Non-Traditional College Students

Introduction

For most higher education institutions, non-traditional students make up a significant portion of the undergraduate student population (Goncalves & Trunk, 2014). Furthermore, the percentage of non-traditional students that make up the population of students on college campuses is expected to continue to grow throughout the coming years with enrollment for non-traditional students occurring at a quicker pace than traditional students (Markle, 2015). While these students have experienced large amounts of success in both their professional and personal lives, non-traditional students often experience significant barriers that prevent them from obtaining success and completing their degree programs (Goncalves & Trunk, 2014; Markle, 2015; Taniguchi & Kaufman, 2005). With more non-traditional students enrolling in higher education institutions than ever before, it is essential that colleges create and implement interventions, programs, and services that help non-traditional students balance their roles in their academic, professional, and personal lives while also increasing the likelihood of academic success among this student group. Within this paper, the definition of non-traditional students will be further explored, and a literature review that examines academic success, barriers to success and degree completion, and common interventions, programs, and services to limit obstacles to success for non-traditional students. Based on the research observed in the literature review, two recommendations will be proposed to help non-traditional students build off of their strengths while decreasing the number of obstacles that these students face. These recommendations will allow a higher percentage of non-traditional students to succeed both personally and academically within higher education

Definition

According to Goncalves & Trunk (2014), non-traditional college students are defined using characteristics such as “age, generally 25 and older, background characteristics such as culture, employment, and family, and at-risk-characteristics that may decrease the chance of degree completion” (p. 164). In 2011, non-traditional students that fit the age portion of the definition made up around 43% of the population of students on college campuses, and that percentage continued to rapidly increase throughout the coming years (Goncalves & Trunk, 2014). More specifically, according to Markle (2015), the enrollment of non-traditional students is expected to increase 28% from 2008 to 2019 for non-traditional students aged 25 to 34 and 22% for non-traditional students aged 35 and older. This increase in enrollment for non-traditional students is occurring at a significantly quicker pace than it is for traditional students aged 18-24 (Markle, 2015). Furthermore, many non-traditional students have additional responsibilities outside of academics than most traditional students enrolled in higher education institutions, such as working full-time, acting financially dependent, and having non-spousal dependents like children that depend on the activities performed by these individuals (Markle, 2015). These responsibilities and commitments can take away from non-traditional students’ academic growth and development if the needs of these students are not considered (Allen, Withey, Lawton, & Aquino, 2016).

Non-traditional students are primarily motivated to attend higher education institutions for internal reasons, such as improving self-esteem and the self-concept that they hold of themselves (Goncalves & Trunk, 2014). Many non-traditional students also approach learning with the goal of applying relevant information that they learn in class into their personal and professional lives (Knowles, 1984). Based on these reasons, non-traditional students are more likely to enjoy their educational experience when there is a perceived collaboration with professors and other students that are taking the course (Goncalves & Trunk, 2014).

College Environment

Academic and Student Success

Despite the challenges facing non-traditional students in higher education, previous personal and professional experiences have allowed these individuals to achieve academic success (Kenner & Weinerman, 2011; Wyatt, 2011). One collective success among non-traditional students within higher education includes the ability to translate practical knowledge from their professional career and translate it into academic achievement in the classroom (Kenner & Weinerman, 2011). According to Kenner & Weinerman (2011), non-traditional students were often able to identify the key factors and decisions that led to them achieving success in their non-academic lives and replicating this success in the classroom by putting themselves in similar situations and positions. Non-traditional students replicated these factors and decisions by bringing their unique learning preferences and life experiences into the classroom. Learning preferences that non-traditional students tend to have include approaching learning as problem-solving, the ability to connect curriculum between other subjects that they are studying, and learning through the use of discussion and experiences in the classroom (Wyatt, 2011). These preferences and experiences helped non-traditional students in both their individual learning and during collaborative group projects, allowing an increasing number of non-traditional students to act as leaders in a classroom environment (Kenner & Weinerman, 2011).

Furthermore, increased levels of engagement and involvement, both academically and non-academically, have led to an increase in academic success and retention among non-traditional students (Wyatt, 2011). Outside of the classroom, 47 percent of non-traditional students participated in volunteer work in the community with classmates and professors (Wyatt, 2011). Inside the classroom, 80 percent of non-traditional students asked questions, contributed to classroom discussion, or engaged with their professor about course material, allowing them to be more thorough when completing academic coursework (Wyatt, 2011).

For non-traditional students to have academic success, it is essential that the classroom is designed in a manner that fosters and builds upon the individual strengths of these students. The concept of andragogy is an attempt to develop a theory specifically for non-traditional students to showcase their abilities (Knowles, 1984). Andragogy is built on the principles that non-traditional students need to be involved in the planning and evaluation of their instruction, are most interested in learning subjects that have immediate relevance to their professional or personal life, experience provides the basis for learning activities, and that learning is problem-centered rather than content centered (Knowles, 1984). If course content and classroom environments do not match these principles, non-traditional students will struggle to showcase their specific strengths, decreasing the likelihood that they will achieve success in higher education (Allen et al., 2016).

Barriers to Success and Degree Completion

Even though non-traditional students have experienced academic success in higher education, obstacles and barriers exist in the higher education environment that prevents students from achieving success and completing their degree program (Goncalves & Trunk, 2014; Markle, 2015; Taniguchi & Kaufman, 2005). One primary barrier that often prevents non-traditional students from realizing success in higher education includes expressed thoughts of isolation from not having the ability to fit in both socially and academically with other traditional students on campus (Goncalves & Trunk). Additionally, Goncalves and Trunk found that conflicts with other commitments outside of higher education, such as a lack of course availability and times that fit into the schedules of non-traditional students, also presented a common obstacle. Commitments within their professional, career, and family life often prevented non-traditional students from achieving the levels of success that they set out to accomplish when they first entered the institution.

Additionally, barriers that prevent non-traditional students from reaching their goals within higher education can differ between men and women. In a mixed-methods study performed by Markle (2015), researchers collected quantitative and qualitative data from an online survey to examine what barriers prevented non-traditional students from completing their degree programs. Non-traditional male students were more likely to reference financial issues and age as common barriers that prevented them from finishing their degree programs (Markle, 2015). Non-traditional female students cited time as the main barrier, often feeling that they were unable to balance all their roles (i.e., wife, mother, student) to the best of their ability (Markle, 2015). These findings correlate well to the results of a study performed by Taniguchi and Kaufman (2005), where non-traditional students that only enrolled part-time in classes were less likely to complete their degree than full-time non-traditional students. Barriers such as financial issues that prevent an individual from being able to afford to pay for higher education and a lack of time due to nonacademic commitments are more likely to lead an individual only enrolling part-time in classes, decreasing that likelihood of achieving success in higher education (Taniguchi & Kaufman, 2005)

Common Interventions, Services, and Suggestions to Limit Barriers

Overall, while there are several barriers that prevent non-traditional students from achieving success, institutional interventions, services, and support programs to help non-traditional students achieve success in higher education are still primarily in the developmental stage (Goncalves & Trunk, 2014). However, even though higher education has not broadly implemented certain services and support programs across the board for non-traditional students, specific higher education institutions have developed programs and services that have produced positive results. At the University of Louisville, they are attempting to remove barriers that limit overall success among non-traditional students (Pulliam, 2018). The university first started making the application process more accessible and less confusing by tailoring the information specifically to non-traditional students. Furthermore, specific programs have aided non-traditional students already enrolled at the institution by offering part-time schedules and class times that fit into their existing schedule, and by providing prior-learning credit based on previous work experience (Pulliam, 2018). More specifically, professors at the university are attempting to design their course work in a manner that applies to non-traditional students’ real lives, a learning preference among many non-traditional students (Pulliam, 2018).

A specific example of a program that was developed and tested in an academic research environment included a Summer Bridge Program (SBP) for non-traditional students to refresh or develop particular mathematical, reading, writing, and technological skills that students frequently utilize throughout higher education (Hoops &Kutrybala, 2012). Even though these programs focus on academics, non-traditional students still felt that they experienced significant academic and personal growth (Hoops & Kutrybala, 2012). Hoops & Kutrybala (2012) suggested that other support programs and services, such as orientation programs and intervention courses, specifically geared to non-traditional students could produce similar positive results as the SBP presented in their study.

Suggestions based on the idea of andragogy have also been suggested to limit barriers of success for non-traditional students. Allen et al. (2016) suggested that a classroom environment that stressed a higher order of andragogical teaching could help non-traditional students effectively utilize their time both inside and outside of the classroom. To achieve this environment, instructors must use ideas that promote the principles of andragogy that allow non-traditional students to take advantage of their strengths. Ideas include increased communication and interaction among both peers and professors, development of cognitive critical thinking and problem-solving skills through the use of classroom discussion and activities, and empowering non-traditional students to seek, retrieve, and retain information (Allen et al., 2016). Through the effective application of these suggestions, non-traditional students can see how concepts learned in class connect to their experiences in their personal and professional lives, increasing the likelihood that students will show increased interest in the course material (Allen et al., 2016).

Other studies have suggested mentorship programs within learning communities in which non-traditional students take classes and work on projects with other non-traditional students, while also receiving advice and guidance from faculty and staff members (Goncalves & Trunk 2014; Scott & Lewis, 2011). More specifically, Goncalves and Trunk (2014) also suggested that institutions offer jobs on campus to non-traditional students to increase the frequency and duration that they interact with other students. However, since non-traditional students often mentioned an insufficient amount of time to devote to coursework due to other non-academic commitments as a primary barrier to achieving success and completing their degree program, many non-traditional students are likely unable to add another element, such as a job on campus, to their already busy schedule. Instead, it is more realistic to focus on increasing non-traditional student interaction with other students and faculty members through activities that already fit into their academic schedules (Scott & Lewis, 2011).

Recommendations

Flexibility of Course Dates and Times

At an institutional level, colleges and universities need to structure educational classroom environments in a manner that allows non-traditional students to utilize their strengths and limits their exposure to barriers. First, non-traditional students need greater flexibility in the time classes are offered. Higher education institutions need to expand the number of courses that are provided in the evening to better align with the needs and responsibilities of non-traditional students (Markle, 2015). While many traditional students that attend college right out of high school are likely to consider themselves a student first, many non-traditional students do not have this luxury. Evening course times are less likely to interfere with the professional and personal obligations that many non-traditional students must attend to regularly.

Furthermore, the ability to attend class on a day not generally reserved for instruction, such as Friday evening or Saturday, provides an increased opportunity for non-traditional students to effectively balance their academic and non-academic duties (Hittepole, 2019). Classes during these days often meet for more extended periods of time than courses offered during traditional times, (i.e., 9:00 A.M. to 4:00 P.M. on Saturdays), but meet significantly less throughout the semester (Hittepole, 2019). This concept allows non-traditional students to complete courses at a pace that is convenient for them, whether it is at an accelerated pace or an extended pace in comparison to traditional course schedules.

Structure of Academic Classroom Environment

Additionally, when structuring academic environments for non-traditional students, classroom learning should take place in a manner that promotes the methods in which these individuals most effectively learn (Exposito & Bernheimer, 2012). Examples of classroom models that use the strengths of non-traditional students include the flipped classroom model and the blended classroom model (Allen et al., 2016). The flipped classroom model involves students reviewing course elements before class to better prepare them for in-class activities such as group projects and discussions with peers. Specifically, these class activities are beneficial for non-traditional students because they reinforce the material learned and challenge students to think critically about how they can use what they have learned in their professional and personal lives (Allen et al., 2016). Many of the benefits gained by students using the flipped classroom fit into the concept of andragogy, allowing non-traditional students to excel academically in this type of learning environment (Allen et al., 2016).

The blended classroom model uses the integration of the traditional classroom setting combined with field-based learning experiences using digital technology platforms and applications (Allen et al., 2016). Blended classroom environments have the potential to be beneficial for non-traditional students because it allows classroom activities and experiences in the flipped classroom to occur in an online environment. This flexibility allows students to have meaningful interactions and experiences with both peers and professors, while also effectively utilizing time spent on academic coursework (Allen et al., 2016).

Conclusion

Understanding the academic successes, obstacles to degree completion, and the learning styles of non-traditional students is vital as more of these individuals enroll in courses across higher education institutions throughout the country. For more non-traditional students to have academic success and complete their degree programs in higher education, barriers that limit the achievements of these students must be reduced through thoughtful interventions, programs, and services. The implementation of flexible course dates and times and the restructuring of a classroom environment that best fits the needs and desires of non-traditional students help to reduce the barriers that many non-traditional students encounter during their time in higher education. By establishing the recommendations made in this paper, non-traditional students can reach the levels of success that they know they are capable of accomplishing, and higher education institutions can serve the current needs of these students while understanding the future challenges and demands of this increasing population of students.

---

References

Allen, P., Withey, P., Lawton, D., & Aquino, C. T. (2016). Andragogical teaching methods to enhance non-traditional student classroom engagement. Journal of Educational Technology, 13(2), 47–59.

Exposito, S. & Bernheimer, S. (2012). Nontraditional students and institutions of higher education: A conceptual framework. Journal of Early Childhood Teacher Education, 33(2), 178-189.

Goncalves, S. A., & Trunk, D. (2014). Obstacles to success for the nontraditional student in higher education. Psi Chi Journal of Psychological Research, 19(4), 164–172.

Hittepole, C. (2019). Nontraditional students: Supporting changing student populations. Retrieved from https://www.naspa.org/images/uploads/main/Hittepole_NASPA_ Memo.pdf

Hoops, L. D., & Kutrybala, L. (2015). The impact of a summer bridge program on nontraditional student development: Teacher care matters. Community College Journal of Research and Practice, 39(11), 1039–1051.

Kenner, C., & Weinerman, J. (2011). Adult learning theory: Applications to non-traditional college students. Journal of College Reading and Learning, 41(2), 87–96.

Knowles, M. S. (1984). Andragogy in action. San Francisco, CA: Josey-Bass Publishers.

Markle, G. (2015). Factors influencing persistence among nontraditional university students. Adult Education Quarterly, 65(3), 267–285.

Pulliam, B. (2018). Breaking down barriers for non-traditional students. Retrieved from http://www.uoflnews.com/post/uofltoday/breaking-down-barriers-for-non-traditional-students/

Scott, L. M., & Lewis, C. W. (2011). Nontraditional college students: Assumptions, perceptions, and directions for a meaningful academic experience. International Journal of Interdisciplinary Social Sciences, 6(4), 1–10.

Taniguchi, H., & Kaufman, G. (2005). Degree completion among nontraditional college students. Social Science Quarterly, 86(4), 912–927.

Wyatt, L. G. (2011). Nontraditional student engagement: Increasing adult student success and retention. Journal of Continuing Higher Education, 59(1), 10–20.