does participation in a post-secondary honors program result in a penalty?
DESCRIPTION
Amid claims that enriched post-secondary programs for high-ability students are either unnecessary or that they perpetuate elitist attitudes and social chasms, institutions of higher education grapple with issues regarding the recruitment, retention, and cultivating optimal learning environments for high-ability students. With current economic and funding trends in higher education, these issues need to be revisited. Although there have been quantitative studies to determine the effect of participation in honors programs, much of the literature is dated and current trends need to be considered. Differences in mean level cumulative GPA were measured between two groups of students who were eligible to participate in a post-secondary honors program. One group chose to opt out of this learning experience while the other group chose to participate. A longitudinal research design was conducted and archival data was collected and analyzed to determine if those who participate in a post-secondary honors program experience a penalty in terms of lower cumulative GPA. Results indicate no significant difference in cumulative GPA between the two groups of honors and non-honors students.TRANSCRIPT
- 1. Scott R. Furtwengler ELCS 8360
2. Overview of the problem Purpose of the current study & research question Literature Review Methodology (participants, measure, procedure) Results Discussion References 3. High-ability students opt out of post-secondary honors programs because they perceive participation in such programs results in a lower GPA (Chase, Hemmeter, & Griffin, 1971; Hartleroad, 2005). Hypothesis: High-ability students who do not participate in a post-secondary honors program will demonstrate higher academic performance as measured by GPA than similar students who do participate in an honors program. 4. Purpose: The purpose of this study is to determine the extent to which a penalty, if any, exists for participation in a post- secondary honors program. Research question: Does participation in a post-secondary honors program penalize/disadvantage students on measures of cumulative GPA? 5. Chase, C., Hemmeter, J., & Griffin, N. (1971) Cosgrove, J. (2004) Hartleroad, G. (2005) Rinn, A. (2005, 2007) Shushok, F. (2006) Slavin, Coladarci, and Pratt (2008) Moon, J. (2012) 6. A longitudinal, quasi-experimental design was used to analyze archival data from one cohort (2009) at a large, southwestern public university. 7. Participants Included one cohort from a large, public, four-year research institution: 2009: N= 3301, 49.8% (n=1645) female, 50.2% (n=1656) male 509 students met the inclusion criteria, with an average age of 17.99 (M=17.99). Distribution of ethnicity included White (24.4%), African American (12.2%), Hispanic (27.3%), Asian American (32.8%), International (1.6%), and Unknown (1.8%) 8. Inclusion Criteria Top ten percentile of graduating high school class Lowest SAT accepted for admission to honors college (980) Full-time status 9. Measure Cumulative GPA was collected at specified points in time: end of term spring semester 2010, 2011, & 2012. 10. Procedure The purpose of this study is exploratory; therefore, the researcher generated summary descriptive statistics providing data on the central tendency and variability of the GPA within and between the two groups (honors and non-honors). Cumulative GPA was collected at the end of three consecutive spring semesters. Using SAT score as a covariate, an analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) was conducted to determine to what extent, if any, the effect of participating in honors has on cumulative GPA. 11. In 2010, inclusive of the covariate, SAT score, there was not a significant effect for group (non- honors & honors) related to students cumulative GPA, F(1, 506) = .001, p > .05, r = .00. In 2011, inclusive of the covariate, SAT score, there was not a significant effect for group (non- honors & honors) related to students cumulative GPA, F(1, 506) = .504, p > .05, r = .02. In 2012, inclusive of the covariate, SAT score, there was not a significant effect for group (non- honors & honors) related to students cumulative GPA, F(1, 506) = 1.13, p > .05, r = .01. 12. Limitations Quasi-experimental, correlational design Convenience sample: participants were neither randomly selected nor assigned Included only students who persisted 13. Factors to consider: Non-cognitive measures: academic self-efficacy, attributional style, GRIT, stereotype threat, achievement goal orientation, commitment, engagement, satisfaction Demographic: SES, parents level of education, access to honors/AP/IB/GT in high school 14. Future directions Further research on factors influencing choice Recruiting Consideration of alternative admission criteria 15. Cosgrove, J. R. (2004). The impact of honors programs on undergraduate academic performance, retention, and graduation. Journal of the National Collegiate Honors Council, 45-53. Moon, J. L. (2012). Honors and high-ability students: Factors that predict academic efficacy, critical thinking skills, and academic goals. Graduate Theses and Dissertations. Paper 12412. Rinn, A. N. (2007). Effects of programmatic selectivity on the academic achievement, Academic self-concepts, and aspirations of gifted college students. Gifted Child Quarterly, 51, 232-245. Shushok, F. (2006). Student outcomes and honors programs: A longitudinal study of 172 Honors students, 20002004. Journal of the National Collegiate Honors Council, 7, 8596. 16. Scott R. Furtwengler [email protected] 281-929-4614 9815 Sagedale Drive, Houston TX 77089