This document discusses a study on transfer student involvement at Vanderbilt University. The study used quantitative analysis of a student survey and focus groups to understand how transfer students' involvement compares to native students. The results showed that transfer students spend less time in campus organizations, attend fewer organization events, and report more difficulty making friends. Transfer students also spend less time volunteering and working. The focus groups revealed that transfer students struggle with the academic rigor and lack of support structures after their initial orientation. The document provides recommendations to improve transfer student involvement through targeted academic support, continued connection from orientation leaders, and housing arrangements to facilitate community-building.

1. CONSIDERING
TRANSFER
STUDENT
INVOLVEMENT
Taylor Jantz
Samantha Lamere
Brandie VanOrder

2. • Pic of Braxton
• ACPA CSI logo

3. THE PROCESS
• Phase 1: quantitative analysis of Quality
of Life Survey data
– Administered annually to all undergraduate
students in November
– 33% response rate on average
• Phase 2: Focus groups conducted
– 2 in late September, 2 in early November
– 12 student participants in first groups, 7 in
second set

4. VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY
• 6,851 Undergraduate & 5,874 Graduate
Students
• 47% Men & 53% women
• 96% of undergraduates live on campus
• 97% Retention Rate
• Holistic First-Year Commons Experience

5. THE TRANSFER STUDENT
EXPERIENCE
• No office/structured services
• Orientation is 2 days with no ongoing
programming
• Acceptance rate for transfer students is 44%,
compared to 13% for first-year students
• 8.5% of the 2014-15 Student Body are Transfers

6. BACKGROUND
• Language: “transfer” and “native”
students
• Horizontal & vertical transfers
• Minimal research about how transfer
students get involved

7. social integration
intellectual growth
retention
GET INVOLVED!
Sources: Kuh et al. (2005), Pascarella & Terenzini (2005)

8. Source: Astin (1999)
the quantity and quality of the
physical and psychological
energy that students invest in
the college experience
- Absorption in academic work
- Participation in extracurricular
activities

9. RESEARCH QUESTIONS
To what extent do transfer students
DIFFER from native students in their
student involvement?

10. RESEARCH QUESTIONS
To what extent does being a transfer
student INFLUENCE student
involvement?

11. RESEARCH QUESTIONS
What is the process for transfer
student involvement? When do
transfer students get involved on
campus, and in what ways? What
campus opportunities do they seek
out?

12. RECOMMENDATION:
ASK THESE QUESTIONS
ABOUT YOUR STUDENTS!
FIND OUT IF TRANSFER
STUDENTS ARE HAVING A
DIFFERENT INVOLVEMENT
EXPERIENCE.

13. CONTROL VARIABLES

14. - Year
- Residential
Area
- Ethnicity
- College
- International
- Income
- Academic
hours
CONTROL VARIABLES

15. STUDENT INVOLVEMENT
VARIABLES
- Student
organization
involvement
- Volunteering
- Residence Life
- Work
- Religious
involvement
- Other social
experiences

16. DATA OUTPUT
Coefficent P-Value
Hours a Week Participating in a Campus Organization -0.285 0.00
Attendance at Programs Offered by Student Orgs. -0.291 0.00
I am Satisfied with my Social Experience at Vanderbilt -0.378 0.00
It Has Been Difficult Making Friends with Other Students 0.593 0.00
Number of Hours/Week Spent Working at a Job -0.285 0.01
Number of Hours Spend Volunteering -0.125 0.04
Have Found a Religious Organization/Community -0.155 0.07
Consumption of Alcohol -0.152 0.09
Residence Hall Program Attendance -0.135 0.28
Note: Results are at the 95% Confidence Level

17. THEMES &
RESULTS

18. Hours participating in
campus student
organizations (29%)
Attend fewer programs
sponsored by student
organizations (29%)

19. Less satisfied with
their social
experience (38%)
More difficult to make
friends with other
students (59%)

20. School is really hard here […] that
has really limited my involvement
It comes down to school work
versus enjoying yourself
I literally have no free time. It’s the
hardest thing I have ever done.

21. RECOMMENDATION:
PROVIDE TARGETED
ACADEMIC SUPPORT TO
TRANSFER STUDENTS
THROUGHOUT THEIR
FIRST SEMESTER

22. The university has not engaged
me since transfer orientation.
I’m not really trying to make new
friends anymore because I’m just
trying to pass this semester.

23. RECOMMENDATION:
TRANSFER ORIENTATION
LEADERS SHOULD HAVE
STRUCTURED WAYS TO
CONTINUE CONNECTING
WITH TRANSFER
STUDENTS

24. There weren’t that many
opportunities to learn about
organizations.
The decision to transfer wasn’t to
make me happy in the moment,
but to make me happy in 10
years.

25. Themes from the focus groups:
HOUSING
Grouping us by residence hall
would have been great because
those are the people you get to
know
I love everyone in my Res Hall (a
living-learning community), they are
all very open to me.

26. - Self motivation
- Prior familiarity
- Structured systems
- Community service

27.  Vanderbilt context
 Data only goes back to 2010
The first-year Commons experience could have
unknown effects
 Other variables that we should have controlled for in
the study, but limited by QLS data
 Because we eliminated first year data, Greek Life
information is different
 Small focus groups
LIMITATIONS

28. IMPLICATIONS
FOR
PRACTITIONERS