, FL.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Legutko RS. Influence of an academic workshop on once-undeclared graduates' selection of a major. College Student Journal. 2007; 41; 1: 93</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Leppel K. Similarities and differences in college persistence of men and women. The Review of Higher Education. 2002; 25; 4: 433-450. 10.1353/rhe.2002.0021</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Mangan, K. (2011, July 11). Texas takes steps to streamline the path to a college degree. The Chronicle of Higher Education. Retrieved from <ulink href="http://chronicle.com/article/Texas-">http://chronicle.com/article/Texas-</ulink> Takes-Steps-to/128404/</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Miller JW, Lesik SS. College persistence over time and participation in a first-year seminar. Journal of College Student Retention: Research, Theory and Practice. 2014; 16; 3: 373-390. 10.2190/CS.16.3.d</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Morisano D, Hirsh JB, Peterson JB, Pihl RO, Shore BM. Setting, elaborating, and reflecting on personal goals improves academic performance. Journal of Applied Psychology. 2010; 95; 2: 255-264. 10.1037/a0018478</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Museus SD, Yi V, Saelua N. How culturally engaging campus environments influence sense of belonging in college: An examination of differences between White students and students of color. Journal of Diversity in Higher Education. 2018; 11; 4: 467-483. 10.1037/dhe0000069</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Orndorff RM, Herr EL. A comparative study of declared and undeclared college students on career uncertainty and involvement in career development activities. Journal of Counseling & Development. 1996; 74; 6: 632-639. 10.1002/j.1556-6676.1996.tb02303.x</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Radunzel, J. (2018). Examining retention and transfer in relation to incoming student data for first-generation and continuing-generation students: What differences exist? Journal of College Student Retention: Research, Theory Into Practice, 0(0), 1-29. doi:https://doi.org/10.1177/1521025118813516</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Rask K. Attrition in STEM fields at a liberal arts college: The importance of grades and pre-collegiate preferences. Economics of Education Review. 2010; 29; 6: 892-900. 10.1016/j.econedurev.2010.06.013</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Reinheimer D, McKenzie K. The impact of tutoring on the academic success of undeclared students. Journal of College Reading and Learning. 2011; 41; 2: 22-36. 10.1080/10790195.2011.10850340</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Reynolds PJ, Gross JPK, Millard B, Pattengale J. Using longitudinal mixed-methods research to look at undeclared students. New Directions for Institutional Research. 2010; 2010; S2: 53-66. 10.1002/ir.372</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> RTI International. (2019). First-generation college students: Demographic characteristics and postsecondary enrollment. NASPA Retrieved from https://firstgen.naspa.org/files/dmfile/FactSheet-01.pdf.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Sarubbi M, Marquez Kiyama J, Harper CE. Ideologies of invisibility and support for families of color during orientation initiatives. Journal of Student Affairs Research and Practice. 2019; 56; 1: 49-62. 10.1080/19496591.2018.1490304</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Swanson NM, Vaughan AL, Wilkinson BD. First-year seminars: Supporting male college students' long-term academic success. Journal of College Student Retention: Research, Theory & Practice. 2017; 18; 4: 386-400. 10.1177/1521025115604811</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Tampke, D. R, & Durodoye, R. (2013). Improving academic success for undecided students: A first-year seminar/learning community approach. Learning Communitites Research and Practice, 1(2), Article 3.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Terenzini PT, Springer L, Yaeger PM, Pascarella ET, Nora A. First-generation college students: Characteristics, experiences, and cognitive development. Research in Higher Education. 1996; 37; 1: 1-22. 10.1007/BF01680039</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Unverferth AR, Talbert-Johnson C, Bogard T. Perceived barriers for first-generation students: Reforms to level the terrain. International Journal of Educational Reform. 2012; 21; 4: 238-252. 10.1177/105678791202100402</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Vaughan AL, Lalonde TL, Jenkins-Guarnieri MA. Assessing student achievement in large-scale educational programs using hierarchical propensity scores. Research in Higher Education. 2014; 55; 6: 564-580. 10.1007/s11162-014-9329-8</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Vaughan AL, Parra J, LaLonde T. First-generation college student achievement and the first year seminar: A quasi-experimental design. The Journal of The First-Year Experience & Students in Transition. 2014; 26; 2: 53-69</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Vaughan AL, Pergantis SI, Moore SM. Assessing the difference between 1-, 2-, and 3-credit first-year seminars on college student achievement. The Journal of The First-Year Experience & Students in Transition. 2019; 31; 2: 9-28</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Wei M, Ku T, Liao KY. Minority stress and college persistence attitudes among African American, Asian American, and Latino students: Perception of university environment as a mediator. Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology. 2011; 17; 2: 195-203. 10.1037/a0023359</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Willingham DT. Why does family wealth affect learning?. American Educator. 2012; 36; 1: 33-39</bibtext> </blist> </ref> <aug> <p>By Emili N. Pickenpaugh; Summer R. Yoast; Amanda Baker and Angela L. Vaughan</p> <p>Reported by Author; Author; Author; Author</p> </aug> <nolink nlid="nl1" bibid="bib21" firstref="ref1"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl2" bibid="bib29" firstref="ref2"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl3" bibid="bib14" firstref="ref4"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl4" bibid="bib17" firstref="ref5"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl5" bibid="bib19" firstref="ref6"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl6" bibid="bib28" firstref="ref7"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl7" bibid="bib25" firstref="ref10"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl8" bibid="bib18" firstref="ref12"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl9" bibid="bib20" firstref="ref14"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl10" bibid="bib26" firstref="ref18"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl11" bibid="bib24" firstref="ref19"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl12" bibid="bib10" firstref="ref21"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl13" bibid="bib35" firstref="ref22"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl14" bibid="bib15" firstref="ref23"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl15" bibid="bib11" firstref="ref25"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl16" bibid="bib40" firstref="ref26"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl17" bibid="bib39" firstref="ref27"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl18" bibid="bib31" firstref="ref28"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl19" bibid="bib13" firstref="ref29"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl20" bibid="bib30" firstref="ref31"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl21" bibid="bib12" firstref="ref32"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl22" bibid="bib33" firstref="ref35"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl23" bibid="bib27" firstref="ref39"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl24" bibid="bib16" firstref="ref40"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl25" bibid="bib32" firstref="ref41"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl26" bibid="bib36" firstref="ref42"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl27" bibid="bib37" firstref="ref43"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl28" bibid="bib22" firstref="ref46"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl29" bibid="bib38" firstref="ref49"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl30" bibid="bib23" firstref="ref72"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl31" bibid="bib34" firstref="ref73"></nolink>
Header DbId: eric
DbLabel: ERIC
An: EJ1333546
AccessLevel: 3
PubType: Academic Journal
PubTypeId: academicJournal
PreciseRelevancyScore: 0
IllustrationInfo
Items – Name: Title
  Label: Title
  Group: Ti
  Data: The Role of First-Year Seminars and First-Year College Achievement for Undeclared Students
– Name: Language
  Label: Language
  Group: Lang
  Data: English
– Name: Author
  Label: Authors
  Group: Au
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Pickenpaugh%2C+Emili+N%2E%22">Pickenpaugh, Emili N.</searchLink> (ORCID <externalLink term="http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3150-6667">0000-0002-3150-6667</externalLink>)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Yoast%2C+Summer+R%2E%22">Yoast, Summer R.</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Baker%2C+Amanda%22">Baker, Amanda</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Vaughan%2C+Angela+L%2E%22">Vaughan, Angela L.</searchLink>
– Name: TitleSource
  Label: Source
  Group: Src
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="SO" term="%22Higher+Education%3A+The+International+Journal+of+Higher+Education+Research%22"><i>Higher Education: The International Journal of Higher Education Research</i></searchLink>. May 2022 83(5):1063-1077.
– Name: Avail
  Label: Availability
  Group: Avail
  Data: Springer. Available from: Springer Nature. One New York Plaza, Suite 4600, New York, NY 10004. Tel: 800-777-4643; Tel: 212-460-1500; Fax: 212-460-1700; e-mail: customerservice@springernature.com; Web site: https://link.springer.com/
– Name: PeerReviewed
  Label: Peer Reviewed
  Group: SrcInfo
  Data: Y
– Name: Pages
  Label: Page Count
  Group: Src
  Data: 15
– Name: DatePubCY
  Label: Publication Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2022
– Name: TypeDocument
  Label: Document Type
  Group: TypDoc
  Data: Journal Articles<br />Reports - Research
– Name: Audience
  Label: Education Level
  Group: Audnce
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="EL" term="%22Higher+Education%22">Higher Education</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="EL" term="%22Postsecondary+Education%22">Postsecondary Education</searchLink>
– Name: Subject
  Label: Descriptors
  Group: Su
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22First+Year+Seminars%22">First Year Seminars</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Academic+Achievement%22">Academic Achievement</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22College+Freshmen%22">College Freshmen</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Nonmajors%22">Nonmajors</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22At+Risk+Students%22">At Risk Students</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Student+Participation%22">Student Participation</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Research+Universities%22">Research Universities</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Grade+Point+Average%22">Grade Point Average</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22School+Holding+Power%22">School Holding Power</searchLink>
– Name: DOI
  Label: DOI
  Group: ID
  Data: 10.1007/s10734-021-00729-0
– Name: ISSN
  Label: ISSN
  Group: ISSN
  Data: 0018-1560
– Name: Abstract
  Label: Abstract
  Group: Ab
  Data: It is commonly stated in both literature and news outlets that undergraduate college students, who are undeclared (i.e., have not declared a major), are at a higher risk of dropping out or underperforming compared to students with declared majors. However, research supporting this belief or literature citing possible supportive interventions is scant and outdated. The small amount of research conducted thus far mostly examines the role of advising in supporting these potentially at-risk students. The present study investigated whether undeclared students at a mid-sized public research university in the USA represent a higher risk than their declared peers, as well as whether participation in a first-year seminar (FYS) minimizes these risks. Findings indicate undeclared students may be at higher risk than their declared counterparts and participation in a research-based academic FYS improved academic outcomes for these students. Results included average first-term GPAs 0.4 points higher and approximately 10% greater retention to the second year as compared to undeclared non-participants.
– Name: AbstractInfo
  Label: Abstractor
  Group: Ab
  Data: As Provided
– Name: DateEntry
  Label: Entry Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2022
– Name: AN
  Label: Accession Number
  Group: ID
  Data: EJ1333546
PLink https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=eric&AN=EJ1333546
RecordInfo BibRecord:
  BibEntity:
    Identifiers:
      – Type: doi
        Value: 10.1007/s10734-021-00729-0
    Languages:
      – Text: English
    PhysicalDescription:
      Pagination:
        PageCount: 15
        StartPage: 1063
    Subjects:
      – SubjectFull: First Year Seminars
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Academic Achievement
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: College Freshmen
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Nonmajors
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: At Risk Students
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Student Participation
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Research Universities
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Grade Point Average
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: School Holding Power
        Type: general
    Titles:
      – TitleFull: The Role of First-Year Seminars and First-Year College Achievement for Undeclared Students
        Type: main
  BibRelationships:
    HasContributorRelationships:
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Pickenpaugh, Emili N.
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Yoast, Summer R.
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Baker, Amanda
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Vaughan, Angela L.
    IsPartOfRelationships:
      – BibEntity:
          Dates:
            – D: 01
              M: 05
              Type: published
              Y: 2022
          Identifiers:
            – Type: issn-print
              Value: 0018-1560
          Numbering:
            – Type: volume
              Value: 83
            – Type: issue
              Value: 5
          Titles:
            – TitleFull: Higher Education: The International Journal of Higher Education Research
              Type: main
ResultId 1