EARLY DECLARATION OF A COLLEGE MAJOR AND ITS RELATIONSHIP TO COLLEGE STUDENT PERSISTENCE by DAVID BRENT SPIGHT FRANKIE SANTOS LAANAN, CHAIR NATHANIEL BRAY DAVID HARDY CLAIRE MAJOR CHARLIE NUTT A DISSERTATION Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Education in the Department of Educational Leadership, Policy, and Technology Studies in the Graduate School of The University of Alabama TUSCALOOSA, ALABAMA 2018 Copyright David Brent Spight 2018 ALL RIGHTS RESERVED i ABSTRACT Completion of a college degree, as reflected by graduation rates, is a priority for campus administrators, politicians, families, and students. When students do not graduate, it has an effect on students, families, institutions, and surrounding communities. Colleges and universities, whether public or private, may find financial support declining when graduation rates do not improve. Debt acquired during college can be costly for students who drop-out before earning a degree. Some students, parents, administrators, faculty, and staff perceive that students making an early decision about a major is necessary for success in college. Many believe that enrolling as undeclared contributes to student attrition from college. Significant numbers of first-time in college students enroll each year without having chosen a major. Previous research examining undeclared students, however, is limited, conflicting, and dated. Still, increasingly, administrators and other stakeholders agree on two things: students should persist to graduation and students should declare a major as early as possible. This was an ideal time, therefore, to examine whether these two things were in fact correlated to one another. The study was conducted through the conceptual frame provided by Astin’s (1993) I-E-O model in order to determine if matriculating in an undeclared versus declared academic program was predictive of college student persistence and degree completion, taking into consideration student demographics, pre-college academic performance, institutional sub-environments, high- impact educational practice participation, and within-college academic performance. For this study, the term undeclared was defined as those students who matriculate to the institution without having a degree-granting major. ii The logistic regression models conducted for this study resulted in the finding that there are no differences in persistence or on-time graduation for declared and undeclared students. The study concludes that research into factors impacting persistence and completion should focus on factors other than major declaration at matriculation. Because declared and undeclared students are quite alike, especially when one considers college student persistence, colleges and universities should encourage and permit students to explore their options for majors as opposed to making premature, uninformed decisions. Institutional policy and practice should be adjusted to consider all students as in need of major exploration. iii DEDICATION This dissertation is dedicated to that which matters most: family. To my parents, Jerry and Hiroko –you sacrificed so much for all of your children to have opportunities that you didn’t have. I learned so much about committing to a task, working hard, giving your best, and persisting from you. Thank you for all you did for me. Thank you to my brothers Jeff and Kevin, and my sister Crystal. To Dr. Rodney Lord –I still miss you every day my brother from another mother. To Catherine and Eva –if I never wrote a dissertation, my life would still be rich and complete, because of you both. You’ve let me in, given me the gifts of being a parent and being a part of such a special family. You’ve listened to all my dad jokes without too dramatic of an eye roll in response. You’ve encouraged me through this project, and I love you both dearly. I love the women you are becoming and look forward to how you both change the world. Thank you. To my wife, my other half, Carolyn –without you, this dissertation doesn’t get written. You challenged me, supported me, guided me, pushed me, loved me through all the ups and down, highs and lows, anxieties and worries, and everything in between in this process of writing this work. You are the most intelligent person I have ever been blessed to meet, and the person with the biggest heart. That combination makes this work, and so many other things in my life possible. Thank you. iv ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS First and foremost, I wish to acknowledge Dr. Frankie Santos Laanan for stepping in and stepping up to be my chair at what seemed to be just the right time in this process. I have learned so much from you that I know will help me continue to contribute to the scholarship in higher education. Thank you for your advice, guidance, teaching, mentoring, and support. Dr. Claire Major, thank you for all you did to help me get past some challenges and stumbling blocks along the way through this process, and for being the kind of department chair who is willing to do right by students. To Dr. Charlie Nutt, your support through this dissertation, and through these many years that make up my growing in the advising profession, are invaluable and I cannot fully express my thanks. To the rest of the members of the committee, thank you for your support and for all your help in making this dissertation better. To Marco Molinaro, Meryl Motika, and Matt Steinwachs – thank you for all your help. This dissertation “literally” does not happen without your help and assistance with the data collection process. Thank you, Dr. Jim Schaaf, for being the kind of boss that gives your team space to work on a dissertation. Thank you to Cohort 8 and the faculty– what an experience! Grateful to share it with all of you. Finally, to Rodney Lord, Matt Kerch, John Fincher, and Amanda Lammers, for all the “Side Conversations” and for all your support, collaboration, and encouragement, thank you is not simply enough. My life is better for knowing each of you and your families. Love you all. v CONTENTS ABSTRACT .................................................................................................................................... ii DEDICATION ............................................................................................................................... iv ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ............................................................................................................ v LIST OF TABLES ......................................................................................................................... xi LIST OF FIGURES ..................................................................................................................... xiv CHAPTER I: INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................... 1 Statement of the Problem ........................................................................................................... 7 Purpose of the Study .................................................................................................................. 9 Significance of the Study ......................................................................................................... 11 Research Questions .................................................................................................................. 12 Conceptual Framework ............................................................................................................ 13 Definition of Terms .................................................................................................................. 15 Organization of the Study ........................................................................................................ 17 CHAPTER II: REVIEW OF LITERATURE ............................................................................... 18 Student Persistence in College ................................................................................................. 20 Tinto’s (1975, 1993) Theory of Student Departure............................................................. 21 Braxton, Hirschy, and McClendon’s (2004) Revision of Tinto’s Theory for Residential Colleges and Universities .................................................................................................... 23 Bean’s (1980, 1983) Causal Model/Industrial Model of Student Attrition......................... 27 vi Chickering and Reisser’s (1993) Theory of Identity Development .................................... 29 Demographic Characteristics and Persistence..................................................................... 32 High-Impact Educational Practices and Persistence ........................................................... 36 Academic Achievement and College Student Persistence ....................................................... 38 Earned College GPA ........................................................................................................... 38 Enrollment ........................................................................................................................... 39 Pre-College Achievement ................................................................................................... 40 Student Persistence with Major Choice ................................................................................... 41 Demographic Characteristics and Persistence with Major Choice ....................................