The Connection Between Faculty Practices in Class and Students’ Time Use Out of Class

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

References

  1. American College Personnel Association (1974). A student development model for student affairs in tomorrow’s higher education. Washington, DC: American College Personnel Association.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Arum, R., & Roksa, J. (2011). Academically adrift: Limited learning on college campuses. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

  3. Astin, A. W. (1984). Student involvement: A developmental theory for higher education. Journal of College Student Personnel, 25, 297–308.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Astin, A. W. (1993). What matters in college?: Four critical years revisited. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

  5. Babcock, P., & Marks, M. (2010). Leisure college, U.S.A. Washington, DC: American Enterprise Institute. Retrieved from https://www.aei.org/research-products/report/leisure-college-usa/

  6. Baum, S., Ma, J., & Payea, K. (2013). Education pays 2013: The benefits of higher education for individuals and society. New York: The College Board. Retrieved from https://research.collegeboard.org/pdf/education-pays-2013-full-report.pdf

  7. Berrett, D. (2015). For students, expectations about academic rigor are far from universal. The Chronicle of Higher Education. Retrieved from https://www.chronicle.com/article/For-StudentsExpectations/234269?cid=trend_right

  8. Biglan, A. (1973). Relationships between subject matter characteristics and the structure and output of university departments. Journal of Applied Psychology, 57, 204–213.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Blaich, C., Wise, K., Pascarella, E.T., & Roksa, J. (2016). Instructional clarity and organization: It’s not new or fancy, but it matters. Change: The Magazine of Higher Learning, 48(4), 6–13. https://doi.org/10.1080/00091383.2016.1198142

  10. Bok, D. (2006). Our underachieving colleges: A candid look at how much students learn and why they should be learning more. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Brint, S., & Cantwell, A. M. (2010). Undergraduate time use and academic outcomes: Results from the University of California undergraduate experience survey 2006. Teachers College Record, 112, 2441–2470.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Carnevale, A.P., Smith, N., Melton, M., Price, E.W. (2015). Learning while earning: The new normal. Washington, DC: Georgetown University.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Chang, M. J. (1999). Does racial diversity matter?: The educational impact of a racially diverse undergraduate population. Journal of College Student Development, 40, 377–395.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Cooper, J. (2007). Cognitive dissonance: Fifty years of a classic theory. Los Angeles: SAGE.

  15. Credé, M., & Kuncel, N. R. (2008). Study habits, skills, and attitudes: The third pillar supporting collegiate academic performance. Perspectives on Psychological Science3, 425–453.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behavior. New York: NY Plenum.

  17. Delucchi, M., & Korgen, K. (2002). “We’re the customer-we pay the tuition”: Student consumerism among undergraduate sociology majors. Teaching Sociology, 30, 100–07.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. DeVise, D. (2012). Is college too easy? As study time falls, debate rises. The Washington Post. Retrieved from https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/education/is-college-too-easy-as-study-time-falls-debate-rises/2012/05/21/gIQAp7uUgU_story.html

  19. Flaherty, C. (2014). So much to do, so little time. Inside Higher Education. Retrieved from https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2014/04/09/research-shows-professors-work-long-hours-and-spend-much-day-meetings

  20. Fosnacht, K., McCormick, A. C., & Lerma, R. (2018). First-year students’ time use in college: A latent profile analysis. Research in Higher Education59, 958–978.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Holzweiss, P., Rahn, R., & Wickline, J. (2007). Are all student organizations created equal? The differences and implications of student participation in academic versus non-academic organizations. College Student Affairs Journal, 27, 136–150.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Houser, M. L. (2005). Are we violating their expectations? Instructor communication expectations of traditional and nontraditional students. Communication Quarterly, 5, 213–228. https://doi.org/10.1080/01463370500090332

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Hout, M. (2012).Social and economic returns to college education in the United States. Annual Review of Sociology, 38, 379–400. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.soc.012809.102503

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Hubbell, L. (2015). Students aren’t consumers. Academic Questions28, 82–89. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12129-015-9473-4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Jackson, L. C., Jones, S. J., & Rodriguez, R. C. (2010). Faculty actions that result in student satisfaction in online courses. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 14(4), 78–96.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Kezar, A., & Rhoads, R. A. (2001). The dynamic tensions of service learning in higher education: A philosophical perspective. The Journal of Higher Education, 72, 148–171.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Krause, K. (2007). Beyond classroom walls: Students’ out-of-class activities and implications for teaching and learning. Nagoya Journal of Higher Education, 7, 301–318.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Kuh, G. D. (1995). The other curriculum: Out-of-class experiences associated with student learning and personal development. The Journal of Higher Education, 66, 123–155.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Kuh, G. D., Cruce, T. M., Shoup, R., Kinzie, J., & Gonyea, R. M. (2008). Unmasking the effects of student engagement on first-year college grades and persistence. The Journal of Higher Education79, 540–563.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Kuh, G. D., Kinzie, J., Schuh, J. H., & Whitt, E. J. (2005). Assessing conditions to enhance educational effectiveness: The inventory for student engagement and success. San Francisco CA: Jossey-Bass.

  31. Kuh, G. D., Schuh, J. H., & Whitt, E. J. (1991). Involving colleges: Successful approaches to fostering student learning and development outside the classroom. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

  32. Logan, J., Hughes, T., & Logan, B. (2016). Overworked? An observation of the relationship between student employment and academic performance. Journal of College Student Retention: Research, Theory & Practice, 18, 250–262. https://doi.org/10.1177/1521025115622777

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Marshall, J. E., Fayombo, G., & Marshall, R. (2015). I paid for it, so I deserve it! Examining psycho-educational variables and student consumerist attitudes to higher education. International Journal of Higher Education4(4), 73–80.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. McCormick, A. C. (2011). It’s about time: What to make of reported declines in how much college students study. Liberal Education, 97(1), 30–39.

    Google Scholar 

  35. Meyer, K. (2014). Student engagement in online learning: What works and why. ASHE Higher Education Report, 40(6), 1–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Michel, J. O., Campbell, C. M., & Dilsizian, K. (2018). Is STEM too Hard? Using Biglan to Understand Academic Rigor and Teaching Practices across Disciplines. Journal of the Professoriate, 9(2). 28–56.

  37. Neumann, A. (2014). Staking a claim on learning: What we should know about learning in higher education and why. The Review of Higher Education, 37, 249–267.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Pace, C. R. (1982). Achievement and the quality of student effort. Washington, DC: National Commission on Excellence in Education. Retrieved from https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED227101.pdf

  39. Pike, G. R., Kuh, G. D., & Massa-McKinley, R. C. (2008). First-year students' employment, engagement, and academic achievement: Untangling the relationship between work and grades. NASPA Journal, 45, 560–582.

    Google Scholar 

  40. Pike, G. R., Smart, J. C., & Ethington, C. A. (2012). The mediating effects of student engagement on the relationships between academic disciplines and learning outcomes: An extension of Holland’s theory. Research in Higher Education53, 550–575.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Plunkett, A. D. (2014). A's for everyone: The effect of student consumerism in the post-secondary classroom. Qualitative Report19, 1–13.

    Google Scholar 

  42. Reason, R.D., Terenzini, P.T., & Domingo, R.J. (2006). First things first: Developing academic competence in the first year of college. Research in Higher Education, 47, 149–175. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11162-005-8884-4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Rojstaczer, S., & Healy, C. (2012). Where A is ordinary: The evolution of American college and university grading, 1940–2009. Teachers College Record, 114, 1–23.

    Google Scholar 

  44. Snyder, T.D., de Brey, C, & Dillow, S.A. (2016). Digest of education statistics, 2015 (NCES 2016–014). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education. Retrieved from https://nces.ed.gov/pubs2016/2016014.pdf

  45. Stirling, A. E., & Kerr, G. A. (2015). Creating meaningful co-curricular experiences in higher education. Journal of Education & Social Policy2(6), 1–7.

  46. Strayhorn, T. L. (2018). College students' sense of belonging: A key to educational success for all students. New York, NY: Routledge.

  47. Thibodeaux, J., Deutsch, A., Kitsantas, A., & Winsler, A. (2017). First-year college students’ time use: Relations with self-regulation and GPA. Journal of Advanced Academics28, 5–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Tinto, V. (2012). Enhancing student success: Taking the classroom success seriously. Student Success3(1), 1–8.

    Google Scholar 

  49. Trostel, P. (2015). It’s not just the money: The benefits of college education to individuals and to society. Retrieved from https://www.luminafoundation.org/files/resources/

  50. Turrentine, C., Esposito, T., Young, M. D., & Ostroth, D. D. (2012). Measuring educational gains from participation in intensive co-curricular experiences at Bridgewater State University. Journal of Assessment and Institutional Effectiveness, 2, 30–54.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Umbach, P. D., & Wawrzynski, M. R. (2005). Faculty do matter: The role of college faculty in student learning and engagement. Research in Higher Education, 46, 153–184.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  52. Wawrzynski, M. R., & Jessup-Anger, J. E. (2010). From expectations to experiences: Using a structural typology to understand first-year student outcomes in academically based living-learning communities. Journal of College Student Development51, 201–217.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. Zheng, H. (2017). Why does college education matter? Unveiling the contributions of selection factors. Social Science Research, 68, 59–73. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssresearch.2017.09.003

    Article  Google Scholar 

  54. Zumbrunn, S., McKim, C., Buhs, E., & Hawley, L.R. (2014). Support, belonging, motivation, and engagement in the college classroom: a mixed method study. Instructional Science, 42, 661–684.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jessica Ostrow Michel.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Michel, J.O., Jimenez, M., Haley, J.D. et al. The Connection Between Faculty Practices in Class and Students’ Time Use Out of Class. Innov High Educ 46, 59–76 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10755-020-09526-6

Download citation

Keywords

  • Time-on-task
  • Cognitvely responsive teaching
  • College teaching
  • Survey research
  • Assessment