The effectiveness of two selected student development programs in four-year public institutions in Arkansas, Louisiana, Oklahoma, and Texas

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to examine perceptions held by students and by faculty-staff-administrators toward student development programs at two four-year public institutions of higher education within the Southwest region. One large institution (over 15,000 students) and one small institution (under 15,000 students) were selected for further study. Selections were based on nominations for outstanding programs by chief student development officers from within the same region. The subjects at each institution were randomly selected from residence hall students and faculty-staff-administrators. The sample consisted of 447 students and 371 faculty-staff-administrators at Institution A (the larger institution) and 334 students and 300 faculty-staff-administrators at Institution B (the smaller institution). Constituents were administered the Student Affairs Inventory (Jacobson, 1984) and asked to make judgments on the present (IS) and the preferred (SHOULD BE) quality of the learning environment. Analyses of variance were conducted on the responses by students with the responses by faculty-staff-administrators to determine the viewpoints held by each group toward the student development programs. At Institution A it was found that significant differences existed between students and faculty-staff-administrators for three of the seven domains (Cognitive, Aesthetic, Social) within the "IS" section and for three of the seven domains (Cognitive, Aesthetic, Physical) within the "SHOULD BE" section. At Institution B it was found that significant differences existed between students and faculty-staff-administrators for four of the seven domains (Cognitive, Identity, Moral, Social) within the "IS" section and for four of the seven domains (Cognitive, Physical, Interpersonal, Social) within the "SHOULD BE" section. It is recommended that similar studies be conducted at institutions of higher education so that student development programs may be more scientifically assessed, thereby creating an opportunity to more closely determine the developmental needs of college students.