Abstract
The self-reported experiences of 50,883 undergraduates at 123 institutions were analyzed using a multinomial hierarchical model to identify individual and institutional characteristics associated with varying levels of student engagement in educationally purposeful activities. Parental education and student academic preparation were positively associated with higher levels of engagement. White students were generally less engaged than students from other racial and ethnic groups whereas men were more likely to be either disengaged or highly engaged compared with women. Students at public institutions and research universities were less engaged than their counterparts at private colleges and other institutional types. Individual student perceptions of certain aspects of the institutional environment affected engagement in complicated ways.
Similar content being viewed by others
REFERENCES
Anaya, G. (1999). College impact on student learning: Comparing the use of self-reported gains, standardized test scores, and college grades. Res. Higher Educ. 40: 499-527.
Astin, A. W. (1985). Achieving Educational Excellence Jossey-Bass, San Francisco.
Astin, A. W. (1993). What Matters in College: Four Critical Years Revisited Jossey-Bass, San Francisco.
Baird, L. L. (1976). Using Self-Reports to Predict Student Performance College Board, New York.
Barron's Profiles of American Colleges (1996). Barron's Educational Series, Hauppage, New York.
Berger, J. B., and Milem, J. F. (2000). Organizational behavior in higher education and student outcomes. In: Smart, J. C. (ed.), Higher Education: Handbook of Theory and Research (Vol. XV), Agathon, New York, pp. 268-338.
Boyer Commission on Educating Undergraduates in the Research University (1998). Reinventing Undergraduate Education: A Blueprint for America's Research Universities The Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching, Stony Brook, New York.
Bradburn, N. M., and Sudman, S. (1988). Polls and Surveys: Understanding What They Tell Us Jossey-Bass, San Francisco.
Bruffee, K. A. (1993). Collaborative Learning: Higher Education, Interdependence, and the Authority of Knowledge Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore.
Bryk, A. S., and Raudenbush, S. W. (1992). Hierarchical Linear Models: Applications and Data Analysis Methods Sage, Newbury Park, CA.
Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching (1994). A Classification of Institutions of Higher Education Author, Princeton, NJ.
Chickering, A. W., and Gamson, Z. F. (1987). Seven principles for good practice in undergraduate education. AAHE Bull. 39(7): 3-7.
Chickering, A. W., and Reisser, L. (1993). Education and Identity (Rev. ed.), Jossey-Bass, San Francisco.
Colbeck, C. L., Cabrera, A. F., and Terenzini, P. T. (2001). Learning professional confidence: Linking teaching practices, students' self-perception, and gender. Rev. Higher Educ. 24: 173-191.
Converse, J. M., and Presser, S. (1989). Survey Questions: Handcrafting the Standardized Questionnaire Sage, Newbury Park, CA.
Education Commission of the States (1995). Making Quality Count in Undergraduate Education Author, Denver.
Ethington, C. A. (1997). A hierarchical linear modeling approach to studying college effects. In: Smart, J. C. (ed.), Higher Education: Handbook of Theory and Research (Vol. 12), Agathon, New York, pp. 165-194.
Ethington, C. A. (2000). Influences of the normative environment of peer groups on community college students' perceptions of growth and development. Res. Higher Educ. 41: 703-722.
Ewell, P. T., and Jones, D. P. (1996). Indicators of “Good Practice” in Undergraduate Education: A Handbook for Development and Implementation National Center for Higher Education Management Systems, Boulder, CO.
Flacks, R., and Thomas, S. (1998, November 27). Among affluent students, a culture of disengagement. Chronicle of Higher Education A48.
Goodsell, A., Maher, M., and Tinto, V. (eds.) (1992). Collaborative Learning: A Sourcebook for Higher Education National Center on Postsecondary Teaching, Learning and Assessment, The Pennsylvania State University, University Park.
Hu, S., and Kuh, G. D. (2000, November). A multilevel analysis on student learning in colleges and universities. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Association for the Study of Higher Education (ASHE), Sacramento, CA.
Johnson, D. W., Johnson, R., and Smith, K. A. (1991). Cooperative learning: Increasing college faculty instructional productivity. ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Report No. 4, The George Washington University, School of Education and Human Development, Washington, DC.
Kuh, G. D. (2000). Understanding campus environments. In: Barr, M.J., and Desler, M. (eds.), Handbook on Student Affairs Administration (2nd ed.), Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, pp. 50-72.
Kuh, G. D. (2001). College students today: Why we can't leave serendipity to chance. In: Altbach, P., Gumport, P., and Johnstone, B. (eds.), In Defense of the American University Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, pp. 277-303.
Kuh, G. D., Douglas, K. B., Lund, J. P., and Ramin-Gyurnek, J. (1994). Student learning outside the classroom: Transcending artificial boundaries. ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Report No. 8, The George Washington University, School of Education and Human Development, Washington, DC.
Kuh, G., and Hu, S. (2001a). Learning productivity at research universities. J. Higher Educ. 72: 1-28.
Kuh, G., and Hu, S. (2001b). The effects of faculty-student interaction in the 1990s. Rev. Higher Educ. 24: 309-332.
Kuh, G. D., Hu, S., and Vesper, N. (2000). They shall be known by what they do”: An activities-based typology of college students. J. Coll. Stud. Dev. 41: 228-244.
Kuh, G. D., Schuh, J. H., Whitt, E. J., and Associates (1991). Involving Colleges: Successful Approaches to Fostering Student Learning and Development Outside the Classroom Jossey-Bass, San Francisco.
Kuh, G. D., Vesper, N., Connolly, M. R., and Pace, C. R. (1997). College Student Experiences Questionnaire: Revised Norms for the Third Edition. Center for Postsecondary Research and Planning, School of Education, Indiana University, Bloomington.
Laing, J., Sawyer, R., and Noble, J. (1988). Accuracy of self-reported activities and accomplishments of college-bound seniors. J. Coll. Stud. Dev. 29: 362-368.
Lowman, R. L., and Williams, R. E. (1987). Validity of self-ratings of abilities and competencies. J. Vocat. Behav. 31: 1-13.
Marks, H. M. (2000). Student engagement in instructional activity: Patterns in the elementary, middle, and high school years. Am. Educ. Res. J. 37: 153-184.
McKeachie, W. J., Pintrich, P. R., Lin, Y., and Smith, D. (1986). Teaching and Learning in the College Classroom: A Review of the Research Literature National Center for Research to Improve Postsecondary Teaching and Learning, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.
Murray, H. G. (1991). Effective teaching behaviors in the college classroom. In: Smart, J. C. (ed.), Higher Education: Handbook of Theory and Research (Vol. 7), Agathon, New York, pp. 135-172.
National Survey of Student Engagement (2000). NSSE 2000: National Benchmarks of Effective Educational Practice Indiana Postsecondary Research and Planning, Bloomington.
Pace, C. R. (1985). The Credibility of Student Self-Reports University of California, The Center for the Study of Evaluation, Graduate School of Education, Los Angeles.
Pace, C. R. (1990a). College Student Experiences Questionnaire, Third Edition University of California, The Center for the Study of Evaluation, Graduate School of Education, Los Angeles.
Pace, C. R. (1990b). The Undergraduates: A Report of Their Activities and Progress in College in the 1980s. Center for the Study of Evaluation, Graduate School of Education, Los Angeles.
Pascarella, E. T., and Terenzini, P. T. (1991). How College Affects Students Jossey-Bass, San Francisco.
Peterson, M. W. (1985). Emerging developments in postsecondary theory and research: Fragmentation or integration. Educ. Res. 14: 5-12.
Pfeffer, J. (1997). New Directions for Organizational Theory Oxford University Press. New York.
Pike, G. R. (1989). Background, college experiences, and the ACT-COMP exam: Using construct validity to evaluate assessment instruments. Rev. Higher Educ. 13: 91-117.
Pike, G. R. (1993). The relationship between perceived learning and satisfaction with college: An alternative view. Res. Higher Educ. 34: 23-40.
Pike, G. R. (1995). The relationships between self-reports of college experiences and achievement test scores. Res. Higher Educ. 36: 1-22.
Pike, G. R. (1996). Limitations of using students' self-reports of academic development as proxies for traditional achievement measures. Res. Higher Educ. 37: 89-114.
Pike, G. R. (1999). The constant error of the halo in educational outcomes research. Res. Higher Educ. 40: 61-86.
Pohlman, J. T., and Beggs, D. L. (1974). A study of the validity of self-reported measures of academic growth. J. Educ. Meas. 11: 115-119.
Raudenbush, S., Bryk, A., Cheong, Y. F., and Congdon, R. (2000). HLM5: Hierarchical Linear and Nonlinear Modeling Scientific Software International, Lincolnwood, IL.
Sorcinelli, M. D. (1991). Research findings on the seven principles. In: Chickering, A.W., and Gamson, Z.F. (eds), Applying the Seven Principles for Good Practice in Undergraduate Education, New Directions for Teaching and Learning (No. 47), Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, pp. 13-25.
The Study Group on the Conditions of Excellence in American Higher Education (1984). Involvement in Learning: Realizing the Potential of American Higher Education U.S. Department of Education, Washington, DC.
Tinto, V. (1993). Leaving College University of Chicago Press, Chicago.
Tinto, V. (1997). Classrooms as communities: Exploring the educational character of student persistence. J. Higher Educ. 68: 599-623.
Turner, C. F., and Martin, E. (eds.) (1984). Surveying Subjective Phenomena (Vol. 1), Russell Sage Foundation New York.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Hu, S., Kuh, G.D. Being (Dis)Engaged in Educationally Purposeful Activities: The Influences of Student and Institutional Characteristics. Research in Higher Education 43, 555–575 (2002). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1020114231387
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1020114231387