This presentation outlines the use of crystallization to report the findings of a case study on second-year students at a professional focus, commuter institution

1. Presented by:
Ashley Babcock, Ed.D

2.  Second-year students = Unique set of
challenges (Gahagan and Hunter, 2006)
 Bartley’s Structure Warrants Research
 Longitudinal, intrinsic case study
 Theoretical Framework
 Chickering and Reisser’s (1993) revised seven
vectors of student development
 Integrative Crystallization:
 Provides multiple ways of understanding
participants’ experiences (Ellingson, 2009).
 Student narratives, researcher’s reflections, poetry
2

3.  Five Main Student Types
 Traditional (ages 18-24)
 Non-Traditional (age 25+)
 Veteran
 Commuter
 Housing
 Bartley’s Second-Year Differences
 Student Expectations
 Workload
 Second-year Focus
 Five Major Themes
3

4.  Non-Traditional Campus
 Anna explains the way Bartley is set-up
 Compartmentalization and Fragmentation of
Majors
 Kevin discusses lack of communication
 Workload
 Sandra highlights the fast pace and demands
 For-Profit Business Model*
 Julie, Samuel, and Madison reflect on faculty leaving
4

5.  Moving from Novice to Intermediate
 Julie and Mike explain developing needed skills
 Prioritizing
 Kevin and John reflect on learning time management
 Faculty and Department Chairs*
 Marcus and Denise discuss faculty’s influence
 Informal Student Mentoring
 Madison and Sandra highlight how mentoring helps
5

6.  General Education vs. Studio Classes
 Marcus and Javier state their views on their classes
 Motivation for Joining Clubs
 Julie and Anna show different experiences in clubs
 Portfolios*
 Madison and John stress the importance of portfolios
 Internships, Freelancing, and Conventions
 Sandra and Anna discuss freelancing and conventions
6

7.  Structure Leads to Lack of Involvement
 Javier and Anna show their perception of campus
 Purposeful Programming*
 Sandra and John suggest ways to stress involvement
 Increasing Communication and Networking
 Julie and Anna discuss ways to reach students
 Building Camaraderie and Pride
 John and Javier explain how increasing transparency
can help build morale
7

8.  Academic Resources
 Marcus and Sandra discuss tutoring and the library
 Computer and Specialty Labs*
 Samuel and Anna highlight their lab experiences
 Outdated Equipment
 Javier and Julie talk about technology and gear
 Business Side of Bartley
 Denise and John vent about rude, unsupportive staff
8

9.  A support structure should be developed
using four common ideas:
 Purposeful Programming
 Programming should use the four vectors
 Events for veteran, adult, and commuter students
 Increased Transparency
 Town Hall Meetings
 Communication is crucial to increase community
 Mentoring
 Faculty and peer mentoring
 Second-year advisors for individualized support
 E-Portfolio Community
 Develop student ownership through reflective
practices
9

10.  Bartley students—divergent from the lit
 Gahagan and Hunter’s (2006) definition of second-year
students is problematic of Bartley population
 Commuter students, veteran students, and adult
students have specific programmatic needs and their
needs to be more research on these populations
 Bartley second-year students are truly the middle child
 Institution specific, purposeful programming
is needed to develop the whole student
 Chickering’s seven vectors should be seen as
fluid and should be used to help develop
programming and SYE support
10

11. 11
Contact Information:
Ashley Babcock, Ed.D
ashlee.babcock@gmail.com
A copy of this presentation is available at:
http://www.slideshare.net/AshleyBabcockEdD
/second-year-students-crystallization