Forces that Influence Late-Admitted Students.

The author used orientational qualitative inquiry to capture advisors' perceptions of students who register late when they enroll in community college. The resulting profile of late-admits developed from semi-structured one-hour interviews with 17 advisors at three community colleges is discussed in relationship to models of attrition developed by Tinto and Bean and Metzner. The advisors' perceptions revealed distinct differences between traditional age (18 to 20) and nontraditional age late-admits.

Attrition is a major problem for postsecondary education in general and for community colleges in particular. As open-access colleges, by virtue of their mission to serve any student with a high school diploma or G.E.D., community colleges admit a larger percentage of part-time students, nontraditional students, students in need of remediation, and other high-risk students than colleges with more selective admission policies. In general, these students may be less prepared for college and at greater risk for failure (Cohen & Brawer, 1996).

Existing research indicates that community college students who become attrition statistics have common characteristics. They are older than traditional students, attend school part-time, are employed full-time, and often need remedial courses (Windham, 1994). In a study of community college students who did not persist, 74% were enrolled part-time and 43% worked full-time (Seppanen, 1995). These same characteristics are found in nontraditional students, at-risk students, and the general population attending community colleges.

The traditional student in a two-year college is nontraditional by virtue of his or her age, life situation, or both. Even the younger students enrolled in a two-year or community college often have obligations that preclude them from devoting the same time and effort to their studies as their traditional counterparts. These students may be single parents or self-supporting. They do not have the luxury of being immersed intellectually, emotionally, or physically in the academic environment. With the numbers of such students increasing, the reality is that nontraditional students are far less likely to leave the institution with degrees in their hands (Bean & Metzner, 1985).

Colleges waste hundreds of thousands to millions of dollars each year as a result of attrition (Jones, 1986). Though there is agreement about the characteristics of attrition, there is little agreement about what should be done about it (Jones, 1986). According to Horton, "we must develop a total integrated approach--an approach that can coalesce the fragments of researched knowledge into systematic program implementation" (Horton, 1980, p. 1).

Tinto's (1993) model of attrition recognizes that pre-entry attributes and each student's goals and commitments can be precursors to the student's transition to college. Thus, students who are not prepared for the transition may begin a process leading to attrition even before the first day of class. Nevertheless, students applying to a rolling admission, open-access college, can be admitted and registered the day classes begin, without any forethought or preparation. Little research has been conducted on students who are late-admits.

One study of 6,278 late registrants (registering during the first 10 days of class) found that these students were more likely to be part-time, older students. Students who registered late indicated that they just decided to attend (26%), they had just arrived in town (17.4%), or had just procrastinated (15.8%) (Belcher & Patterson, 1990). Given that late registrants are more likely to be part-time, older, and less motivated to register early, late-admitted students may also be more vulnerable to the factors that result in attrition. Institutions that allow late admission may be doing a disservice to students who have not adequately prepared for college, and some researchers recommend that community colleges abolish late registration. In their studies of at-risk students in community colleges, Roueche and Roueche (1993) found that "retention and student performance significantly improve once the policy [late registration] is abolished" (p.251). They indicated that students who register late are more likely to withdraw or fail than students who register on time.

The research project described in this report was designed to investigate advisors' perspectives on the characteristics of late-admits, how they differ from students who apply earlier, the forces that influence their late decision to attend college, and whether late-admits possess attributes that would put them at risk for attrition. Advisors at three community colleges were interviewed about contacts they have had with new freshmen who seek advising during the walk-in registration period, which occurs the week before a term begins. The advisors were asked to relate the stories that they have heard from these students; their advising perspectives of the students' goals, expectations, concerns, and apprehensions; and their perceptions of these students' over-all preparedness to start college.

Method

The approach taken to this qualitative study relied on orientational qualitative inquiry, which attempts to describe and explain specific manifestations of already presumed general patterns. Such inquiry is aimed at confirmation and elucidation rather than discovery (Patton, 1990, p. 86). This study, therefore, involved a theoretical orientation. The literature suggests a number of different theories related to student persistence and success in college. The theories range from psychosocial and cognitive theories rooted in the individual psyche, to theories that offer societal and environmental factors as the basis for persistence. Along the continuum are theories that combine causal factors from each of these perspectives.

Many theorists have developed models to help explain attrition as a function of both personal and environmental factors. In these models, the college environment is viewed as having a significant influence on a student's persistence. Tinto's model of attrition briefly addresses pre-entry attributes as the beginning of the attrition process. Attributes such as family background, skills and abilities, and prior schooling feed into students' goals and commitments, which include students' intentions and their commitment to institutions. The rest of the model consists of institutional experiences, integration, a second level of goals and commitments, and finally, the outcome or departure decision (Tinto, 1993). Other theorists have referred to student characteristics as noncognitive variables of persistence. Students' academic self-concept, expectations of achievement, and goals have been determined to be significant predictors of college success (House, 1996).

Of the pre-entry attributes, Tinto has identified intention and commitment as the most important factors for attrition. Many times students leave not because of failure but as a result of their own cost-benefit analysis; they are not receiving the desired return for their educational investment. These students are not committed to expending the necessary effort for the learning process. Research has shown that students with higher goals are more likely to persist (Tinto, 1993). Students in the community college setting often do not have well-defined goals and thus are at risk for attrition.

Bean and Metzner (1985) developed a model of attrition specifically applied to nontraditional students. Their model, while similar to Tinto's, considers that the attrition of nontraditional students is affected more by environmental factors (outside of the academic environment) than by integration into the academic environment. Environmental factors include finances, hours of employment, outside encouragement, family responsibilities, and opportunity to transfer. Bean and Metzner label Tinto's pre-entry attributes as background and defining variables. They include age, enrollment status, residence, educational goals, high school performance, ethnicity, and gender. The background variables follow a path into the other components of the model, including academic variables, environmental variables, and the resulting outcomes. The model differentiates between the academic outcomes (grade point averages) and the psychological outcomes of utility, satisfaction, goal commitment, and stress. The model culminates in an intent to leave and the eventual behavior of dropping out (Bean & Metzner, 1985).

Based on these student attrition models, the following research questions were developed for this study: (a) What circumstances surround a student's late application to college? (b) What environmental factors affect the student? (c) What academic factors affect the student? (d) What are the student's goals and attitudes toward college? (e) Do the characteristics of late-admits differ from students who began the process earlier?

Researchers have noted that self-reporting by students is often times not the best source for understanding the reasons for attrition (Jones, 1986; Kheim, 1980). Therefore, this research project involved asking advisors for their perspectives on the characteristics of first-time freshmen whom they advise during walk-in registration. A qualitative design was used to maximize the content and scope of the advisors' comments.

Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 17 advisors at three different community colleges who regularly advise during "last minute" registration, which takes place a few days before the quarter begins (see Table 1). The research data were compiled from one-hour interviews with the advisors. The research questions formed the basis for the Interview Guide (see Table 2), and the interviews explored each advisor's impressions of students who register within one week of the first day of the term, as compared with students they see much earlier in the registration period. The advisors were asked to discuss late-admits' demographic characteristics, enrollment status, goals and commitment, skills and abilities, as well as nonacademic environmental factors affecting the students.

Table 1

Institutions Surveyed

                  Institution 1     Institution 2

Type              Suburban          Rural
                  2-year            2-year
                  branch campus     branch campus

Degrees           Technical         Technical
                  and transfer      and transfer
                  associate's and   associate's and
                  certificates      certificates

Student Age (M)   29                Males 20.8
                                    Females 27.5

No. of Students   3,690             2,267

Type of Late      Cafeteria(*)      Private office
Registration      Individual        Individual

No. of Advisors   13 faculty        1 staff
                                    (retired faculty)

                  Institution 3

Type              Regional
                  metropolitan
                  university

Degrees           Technical
                  and transfer
                  associate's and
                  certificates
                  Baccalaureate
                  Master's

Student Age (M)   24

No. of Students   11,500

Type of Late      Cafeteria(*)
Registration      Individual

No. of Advisors   1 staff
                  2 faculty

(*) Cafeteria style registration: Mass registration in a hall or large room. Tables set up side-by-side with an advisor at each table. Students seen on a first-come, first-served basis.

Table 2

Interview Guide

Information about the Advisor

Majors for which he or she advises
Number of years as advisor
Number of years participated in walk-in registration
General impressions and feelings about walk-in registration

What have advisors observed or learned about new freshmen being
advised during walk-in registration?

Communication skills
Age
Maturity
Marital status
Family information
Employment status
Parents' and siblings' college experiences
Hobbies and recreation
College major
Degree aspirations
Length of time out of school
Reasons expressed for late admission
Insecurities and concerns expressed
Apprehensions
Overall preparedness
Outlook
Perceived strengths and weaknesses
Experiences in college: Admissions process, testing

The taped interviews were transcribed verbatim. Tinto's model of institutional departure (1987) and the model of nontraditional student attrition by Bean and Metzner 1985) were used to develop the categories for coding. These models provided the basis for theoretical triangulation--the data was analyzed using categories developed from two different models of attrition (Patton, 1990). The pre-entry attributes, background and defining variables, environmental variables, and academic variables of students at high-risk for attrition, as outlined in the theoretical models (Tinto, 1987; Bean & Metzner, 1985), were compared to the characteristics of the late-admit as described by the advisors. This pattern matching technique was used to ascertain if late-arrivers exhibited some of the same characteristics as students who are at high-risk for attrition.

Findings

Of the 17 advisors interviewed, 13 reported that they believed late-admits to be characteristically different from students who are admitted earlier; 3 felt that the populations are not substantially different; 1 was undecided. To categorize these, differences, two theoretical models of attrition were used. Tinto's Model of Institutional Departure defines pre-entry attributes as well as goals and commitments as influential precursors to the institutional experiences of students. Within the category of pre-entry attributes are three sub-categories of family background, skills and abilities, and prior schooling. Intentions and goals, institutional commitments, and external commitments are all listed under Tinto's category of goals and commitments (Tinto, 1993). Bean and Metzner's model of nontraditional student attrition names essentially the same pre-entry student variables, but groups them differently (Bean & Metzner, 1985).

The advisors who indicated that late-admits are different cited differences in confidence and attitude--pre-entry attributes that Tinto describes as dispositions. These advisors also discussed a deficiency in Tinto's pre-entry attribute category of skills and abilities with regard to academic and organizational skills of late-admits. Using a third category from Tinto's model, goals and commitments, the advisors stated that the late-admits also lack motivation--which Tinto views as the "expression of individual commitment" or lack thereof (Tinto, 1993).

Pre-entry Attributes

Family background. Families can play a role in student confidence, according to the advisors interviewed. If a family is supportive, the student is given the extra boost to make the difficult decision to attend college. Parents may be supportive of their child's desire to go to college, but some parents, especially those who have not attended college, may not see the value of a college degree. In this instance, the family might discourage a student from attending college. For the nontraditional student, the spouse may not want the student to spend time outside of the family. In traditional households, the husband may feel threatened by his wife's aspirations, especially if she will surpass his educational level. Advisors had the following comments about the late-admits:

   But she doesn't seem to get a whole lot of support from her husband and
   it's like she's juggling; she has to worry about kids and baby-sitting in
   addition to worrying about when she can come to school.

   The men really almost resented them coming back to school. They may or may
   not have any education, but they almost resented their wives coming back to
   school. It's very sad, so rather than being a help for this, they're a
   roadblock, another roadblock they have to overcome in coming back to
   school. I don't know what you can do for a woman in that situation, but I
   could see that. I have not seen that the last quarter or two, but I can
   think back to last year, and I know there were some situations that the
   women were in that kind of a situation.

   One of the biggest problems I see is there's a lot of very underprepared
   students whose parents want them here because they can stay on the family's
   health insurance and they can stay on the family's car insurance if they're
   full-time students. That's a big issue with these underprepared students. I
   have to be full-time. I'm not capable of carrying 12 hours, but I have to
   be full-time because of insurance.

   And the other group is a big problem for us, we have them here too, because
   so many of these people are first-generation, I don't think it's only that,
   but they're all working, and working is reinforced in their families. And
   so they have a tendency to put their focus on work and not school. So
   that's the other big issue for us with these people.

Disposition--Confidence. Advisors perceived that late-admits were generally less confident about the prospect of being admitted and succeeding in college than earlier admits. This may be the reason why some students delay the admissions process: Their fears and insecurities make them doubt their abilities. The following quotations present the issue of confidence for late-admits:

   I would say probably there's a little less confidence coming in for the
   late-registereds than other students who have things pretty well planned
   out.

   Students may be intimidated by the professors and the whole college
   environment--especially if they are first generation.

Disposition--Attitudes. Although most of the late-admits appear to be tolerant of the chaotic nature of the process, they are demanding of the "product they are purchasing." They perceive themselves as customers that should be served. They relate their educational endeavor to other purchases they have made in their daily lives. They have a customer mentality--if you pay the price, you should be able to purchase the product. One advisor explained that some students think college is like a fast food restaurant:

   That's one of the great ironies too, ... how a lot of these people that
   come in the latest are the most demanding. Because again, I don't think
   they understand how higher education and the system works. They come in and
   think it's like McDonald's; you know, be able to get what they need, when
   they need it, and thank you very much, and I'm on my way.

Another advisor supported the notion that the student views the college as a business:

   Well they recognize they're late, but they're going to see it more as a
   business. That the customer is always right and you do whatever it takes to
   keep the customer happy, and if the class is closed, you get them in. And
   they don't understand why it would be important to the English department
   to cut it off at 22 or 23 students instead of just letting just one or two
   more in. They don't see any real advantage or any real purpose to that yet.
   Somewhere down the line they may, but right now all they know is that
   they're here, they have the money, we want students, and why can't I have
   my class?

Some of the late-admits were described as being "nonchalant" or "lackadaisical" about this major transition in their life. These students, the advisors predict, will not last long:

   But there's just a personality that you can tell. I don't know if it's kind
   of ... they're lackadaisical or nonchalant, you know, like "whatever" type
   of attitude. Those are the people that you just know they're not going to
   make it.

Skills, Abilities, and Prior Schooling--Academic Ability. The advisors disagreed about the late-admit's academic abilities. Some advisors indicated that these students needed more remediation than the students admitted earlier in the year. Other advisors felt that the late-admits were representative of the larger open-access college population. The controversy is illustrated in the following statements:

   Researcher: Do you see more preparatory courses and remedial courses for
   these students, that they have been placed into those courses more than
   your normal group?

   Advisor: I don't know. I don't think so.... And almost all of our students
   need or test .at a level of some preparatory math. I'm not sure all of them
   need preparatory math or developmental math but almost all of them test at
   that level. So, most advisees I see, based on the testing, are advised to
   take pre-college math courses whenever they register.

   I think with a lot of the students I see, generally coming in at that time,
   they require a lot of prep work. Prep English, prep math, and college study
   skills, and I just don't think that we have enough classes available in
   that to take the walk-in people. And so then you're really stuck trying to
   find them courses that they can really take because of the prerequisites in
   so many of the classes.

One source of insecurities may be the students' perceptions of their academic abilities. The following comments from advisors suggest that some late-admits feel that they do not have the intellectual capabilities to succeed. They are afraid of the humiliation they might suffer. Admission and placement testing may exacerbate this problem. If the student did not perform well on tests in the past, the mere suggestion of testing may discourage him or her from proceeding with the admissions process.

   I get a lot of questions, the kinds of questions I'm going to mention I
   would assume come from this apprehension: What's involved in this class? Is
   there a lot of writing; is there a lot of reading? Do you know how hard it
   is? And things like that.

   But I think these questions are geared toward, "Am I going to be able to do
   this? Am I up for this? And I think there's a lot of apprehension.

   It might be ... background things, being not very successful in school
   before, not being prepared, uncertain about what college entails even. I
   mean that's spooky not knowing the expectations.

Skills, Abilities, and Prior Schooling--Interpersonal Skills. Advisors frequently mentioned these students' inability to communicate effectively and articulate their needs. Some of the advisors attributed the communication problems to the students' fears and insecurities; others thought it was an ignorance born of the students' upbringing:

   I would say that they don't have good communication skills compared to
   other people that call me and contact me before. It might be that it's a
   hard thing to do ... for some people to contact people. Maybe they're shy
   or maybe they're intimidated or something.... I see that coming through. I
   feel real comfortable with most of my students. I have a very relaxed
   dialogue with them and with the ones that do come in the last minute....
   They seem to be a little bit more intimidated, a little bit more scared, a
   little bit more uncertain.

Skills, Abilities, and Prior Schooling--Organizational Skills. Advisors noted that students' organizational skills can affect the way students approach the process of being admitted to college. The advisors indicated that if students are poorly organized, they probably have not taken the time to order literature from the college, read it, and know what to expect. These students may very likely be unaware of the specific timeline to complete the steps of admission, and may not even be aware that there is a timeline. These students arrive late, but may not have a conception of what that means.

The advisors expressed different opinions about whether the students comprehend that they are late in the admissions process. The advisors who indicated that late-admits understand their predicament because of late admission also indicated that the students did not complain because they understood the consequences of their procrastination:

   If they're in on walk-in day, it just depends on how long they have to sit
   there to wait to see somebody. Even then there's a sense that they should
   have done this earlier. There isn't really all that much complaining on
   that day.

Many advisors also contended that some students had no idea that they were late. These late-admits appeared to be ignorant of the logistics of enrolling in college. The following quotation illustrates this point:

   Researcher: Do they have the sense that they're late in the process?

   Advisor: No, I don't think they have any sense of it at all. Classes
   haven't started yet so.... In fact, I think some people don't even think if
   they come in the first week that they're late in the process, because we
   certainly don't discourage them in registering if they come in the first
   week.

Preparation. Advisors mentioned repeatedly a lack of focus and preparation with regard to the late admit. Many of these students, especially the younger ones, had not thought out the process and timeline for being admitted to college. One advisor put it very succinctly:

   Researcher: Do you notice anything different from your normal advising
   group?

   Advisor: Yes. They seem to know nothing about college.

Other advisors commented that they felt the lack of preparation indicated the students' philosophy of life--they were not "far-sighted" and were living one day at a time, without regard for the future. The advisors explained as follows:

   I'm probably stereotyping, but they're less prepared. They've thought about
   it less. They need more remedial information just on how the system works,
   how college works. They're far more likely to be undecided students than
   earlier in the year. They're probably a little less prepared than average.
   And that's probably just a continuation ... of what they've been doing and
   haven't been terribly far-sighted.

   I think they've probably thought about it less ... for the most part aren't
   really sure what direction that they want to go.

The advisors noted that whereas almost all the late-admits fell short in the area of preparation, the first-generation college student was even more likely to be lost in the process. The federal financial aid process confuses even the most sophisticated students. The first-generation student with limited skills does not know how to begin to deal with it. Without financial aid, many will not be able to attend college. One is behind in the process before even being admitted. The advisors had the following observations about the preparation of these late-admits:

   New admit students who are pre-at-risk ... are the classic profile of
   something like this: They have low ACT scores, they're often
   first-generation students, some of them--a fair amount of them--newbie,
   nontraditional age students as well--have never been in college before, no
   one in their family has, so ... that's probably one of the reasons why
   they're late in the process. They don't understand the process. They're
   coming in late, they haven't planned for the process because they don't
   know how the process works. They get here the ninth hour, and we're least
   prepared to deal with them, and we don't have any classes to give them....
   We have a few, but usually not what they need. So they're double-whammied
   again.

   The group of first in their family really have no clue, think they want to
   go to college, just thought they would stop in and get signed up for
   classes--in may cases you spend a lot of time with them and they realize
   that they can't get financial aid the same day, and it's a wasted trip.

   I think one of the big characteristics of this group is they absolutely,
   and that's why they're here, they absolutely have no ability to prioritize.
   They have excuses that you would not believe. Anything that goes wrong,
   "well this was more important,' and they haven't figured out that if you
   want to be a full-time college student, you have to make that one of your
   top priorities.

Goals and Commitments

External Commitments--Employment. Some advisors attributed the students' fears to the fact that the students had to make difficult choices about sacrifices that would accompany their return to school. Many students had to find alternative means to support themselves and their families when they returned to college. The advisors had the following observations about sacrifices students must make before returning to school:

   It means quitting their jobs or making some financial sacrifices. So, yeah,
   I think they're weighing all those odds, and that's probably why they don't
   come earlier because they're going to have to give up something to get
   involved with the program; and they're just unsure if they wanted that
   trade-off.

   I think probably, the students are somewhat indecisive, but they know they
   have to make a decision because the deadline date is coming up. And many of
   them, are thinking about "should I quit my job and go into this full-time"
   or "can I manage to go through this part-time and still continue my job?"

Intentions--Motivation. In general, the advisors reported a lack of motivation on the part of late-admitted students. Many of them indicated that the students who procrastinated were not committed to the idea of coming to college. Advisors spoke about the problem of motivation in the following ways:

   There's not going to be a great deal of motivation for these students
   because they've let it slip and slide to this point, so they aren't driven
   yet. And my guess is that a large portion of them won't continue. And it's
   probably larger than that group that got started two months earlier and was
   more interested.

   It's probably just a quirk to some degree that they're here in the first
   place, and unless you give them a reason to want to be here, get them into
   a class, let them see that they can succeed, and find a class they enjoy,
   [they won't] just turn things around.

The students who felt "trapped" were ones who were forced into the situation by a crisis in their life. They would not have made the decision to attend college had circumstances not mandated that they pursue a degree or college level coursework. Some of them were not committed to the process of education; they only wanted the end result so that they could get on with their lives. Several advisors referred to the term "quick fix" when talking about this type of student:

   I would say the majority of them are people who feel trapped--that they
   must come to college. They don't necessarily want to come to college, but
   they feel that if they don't ... their job is ending or the jobs that
   they've been doing for the last five or ten years are getting them nowhere,
   so they feel frustrated. And everybody's told them that you can't get
   anywhere without a college degree so they come. That's more what I hear
   than "I'm real excited about coming to college--it's something I wanted to
   do, I got married when I was 18, and I always wanted to attend." I mean, we
   have a few of those people, but that's not the overriding majority. The
   second group is a delight to work with and they're usually excellent
   students that come in and just eat it up. The other students may do well,
   but they have no idea what they're getting into and their reasons typically
   are more vocational than anything else.

Although some were motivated by circumstances, others were being pushed (sometimes quite literally) by family or friends. Advisors seemed to believe that the nontraditional students were more motivated by circumstances, whereas the traditional students were being pressured to attend college by parents or peers. The following comments illustrate these points:

   But I would say that [for] the majority of the older, as well as the
   younger, it's some outside pressure being put on them for whatever reason
   to come.... I almost get a sense that it's not of their own free will ...
   the decision.... the older ones might be having some problem at work at
   that particular point in time, and they're so frustrated, and trying to
   overcome that frustration at work--they come here. The younger ones, it's
   more you get the feeling like family are influencing them.

   "They told me I had to come ... society said I had to come, my parents said
   I had to come." "My parents said if I didn't come to college out of high
   school, I'd never go to college." And that certainly is a fallacy. That's
   widely believed by a lot of parents.

Traditional Versus Nontraditional Late-admits

Even though advisors provided extensive information about late-admits in general, most of them identified two distinct groups of late-admits--traditional and nontraditional students. Although this may seem obvious by virtue of the age difference, the more interesting distinctions are perceived differences in motivation, disposition, and forces influencing the two groups (see Figures 1 and 2). For the purposes of this study, the definition of traditional students are ones who are entering college directly from high school or shortly thereafter. They would be in the traditional 18-to-20-year-old range of entry age. The nontraditional students encompassed everyone else. Many of the nontraditional students were married and had children. Some of them had been in the workforce, and others had been at home raising families.

[Figures 1-2 ILLUSTRATION OMITTED]

Motivation. As discussed previously, traditional late-admits seem to be motivated by different factors than nontraditional late-admits. They are unsure of their future and lack the drive to actively pursue a solution. They use college as a stop-gap measure while they're trying to decide. The decision-making process of the traditional late-admits was described by advisors in the following ways:

   They're sort of treading water, as I call them; they're not stroking.

   I get a sense there's an awful lot of them [who] have delayed, and put off,
   and procrastinated, the issue of whether they are even going to college.
   And then at some point after maybe a summer has elapsed, Mom and Dad, or
   just Mom, or just Dad, and the student have a conversation that probably
   goes like this: "Well I think I will go to college after all." And there's
   this thing out there which is essentially you can apply and be accepted and
   start all within the same day or weekend. And since they've avoided the
   decision, that's an easy decision to make--because it's just there. I think
   there's always the assumption that they either go through a normal
   regularized application process and go away to college, but since they put
   that off now, making the decision very late allows them to say to their
   parents, "Ok. I'm going to try it, and if I do ok there, they'll pay for me
   to go somewhere else.'

Disposition. Many nontraditional students convince themselves that college is just a pipe dream and rationalize their decision to ignore the ambition to get a degree. It's only the onset of the first day of class that moves the nontraditional late-admit to the door of the college: "It's now or never." Any roadblock is an omen that they are traveling the wrong path. This signals the student to turn back. The advisors explained the anguish of the nontraditional late-admit as compared to the more nonchalant attitude of the traditional late-admit population:

   But, a lot of them remark to me, and these are primarily returning adults,
   that they sat out in the car, and they waited. They didn't know if they
   were--it was a real risk for them to walk in that door. They didn't think
   they could do it.

   I think your agonizers are your older, your returning
   adults--nontraditional students. They ... are very insecure. They're very,
   once they get in, I think those are the ones that become A oriented
   students.

The advisors initially indicated that they felt, in general, that late-admits were not as committed as students who arrived earlier. Upon further questioning, most of the advisors made the distinction between nontraditional and traditional late-admits. Traditional late-admits walked through the door with little ambition or forethought--blown in by the wind (or pushed by a parent or friend), whereas nontraditional students forced themselves through the door, agonizing at each corridor, wondering if they were doing the right thing. Traditional students were unaware of their limitations, and nontraditional students were obsessed with their perceived shortcomings. Although these generalizations are based on the advisors' perspectives, these same advisors often subsequently saw these students in class and were involved with their academic progress:

   I would say some are apprehensive; some are very excited. Again, the
   nontraditional ones are very excited. They're very focused. While some of
   the traditional students just really couldn't give a darn about the classes
   ... that they're enrolled in or the education that they're receiving. I'm
   sure that probably reflects on how long they last in some of these classes
   too. There's a wide range of how they feel about that.

Commitment. Although advisors perceived nontraditional late-admits as hesitant and conservative in what they tackled the first quarter, they overwhelmingly agreed that this group of nontraditional students often become their best students. They cited maturity as making the difference. From the very beginning, many nontraditional students were committed to doing well. They were much more involved in the process and wanted to assure that their time was not wasted. Traditional students wanted their educational future plotted out for them. As long as it did not encroach on other aspects of their lives, they were willing to tolerate the inconvenience. The following quotations illustrate these points:

   I would say, not a majority of them, a lot of them [late-admits] come with
   their parents because a lot of those parents I guess are paying the bill.
   The ones with parents are usually the ones that are fresh out of high
   school. The nontraditional students that are starting usually come by
   themselves and are very inquisitive. Much more inquisitive, I mean you can
   tell the freshman that are just out of high school; you can tell them that
   they have to take a class in Dirt Eating 101, and they wouldn't question
   that they should take it. While the nontraditional students would question,
   ... "Why do I need this, why do I need a prerequisite." So in terms of
   commonalties, the commonalties seem to bide out with age.

   Researcher: Do the younger students question their ability as much [as the
   older students]?

   Advisor: They don't care as much. That's why I like having older students.
   If a younger student gets a "D," you know, that's a grade. But if an older
   student gets a "C" that's an embarrassment.

   Researcher: The older ones seem to have thought it through more?

   Advisor: Yeah, I would say so, but they're the ones that ... lack a little
   confidence. They need to get their confidence up, and they usually do
   within a quarter or two.

One advisor theorized that younger students were just as apprehensive, but were not willing to admit it. The older students on the other hand, readily admitted their fears and insecurities:

   Well, I don't think they admit it. They're not going to tell you that
   they're dreading, or ... dreading is not a good word, but they're
   apprehensive about coming to school. But the older students are at least
   willing to tell me that.

A Cost-Benefit Analysis of Late Registration

At some point in the interview, each advisor was asked if he or she felt that allowing students to be admitted at the last minute was beneficial or detrimental to the student. Most of the advisors theorized that many of the students would "lose momentum" if they were turned away and told they would have to wait until the next term to be admitted. They indicated that this population may make only one attempt at college. If thwarted, they might not return. The advisors made the following comments:

   But you never know what: little gem is out there, and everyone you hold
   onto is a victory. If you close the door on them this time, you just don't
   know that they'll ever come back.

   I just think ... this was their shot at, that they got the nerve to come
   up, or whatever you want to say, to come in. And yeah, you've discouraged
   them, and I think that you may not see them attempt college at all.

   I think you've stopped the momentum because I have some people tell me
   that. I believe it's that "I made up my mind that today I'm going to do
   this, and I'm here, and I need to register and everything because...." I
   thoroughly believe them when they say that "If I don't get it done today, I
   will have lost the momentum and I probably will not register."

A majority of the advisors believed that last minute registration was necessary for open-access colleges and served a good purpose. Some enthusiastically supported the process whereas others were noticeably more reluctant with their support:

   I don't think it's a disservice. I don't think it is. Because I just think
   it's giving them a last ditch opportunity to get their life on track, to
   pursue their education.

   I wish it didn't have to happen. I don't object to it because it's serving
   a need, but it always amazes me that need arises because I tend to plan a
   little farther ahead myself, and I can't understand people who come in with
   no concept of what they want to do except go to school on the day before
   school starts.

Students coming in late met more challenges and roadblocks than earlier admits, and were probably the least equipped to handle the obstacles. They needed more remediation; some of the younger students had problems of motivation, and some of the older students had confidence problems. A few of the advisors reasoned that late-admits have greater needs than the earlier population--needs that cannot be met in a frantic and chaotic advising environment. They felt that admitting them without being able to provide the classes and services necessary to optimize the possibility of their success was unethical on the part of the college. These advisors felt that such policies set the stage for failure. One advisor expressed these concerns in the following way:

   Now this is the immoral part about it as far as I'm concerned; we have the
   situation where the [college] has agreed to take these students, but yet we
   don't have what they need. So we're essentially setting them up for
   failure.... I really would like to make a case for either not admitting the
   students or having the resources they need.

Implications

Some of the late-admitted students described in this research did not seem to be cognizant of the fact that they were late. These late-admits appeared to be ignorant of the logistics of enrolling in college. One implication is that they were first-generation college students who did not have a support system to familiarize them with the process or they lacked the organizational skills to follow the procedures of admission. Everything had to be explained to them in depth because they did not even have the basic notions of how to employ the system. These late-admitted students had not developed the skills to plot out their path, nor did they understand the necessity of doing so. Late-admits may be the neediest of all students, but they are admitted at a time when the system is the most over-loaded and least capable of meeting their needs.

This research unveiled two different types of late-admitted students--traditional late-admits and nontraditional late-admits. The traditional late-admits were students in the 18-to-20-year-old range coming directly from high school to college. The traditional late-admits were perceived by the advisors to be deficient in the areas of goals and commitment (as described in Tinto's Model of Institutional Departure) and lacking in the areas of educational goals and major certainty in Bean and Metzner's Conceptual Model of Nontraditional Student Attrition. They would, therefore, be at high risk for attrition from the onset of their postsecondary experience.

Nontraditional late-admits appeared to have a distinct set of forces that both influenced their decision to attend college and impeded their progress in making that decision a reality (see Figure 2). As opposed to the traditional late-admits, nontraditional students thought about the process of going back to college long before the term began, grappling with the logistics of caring for children, changing job schedules, living on a reduced income, and paying for the direct and indirect costs of education. These students were overwhelmed by myriad decisions and preparations. Insecurities nearly paralyzed them. In Bean and Metzner's conceptual model of nontraditional student attrition, these nontraditional late-admits suffer from environmental variables that make their initial step towards education very difficult.

Conclusion

The problem of addressing the needs of the late-admit plagues open-access colleges across the nation. The mission of these colleges is to provide educational opportunity for students who may not otherwise have access to the benefits of higher education. Although reducing the number and scope of the bureaucratic barriers encountered may be desirable, the problems created by eliminating admission deadlines should be acknowledged. It is important for leaders of open-access institutions, particularly those involved in making enrollment policies, to begin a dialogue about admission policies that allow new students to be admitted through the first day of the term, and often into the initial few weeks of class. Research is an important component of this dialogue.

Researchers at individual institutions may have investigated the role of late admission in attrition, but this author was not able to uncover any published data on the topic. Research is needed to determine if late-admits are served by the process and the ethical implications of allowing first-time freshmen to be admitted without the benefit of orientation when there are few classes available to meet their academic needs. The study described in this report represents a step toward beginning that inquiry. It explored the impressions advisors have about first-time freshmen at open-access colleges who are admitted late and the forces that influence their late arrival. The distinct difference between this study and previous attrition research is the setting in which it was conducted and the focus on late admittance and registration.

In traditional college settings, research has found that nontraditional older students are at highest risk for attrition. This study would suggest the opposite to be true--nontraditional late-admits appear to be more motivated and better prepared to make the transition to college than traditional late-admits and therefore are less likely to become attrition statistics. A nontraditional student, in the nontraditional setting of an open-access college, may ultimately result in a better "fit" of student to institution. Most attrition research has been conducted in traditional institutions where the older student is clearly out of place. In this study, it was the traditional student that did not fit the norm of the setting.

Although "fit" is an important avenue to explore, the forces influencing the decision to attend college may ultimately distinguish the traditional from the nontraditional late-admit. Motivated traditional students have most likely been admitted months before the term begins. This research would suggest that the motivated nontraditional student has not proceeded with the admission process because of fears and insecurities. They have the motivation and drive, but not the confidence to move forward. The only thing that tips the scales to action for these students is the imminent first day of the term. Once in the door and registered, the student's level of confidence becomes irrelevant--the momentum has begun, and the student's drive and determination takes over.

The advisors who participated in this research provided a wealth of information and readily contributed their expertise and insights. Nevertheless, the impressions they reported may be misleading or distorted by individual biases. Further qualitative and quantitative research will be necessary to confirm these characteristics of late-admits. If community college administrators, advisors, and faculty can better understand late-admits, they can develop programs to encourage these students to start the transition to college sooner and to meet the students' needs once they do arrive. Whether traditional or nontraditional, every student should be afforded the opportunity to succeed. It is important to cast an ever-finer net to understand the factors that contribute to attrition completely and precisely. By doing so researchers will extend their knowledge of the often-masked yet complex process that leaving college represents.

References

Bean, J. P., & Metzner, B. S. (1985). A conceptual model of nontraditional undergraduate student attrition. Review of Educational Research, 55(4): 485540.

Belcher, M. J., & Patterson, C. (1990). Who are late registrants and what will they do when faced with a late registration fee? Miami, FL: Miami-Dade Community College. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 328 324)

Cohen, A. M., & Brawer, F. B. (1996). The American community college. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Horton, J. (1980). An integrative model for retention strategies. Paper presented at the Annual Convention of the American Association of Community and Junior Colleges, Washington, DC. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 203 943)

House, J. D. (1996). College persistence and grade outcomes: Noncognitive variables as predictors for African-American, Asian-American, Hispanic, Native-American, and White students. Paper presented at the Annual Forum of the Association for Institutional Research, Albuquerque, NM. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 397 710)

Jones, S. W. (1986). No magic required: Reducing freshman attrition at the community college. Community College Review, 14(2): 14-18.

Kheim, D. H. (1980). Model for determination of student attrition: Causes and trends. B.E.N. student retention. Durham, NC: North Carolina Central University. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 224 374)

Paton, M. Q. (1990). Qualitative evaluation and research methods. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.

Roueche J. E., & Roueche S. D. (1993). Between a rock and a hard place: The at-risk student in the open-door college. Washington, DC: Community College Press.

Seppanen, L. (1995). Implications for retention strategies of differential student progress rates and the literature on student retention. Olympia, WA: Washington State Board for Community and Technical Colleges; Education Division. Research, Report No. 954. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 387 165)

Tinto, V. (1993). Leaving college: Rethinking the causes and cures of student attrition (2nd ed.). Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.

Windham, P. (1994). The relative importance of selected factors to attrition at public community colleges. Paper presented to the Annual Conference of the Southeastern Association for Community Colleges, Savannah, GA. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 373 833)

Dana Freer Weiss serves as director of Enrollment Services at the University of Cincinnati's Raymond Walters College. She is a doctoral candidate in the College of Education at the University of Cincinnati. ([e-mail])