Running head: SECOND YEAR STUDENTS

Research Packet: Second Year Students

Mary Denmon, Joanna Kaufmann, Derek Smith, Fang Xu
University at Buffalo

SECOND YEAR STUDENTS

2
Executive Summary

A sub-population within the broad population of the American college student that has
not been studied extensively is second-year students. First-year programs are prevalent in almost
every college or university, but much of this support drops off after the first year. This raises the
question of whether sophomore, or second-year, students are facing challenges in regards to
persistence, connections to campus, and career planning. While some of the literature has
introduced the concept of a sophomore slump, the general body of research on second year
experiences and retention as well as our student interviews indicated that second year success is
dependent upon several personal characteristics and a slump may occur before the second year.
We will first analyze the major points regarding the different literature on the second year
experience, talk about gaps in the research and unanswered questions, discuss our interview
findings, synthesize our literature findings with our interview findings, and then conclude with
directions for future research and recommendations for practitioners.
Literature Review
Many campuses across the nation provide orientation and new student services in order to
support the student in transition whether it is for first year freshman or transfer students. A
relatively new body of literature and research is being conducted and will be analyzed that
focuses on the experiences of second year students. Based on Gumps work, the basic concept of
what a sophomore slump entails is decreasing interest, declining grades, increasing absences,
and ultimately, dropping out altogether (2007, p. 111). Several researchers have discussed the
idea of a sophomore slump over a long period of time (Margolis, 1976; Furr, & Gannaway, 1982;
Sanchez-Leguelinel, 2008; Reyes, 2011). This concept of the sophomore slump and the second

SECOND YEAR STUDENTS

year experience has been gaining much attention with colleges and universities focusing much
on the retention rate of this class.
Previous research has been focused on first year success programs in efforts to keep
students from leaving the college or university defined as having been enrolled for two
consecutive semesters (Goh, 2001; Barton & Donahue, 2009). Student experiences during
freshman year can also affect retention into their second year and beyond, with poor academic
performance decreasing their likelihood to persist (Allen, Robbins, Casillas, & Oh, 2008; Meyer
& Marx, 2014). Several other factors have been shown to impact sophomore student persistence
such as advising (Burks & Barrett, 2009; Meyer & Marx, 2014), self-efficacy (Gibson, 2011;
Robertson & Taylor, 2009; Vuong, Brown-Welty & Tracz, 2010), and career exploration and
related skills experience (Isakovski, Kruml, Bibb, & Benson, 2011; Robinson & McDonald,
2014). Related to self-efficacy and overall development, ways to help sophomores succeed have
been shown through having students become more involved in the learning process (Gibson,
2011), work towards developing a sense of self-authorship (Schaller & Wagner, 2007), or
become more involved on campus (Fouburt & Grainger, 2006). Overall the research shows that
the second year of college has many factors involved, and sophomore year can be a time where
students are confused about requirements, unsure about future plans, or overwhelmed with
academics, mental health, campus involvement, and other issues (Margolis, 1976; Tobolowsky,
2008).
Gaps in the Research
Analyzing the second year experience has been discussed for many years, however
empirical research that has been conducted is very limiting. Some gaps within the research and
opportunities for improvement include more broad analysis with controlled variables pertaining

SECOND YEAR STUDENTS

to retention. Through the literature and studies, students were at different levels coming into
college and throughout their first year that retention could be skewed. Although a few of our
studies identified different ethnicities and their effects with second year persistence, more
research should be conducted to explore different variable factors and go into further detail as to
why certain factors such as socioeconomic status affects students during the second year
experience. Lastly, an analysis on a second year course or seminar that many of the research has
been analyzed upon may present differing results given that each institution has a specific
outcome for their sophomore students and some institutions mandating that students take such
courses. Given that the research is fairly new, there are still many questions that need further
answering such as whether or not second year attrition is all that different from the first year and
major factors that contribute to graduation over the course of their enrollment at an institution
versus enrollment from semester to semester.
Interview Data
The characteristics of the sophomore slump from the literature were one thing that
differed amongst our interviewees as a whole. Each interview had individual characteristics that
may be classified as one that could be found in the definition of a slump that was explained
prior. However, our students had experienced the aspects of a slump during different semesters,
some prior to the second year. The three themes that arose from the student interviews were
academic challenges, change in academic and career plans, and connections to campus. In
addition, how each of the students defined success for themselves varied widely. Broadly, the
interviewee experiences were highly varied; one of our interviewees struggled academically
because of trouble finding a balance while another struggled academically but enjoyed the
challenge. Characteristics such as absenteeism, dropping out, or a decline in grade point average

SECOND YEAR STUDENTS

due to the second year of college did not seem to prevail. Rather, the common themes could be
seen in each interview, but were experienced in different ways based on characteristics such as
high school preparation, academic program, and campus involvement.
Comparison of Literature and Interviews
In regards to our interviewees and the literature, there are several connections that can be
seen. In the study conducted by Wang et al., it was concluded, institutional commitment
resonates with the theoretical perspective that commitment to the institution influences college
integration and persistence (Tinto, 1993). All four of our interviewees felt some sort of
connection to the campus through academic involvement or social involvement, which can be
linked to academic persistence and student success. It was also seen that all four students
expressed a level of academic or career change. All of our students have plans to persist, thus
relating their possible navigation of these stressors of college to an increased chance of retention
as discussed by Goh et al. (2001). However, a major difference between the interview data and
the literature on sophomore students is that none of the four participants seems to be exhibiting a
sophomore slump as defined in the literature (Margolis, 1976; Furr, & Gannaway, 1982;
Sanchez-Leguelinel, 2008; Reyes, 2011). Jill was the one out of the four that seemed to be
closest, based on her continued worries about academics. This could also be tied to poor
performance freshman year continuing to affect her (Allen, 2008).
Recommendations for Practitioners and Future Research
With many factors influencing ones decision to attend college, the average American
college student in the coming years will be of a low socioeconomic background, older, and more
ethnically diverse (Broido, 2004). Based on the Documenting Effective Educational Practice
(DEEP) schools presented in Student Success in College by Kuh et al., the literature discusses

SECOND YEAR STUDENTS

that institutions of higher learning should meet students where they are at by understanding the
needs of their student population, experiences wanted, and by providing overall enriching
experiences (Kuh et al., 2009).
Each campus is going to be unique in supporting the success of their second year
students. Practitioners should focus on understanding the needs of each incoming class of
students and provide them with the opportunities that will enable them to perform well inside
and outside the classroom. It is important to be intentional on the pathways for success and not
prescribe overly restrictive pathways (Kuh et al., 131) that restricts students and provides
colleges and universities with diminishing returns in support of academic success. In particular
for second year experience seminars or courses that are starting to gain much attention,
practitioners should approach the sophomore student more holistically and understand that
around the second year is when many sophomores start career exploration and are often times
forced to choose a major. Understanding the millennial generation with more diverse students
from ethnically diverse backgrounds practitioners should be cognizant on the ways that faculty
and staff interactions, as well as classroom opportunities are intentionally constructed to improve
academic success.
Conclusions
With the sophomore year being one of great impact in shaping the future of what students choose
to pursue academically, it is important to note the characteristics that affect the second year
student experience in order to support their success. Although findings in the literature did not
yield the same results as those from our interviewees, it should be carefully noted that each
student within the second year should be treated holistically and could possibly be affected by
such independent factors that lead to persistence and success such as faculty interaction, self-

SECOND YEAR STUDENTS

efficacy, and different socioeconomic backgrounds. With the changing demographics of the
American college student, it is important to meet the needs of the average sophomore and
tailor programs, seminars, and experiences that will provide students with an enriching and
academically successful experience.

SECOND YEAR STUDENTS

8
Annotated Bibliography

Allen, J., Robbins, S. B., Casillas, A., & Oh, I. (2008). Third-year college retention and transfer:
effects of academic performance, motivation, and social connectedness. Research in
Higher Education. 49(7), 647-664.
Allen et al., studied third year enrollment data from 23 institutions to determine factors
that may affect third-year retention and transfer rates. Factors included in the study were
first year GPA, academic preparation, and student characteristics. The major findings of
the results are the relationship of academic preparation on college performance, and the
positive relationship of poor academic performance and likelihood to transfer to a
different institution. In addition, first year academic performance and socioeconomic
status were found to have a strong impact on retention overall.
While this study is not focused on second year students, it has demonstrated the
relationship between poor academic performance during the first year, and increased
likelihood to drop out or transfer. Second year students may be impacted by their first
year GPAs, and more resources may prevent increased transfer or dropout in the third
year, as discussed by Allen et. al. This research is applicable to our project because of its
exploration of long-term persistence effects, some of which may be especially relevant
during the sophomore year if a student has faced issues during his or her first year.
Angrist, J., Oreopoulos, P., & Williams, T. (2014). When opportunity knocks, who answers?
Journal of Human Resources, 49(3), 572-610.

SECOND YEAR STUDENTS

Although the research for this article pertains to Canadian college students there is still a
lot of good research to consider when thinking about an American college student. This
article also focuses on a commuter school, which is something that can add to our
research of second year students and retention, as many schools may not have a secondyear residency requirement. Angrist, Oreopoulos and Williams studied the effects of
academic achievement awards for both first and second year students. The program
offered fiscal incentives for students who participated and maintained a seventy or above
GPA. They received higher rewards for better grades.
The finding of this research was that the selected program affected both first and second
year students differently in that second-year students achieved more than expected with
the added incentives. In addition, both male and female students also responded
differently to the academic achievement awards program. It was found that this program
had a great effect on second year male students than any other group who participated. It
was also found that students who were not fully informed about the program did not try
to obtain the awards or become involved in the program. This research is helpful to our
work because it gives us an example of ways to use an award system for high achieving
students along with aspects of such a program that worked better than others.
Barton, A., & Donahue, C. (2009). Multiple assessments of a first-year seminar pilot. The
Journal of General Education, 58(4), 259-278.
While many colleges and universities across the nation are trying to increase retention
rates, about seventy-four percent are developing first year seminars given the positive

SECOND YEAR STUDENTS

10

correlation between engagement, satisfaction, and attitude (National Resource Center for
the First-Year Experience and Students in Transition, 2002). It is important to look at the
data at previous seminar programs on which many of the sophomore experience
programs are being based upon or succeeding. Researchers such as Pascarella and
Goodman discuss that external factors such as ones background, family, or income status
could contribute to diminishing returns instead of thinking of assessment for such
program to be a positive indicator for success. The study of the research compares two
first year courses at the University of Maine at Farmington (UMF), one traditional course
that that is an exploration in learning versus another which is more lifelong learning
seminar based. Results from the research indicate that retention in the freshman seminar
course was after the first semester of taking the course. This analysis shows a gap in the
period from spring to fall of the following year. Many factors from this research can
contribute to the outcome such as the freshman seminar course being one semester long
versus the lifelong learning course being one week long. Data analysis from this study
indicates that many freshmen started to gain increased self-efficacy, which was seen in
other literature pertaining to sophomore development (Gibson, 2011). Within the study,
students in the seminar started to spend more time on academics, had higher expectations
of themselves, and seemed to take ownership of their grades and communicated more
with their instructor. Given the sample size was small and that students in the seminar
course had a higher Perry intellectual score, the data may need further warranting. At
UMF the college does not necessarily design their seminars around retention, but rather
focus on the students needs holistically unlike many other colleges and universities. The
lack of focusing on the student holistically could be a reason why sophomore students are

SECOND YEAR STUDENTS

11

missing that piece as they exit their first year, never having been exposed to skills for
academic work and career exploration.
Burks, T. A., Barrett, T.G. (2009) Student characteristics and activity choices of college
freshman and their intent to persist in religiously affiliated institutions. Christian Higher
Education, 8(5), 351-392.
This study investigated 4,203 first year students from twenty-seven different religiously
affiliated institutions in the United States. This study looks at personal health, physical
health and other demographic variables in relations to first year students persistence into
sophomore year. Burks and Barrett find that there was no relationship between both men
and women when it came to personal health and physical health and persistence onto
sophomore year. It was also found that there was no significant difference between men
and women besides them overall being more persistent than women. This was interesting
because it didnt necessarily match any of our other research but it does prove that all
colleges and universities will need to find specific methods of retention for their own
institutions.
Although it does not look at second year students it gives us an insight on the retention
methods used for first year students and that will be helpful in drawing some conclusions
from the research. The relevant factors that improved retention included satisfaction with
academic advising, contact with faculty, satisfaction with orientation, and participation in
community service. It can also be useful in linking what methods are successful for first
year students and could work for sophomore students as well.

SECOND YEAR STUDENTS

12

Daempfle, P. A. (2003). An analysis of the high attrition rates among first year college science,
math, and engineering majors. Journal of College Student Retention: Research, Theory &
Practice, 5(1), 37-52.
Daempfle reviews literature relating to high attrition of first year science, math, and
engineering (SME) majors. Through his review, he concludes that factors of instructional
climate, and differing expectations between faculty and incoming students are more
likely to cause attrition than more commonly believed factors such as cognitive ability.
Daempfle reviewed other factors that may impact SME retention such as gender,
minority status, and personal contact with faculty. The review includes his
recommendations for improving SME undergraduate courses, which largely include
creating a more engaging and integrative classroom that is not focused solely on
acquisition of knowledge.
While this work by Daempfle appears to have looked at the literature on SME attrition in
a way that has better synthesized causal factors, this may not be concrete or up to date
enough for our project. If we were to use this work, we would need to find research
findings on the factors that he has found to have the most impact as well as see if there
has anything been done more recently (most likely using the term STEM instead of
SME). However, the general points are relevant to second-year students, because the
majority of students who switch out of SME majors do so after the first year, going into
their second year.
Fouburt, J. D., Grainger, L. U. (2006) Effects of involvement in clubs and organizations on the

SECOND YEAR STUDENTS

13

psychosocial development of first-year and senior college students. Journal of Student

Affairs Research and Practice, 43:1, 166-182.
In this study Fouburt and Grainger attempted to measure the effects of student
involvement in clubs and organizations in their psychosocial development. They begin
with a review of literature related to student involvement, including the commonly cited
work by Astin (1977, 1984). The measured psychosocial development is based on
Chickering and Reissers vectors (1993) and was measured using the Student
Development Task and Lifestyle Inventory (SDTI). The participants completed the SDTI
three times: once at the beginning of freshman year, at the beginning of sophomore year,
and at the end of senior year. The overall results showed a positive relationship between
student involvement and psychosocial development along Chickering and Reissers
vectors.
This study will be helpful to our research because it has targeted specific areas for growth
that student are experiencing moving into their sophomore year. However, this study
seems highly limited through the participating population. The majority of participants
were Caucasian, were at the top of their high school classes, and were from middle to
high income households. We will be able to use this for our study, but should keep in
mind these limitations.
Furr, S., & Gannaway, L.(1982). Easing the sophomore slump: a student development approach.
Journal of College Student Personnel. 23(7). P340-341.

SECOND YEAR STUDENTS

14

This article is empirical research. The authors explored the definition and causes that
resulted sophomore slump, and studied a transition workshop held at the University of
Texas in order to find an effective method to ease possible sophomore slumps. This
workshop constituted three phases: recognizing sophomore slump, discussing it, and
solving it. The participants admitted that this workshop helped them gain the knowledge
of sophomore slump and provided them with a problem-solving strategy.
This article was published in 1982, at that time there was little research on the topic of
sophomore slump. The researchers just began to study sophomore slump, and make a
basic definition of it. These authors simply described the workshop, but did not deeply
explore it. They did not address what the main factors affecting sophomore slump were,
what were the constructive methods easing sophomore slump. This is useful in in its
basic introduction of the concept, but did not provide in depth analysis.
Gibson, L. l. (2011). Student-directed learning: An exercise in student engagement. College
Teaching, 59(3), 95-101.
Change in power dynamic, and not granting students the opportunity to do whatever they
wish but giving them the opportunity to be a part of a process and provided them with a
sense of power is what will add value to the experiences students have. At a two year
university in the Midwest, sociology of aging was the class and was comprised of a small
sample of thirteen sophomore students in the classroom, this study explores one
professors initiative in getting sophomore students engaged in the learning process. When
students were asked to essentially create the classroom experience for the year. Many of

SECOND YEAR STUDENTS

15

the themes that came about from the respondents had to do with feelings of mattering,
worthiness, and self-efficacy. Many students coming into college are in the dualistic
mindset where they view the professor as the all-knowing authority figure, in the
development throughout college many opportunities are given to students to take
ownership and trust each other, gain knowledge from one another, and believe in their
capabilities. The author writes that one student says, The idea that you trust us is
awesome. We are adults. This study also reflected on the ways the process provided
students with opportunities to engage in the classroom. Sophomore students in the
classroom appreciated less autonomy and felt more engaged in learning within the
classroom if they were part of the decision making process versus having everything set
in stone for them prior. Based on the study, with having students take ownership of the
course syllabi, based on a one-year analysis from 2009 to 2010 when the study was done,
the absenteeism dropped tremendously from 16.4% to 5.6%, possibly signaling a relation
between engagement in student learning and being part of the process.
Goh, L., Swartz, J. & Donnelly, S., (2001). A case study of second year student persistence.
Journal of College Student Retention, 2(4), 271-294.
Student retention is usually a main focus for first year programs. Goh, Swartz, and
Donnelly discuss the importance of second year retention efforts. They did this by
discussing research done by a major university in the mid-south. The main findings
involved categories of students personal lives and commitment. The findings were
helpful in discovering some major factors that attributed to students staying past the
second year of college. The findings were that students who were well adjusted to stress,

SECOND YEAR STUDENTS

16

got good grades and had a stable career choice were the most likely to thrive and continue
their higher education.
This case study is relevant to our research because it outlines the reasons why students
either stay or leave colleges. It not only focuses on their personal attributes but it also
looks at external factors in their lives. By looking and focusing on students as a whole
this article brings light to other factors besides what the colleges are doing to keep
students. By seeing what struggles students face outside the college environment it can
help in figuring out what students need in order for them to stay.
Goodman, K. M. (2014). Good practices for whom? A vital question for understanding the first
year of college. New Directions for Institutional Research, 2013(160), 37-51.
Goodman used White students and African-American students to research the leadership
and psychological well-being outcome on the Good Teaching megascale and the
Academic Challenge megascale. The regressions used were: male, low family income,
first-generation status, high school ACT score, academic motivation, number of liberal
arts courses taken, pretest for the outcome and other scales (p.43). Goodman found that
many of the scales had different results for White males and African American males.
This research was helpful because it shows that different students learn and grow from
different models and what is successful for one group will not necessarily work for a
different group. Through the results of challenge being more helpful for African
American students and good teaching being more helpful for white students, we can see

SECOND YEAR STUDENTS

17

that the needs of different students within the second-year population should possibly be
addressed differently.
Graunke, S. S., & Woosley, S. A. (2005). An exploration of the factors that affect the
academic success of college sophomores. College Student Journal, 39(2), 367-376.
Student success has been of much discussion amongst different researchers. Some argue
that creating programs and intentional experiences for first year freshman is the most
important time for a student, while others argue the later levels of higher education are
more important. This study focused on sophomore student success and variables that
impacted the success of second year students in comparison to the first year experience.
The study mentioned that during the second year, many students are at a point in their
academic career where they need to choose a major; however, sophomores have the least
amount of support. This study pointed out the importance between the first year students
needs and needs that second year students may have in relation to student success and
retention. Many of the previous researchers have found that student involvement in
activities was not as an important factor to sophomore students than what has been
previously discussed (Wang, 2013). The study found that being committed to an
institution was not a strong of a predictor of being committed to the decision they made
in terms of their career choice. Another factor in relation to sophomore student success is
faculty interaction being a positive correlation. The study conducted analyzed different
characteristics that sophomore students exhibit in determining factors that will lead to
their success through a survey distributed to 2,259 sophomore students. Some of the
significant findings from the data include a positive correlation between sex, ethnicity,

SECOND YEAR STUDENTS

18

transfer status, and honors status with a students grade point average which in turn
created a stronger institutional commitment during the fall semester. This study looks at
the sophomore experience through an entire and separate lens than a progressive program
from the first year experience. This article aids in making a distinction between the first
and second year and notes that both populations have similar but separate needs.
Gump, S. (2007). Classroom Research in a General Education Course: Exploring Implications
through an Investigation of the Sophomore Slump. JGE: The Journal of General
Education, 56(2), p105-125.
In this article, Gump reviewed the history of the sophomore slump, provided a whole
picture of the theories development about sophomore slump, and defined the
characteristics of sophomore slumps including decreasing interest, declining grades,
increasing absences, and ultimately, dropping out altogether (Gump, 111). He examined
the pervasiveness of sophomore slump among the students enrolled in one general course
Introduction to Japanese Culture, and had two main interesting findings: not all
sophomore students exhibit sophomore slump tendencies, and lower grades and
increased absences are neither causes nor characteristic of the kind of sophomore slump
of the students (Gump, 116). He also pointed out that higher selectivity lowers
sophomore slump-related attrition by comparing the pervasiveness degree of sophomore
slump of different selectivity level higher institutions. Gump provided a different
perspective about the concept of sophomore slump. He raised the questions for future
study of whether sophomore slump exists in all the student population or not, and to what
extent sophomore slump affect the students academic performance and retention.

SECOND YEAR STUDENTS

19

Isakovski, T., Kruml, S. M., Bibb, J. F., & Benson, A. D. (2011). C-SCAPE: One business
schools answer to the sophomore slump. Academy of Educational Leadership Journal,
15(4), 17-33.
The first year experience for many students is filled with excitement, curiosity, and
exploration. However, during the second year for many students, it is a time of
uncertainty that can cause students to feel disconnected. The study addresses Millikan
Universities Tablar School of business Career-Scape (C-Scape) program, which provides
a comprehensive Integrated Course Design (ICD) for their students. The article mentions
that millennial students entering college may have different purposes than more
traditional students and many require a road map to success and expect constant support.
The purpose of the second year experience herein after referred to as C-Scape, is to create
a connection from which students feel connected to their plan of action and their goals in
choosing a career path. The framework in which the model was designed off of was
based on Finks work, which was obtained through the Blooms Taxonomy model. It
emphasized assessment, connection of learning goals, student activities, active
participation, and feedback. This article is relevant to the research being done on the
second year experience given and supports the main thesis of retention of sophomore
students by showcasing a three stage career and self-exploration plan that focuses on
understanding their personal values and skills, connecting those results to careers that
may be of high interest to the student, and by creating an action plan for an
implementation of intentional actions.
Kennedy-Phillips, L. C., & Uhrig, K. J. (2013). Measuring the second year transformational

SECOND YEAR STUDENTS

20

experience program (STEP) at The Ohio State University. New Directions for Student
Services, 142, 83-88.
The Ohio State University has a program that is directly related to measuring the
retention rates, student engagement and satisfaction of second year students. The program
is called Second-Year Transformational Experience Program or STEP. This article talks
about the program and was successful and unsuccessful about it. The Ohio State
University has four main goals that they use and apply to their research. They are
teaching and learning, outreach and engagement, resource stewardship, and research and
innovation. In their research they looked at the student life strategic focus areas and tried
to figure out where their efforts had an effect on students. Their findings talked about
their need to increase administrative effectiveness in order to solve many of their
problems with their four main goals. This was an important aspect of the article because
it is a problem many other universities face and there is no clear solution yet.
It is important to look at this article because it can give us a better idea of the types of
programming available to second year students. It will also give us a clear idea of how
schools are addressing the problem of second year students leaving college. This article
has a lot of important research as well as good starting points on how to think about
combatting the issue students leaving higher education institutions.
Koch, L. C., Mamiseishvili, K., & Higgins, K. (2014). Persistence to degree completion: A
profile of students with psychiatric disabilities in higher education. Journal Of Vocational
Rehabilitation, 40(1), 73-82.

SECOND YEAR STUDENTS

21

Kochm Mamiseishvili, and Higgins researched college students with psychiatric

disabilities to examine their persistence rates and characteristics. They found that students
with psychiatric disabilities are enrolling at colleges and universities at an increased rate.
They believe it may be even more than they had recorded due to students not self
disclosing their psychiatric disability due to the stigma it is associated with and the fear
of disclosing it. The research found that the retention rate of both first and second year
students with psychiatric disabilities was very similar (77 and 76 percent).
This research is important to look at when researching second year students and their
supposed slump because colleges and universities will be enrolling more and more
students with different types of needs and support services. Many of the research we have
obtained talks about the different need of each different type of institution but this one
was of great importance because student with psychiatric disabilities can affect any
school and most likely will.
Litzler, E., Young, J. (2012). Understanding the risk of attrition in undergraduate engineering:
Results from the project to assess climate in engineering. Journal of Engineering
Education, 101: 2, 319-345.
Litzler and Young begin their examination of climate as a possible reason for attrition by
examining the literature. The literature on engineering education and attrition indicates
that there are both individual characteristics and student experiences that can affect a
students likelihood to persist in engineering. This study is based on over 10,000
undergraduate student responses to the Project to Assess Climate in Engineering (PACE)

SECOND YEAR STUDENTS

22

study. Some of the variables measured included intent to complete an engineering

degree, employment status, class standing, and community and peer interaction.
The results demonstrated different risk levels for attrition among many factors including
race and ethnicity, and class standing. In the third model of their data analysis (includes
perceptions and experiences), freshman students are the most likely to be at risk,
followed by sophomores. While the higher risk is with first year students, the statistically
significant result of having a level of risk for attrition in the second year is particularly
relevant for our work. In addition, this study based on engineering students is well paired
with the work done by Meyer and Marx (2014).
Longerbeam, S. D., Sedlacek, W. E. (2006) Attitudes toward diversity and living-learning
outcomes among first- and second-year college students. Journal of Student Affairs
Research and Practice, 43:1, 40-55.
Longerbeam and Sedlacek compared students in a living-learning program based on civic
engagement with other undergraduate students to determine possible effects on their
attitudes toward diversity. In their review of the literature, the authors discuss both the
research on student comfort with diversity and on living-learning communities. Each
group was surveyed based on questions designed by the authors during three different
time periods: before matriculation, after the first semester, and after the third semester.
Some of the limitations to this study include the survey methods and uneven sample sizes
as noted by the authors. However, the results that are of interest showed that during the
first two years of college, some students may experience more negative attitudes towards

SECOND YEAR STUDENTS

23

diversity. The other results of the study were not statistically significant and the authors
did not show a relationship between their selected civic engagement living-learning
community and attitudes towards diversity. For the purposes of our work, we will most
likely solely use the indication
Margolis, G. (1976). Unslumping our sophomores: Some clinical observations and strategies.
Journal of American College Health. 25, 133-136.
This article discussed sophomore slump from a psychological perspective. The author
thought sophomore slump is too stereotypical, which actually would happen in any
stage of college life. Based on the authors former clinical counseling experiences, the
author concluded that sophomore slump was an identity crisis of college students, and
could happen in any stage of college life not only limited in sophomore year, and it was
caused by the following reasons: students ability cant catch up with the higher
expectation in academic and social life; lose peers support because of the change of
dormitory; sophomore students introspection towards college life, but lack of support to
cope with these problems. Aimed at those sophomore causes, the author raised counseling
strategies.
Even though this article published in 1976, it still valuable for its exploration in
sophomore slump formation from psychological perspective. Its detailed description
about sophomores psychological changing helped us gain better understanding about
sophomore slump. However, all of the authors discussion was based on description of
counseling experience, lack of deeper comparative research.

SECOND YEAR STUDENTS

24

Meyer, M. and Marx, S. (2014), Engineering dropouts: A qualitative examination of why

undergraduates leave engineering. Journal of Engineering Education, 103: 525548.
Meyer and Marx conducted a study to examine undergraduate attrition in
engineering. The authors begin with a review of quantitative literature attrition in
undergraduate programs and engineering but note that this study is being conducted to get
more insight on individual reasoning for leaving engineering programs. The participants
were eight individuals who left engineering programs their sophomore year. Four out of
the eight were able to give the researchers detailed accounts that were provided. Thus
while these accounts are very informative, a limitation of the study is the small sample
size. The main themes extracted from these accounts were divided into individual and
institutional factors. All of the four participants cited issues of poor academic
performance, inadequate advising, and feeling overwhelmed as some of their reasons for
leaving.
This research will be helpful to our project, as it deals with attrition specifically in the
sophomore year. Furthermore, it provides information regarding a specific type of
program that may have a higher attrition rate. The small sample size prohibits us from
using this research broadly, but does give examples of possible issues that students may
experience in an engineering program.
Reyes, M. (2011). Research, theory: A sophomore-to-junior mentoring program that works: The
SAM program at the University of Texas Pan American. J. College Student Retention,
13(3), 373-382

SECOND YEAR STUDENTS

25

The author introduced the background and development of Sophomore Academic

Mentoring (SAM) Program at the University of Texas Pan American (UTPA). Even
though not all college students exhibit sophomore slump tendencies(Gump, 2007),
through analyzing the background of UTPA as a Hispanic serving institution, most of
students of UOPA are first generation college-going and from low SES Hispanic family,
the author concluded that the above elements make the students of UTPA are more
vulnerable to be exposed to sophomore slump. The SAM Program aimed to improve the
retention rate of sophomore-to-junior which was effective: retention rate increased from
46.1% in 1998 to 62.6% in 2010. This programs strategy is to assist students in
improving their academic skills and performance in college courses, and to assist students
in preparing for and adapting to college life. The author also found that pairing mentees
with mentors by area of study was especially effective. This article exhibited the
effectiveness of peer mentoring in erasing sophomore slump, which can be employed as a
tool in other institutions.
This article pointed out that sophomore slump maybe not a common phenomenon of
every college student. What made sophomore slump happened maybe the overlapping
identities like low SES, first generation, or minority status.
Rigali-Oiler, M. R. (2013). Promoting academic persistence among racial/ethnic minority and
European American freshman and sophomore undergraduates: Implications for college
counselors. Journal of College Counseling, 16(3), 198-212.

SECOND YEAR STUDENTS

26

This article looks at the differences between different groups of students. It focuses on
how their differences in racial/ethnic identity, self-beliefs, perceptions of their school
environment, and academic decisions differ depending on their individual wants and
needs. This article researches all types of students and how their individual environments
and self-beliefs affect their college experience. Rigali-Oiler hypothesized specific
outcomes between male/female students, REM students and European American
students. His research found group differences were evident but they were not for the
original reasons hypothesized. He found that different students have different needs and
additional research needs to be done to fix this problem.
This study is important for our research because a main focus on this research was
retention of first and second year students. This is helpful because it can help us compare
findings with other research on retention of both first and second year students. This will
help us compare the programs and statistics in our paper if we chose to do so.
Robertson, L. J., & Taylor, C. A. (2009). Student persistence in the human sciences: Freshman
to sophomore year. Journal Of Family And Consumer Sciences, 101(1), 36-43.
Robertson and Taylor researched persistence of students before entering college and how
that influenced their success in college. This research was done to improve retention in
first year students at the college of human environmental sciences at a midwestern land
grant university. The findings were that age, composite ACT score, high school GPA,
academic confidence, desire to finish and other personal character traits determined
whether or not a student would persist and stay at the institution they choose to attend.

SECOND YEAR STUDENTS

27

This research is helpful in showing that outside influences before even entering a college
can affect whether or not they are going to succeed. Although our research is primarily
focussed on second year students it is important to be informed on the research pertaining
to first year students and how that first year matters in keeping them their second year
and forward.
Robinson, R. R., & McDonald, J. E. (2014). Developing skills in second year biological science
undergraduates. Bioscience Education Electronic Journal, 22(1), 42-53.
Robinson and McDonald look into developing the skills of biological science
undergraduates and if it has an affect on student engagement. This research took place
over three years and used a twenty credit Bioscience Skills model to attract and
research the student participants. The aims of this module was to develop critical
thinking, literacy and communication, creative thinking and other skills critical in making
students successful in this program. This program was interesting because all of the skills
taught were valuable to any college major. The findings of this program were that even
with discrepancies between the skills expected and those exhibited they found that the
students improved throughout the program.
The research done throughout this program could be really influential in helping retain
students of any program. The individualized attention the students received was
positively recognized and the frequent assessments and demand for their time was
challenging but the participants followed through. The end outcome was that the students
felt empowered to take responsibility for their own academics and knew that support was

SECOND YEAR STUDENTS

28

available to them. It would be interesting to do this same research for all academic
programs across a campus and see the results and see if their is a direct impact on
retention specifically after students second year.
Sanchez-Leguelinel, C. (2008). Supporting slumping sophomores: Programmatic peer
initiatives designed to enhance retention in the crucial second year of college. College
Student Journal.
Based on their literature review, the authors tried to conclude the factors contributing to
sophomore slump: sophomore students challenges in achieving competence, developing
autonomy, establishing identity, and developing purpose (Lemons and Richmond (1987,
developmental perspective); curtailed resource and supporting for sophomore students;
attempting to commit to a major; struggling with intensified curriculum and increasingly
difficult coursework; higher expectation to learning outcomes. Through analysis these
factors, the author assumed that advisement is the most important variable for retention
of second year students(p639). The author described and evaluated peer-counseling
program held at Jay College of Criminal Justice. The author built a two-factor orthogonal
model to analyze the influences of the program, especially the influence on enhancing
retention of sophomores. Even though the author found that the sophomores have higher
satisfaction towards mandatory peer counselor advisement than optional services and
activities (p644), there is no evidence to prove that the increasing retention rate linked
with Sophomore Peer Counseling Program.

SECOND YEAR STUDENTS

29

This article sorted out the factors leading to sophomore slump, and proved that peer
counseling program has direct influence to increasing satisfaction of sophomore students.
Its limitation is that the participants were volunteers and only came from one institution;
it still needs to do further research to make sure the reliability of the outcome.
Schaller, M., Wagner, R. (2007). Indecision and an avalanche of expectations: challenges facing
sophomore resident assistants. NASPA Journal, 44(1), 32-56.
This article is an extended research of Schaller (2005)s article Wandering and
Wondering: Traversing The Uneven Terrain of The Second College Year, in which stated
sophomore slump is a development period constituted by four stages( random
exploration, focused exploration, tentative choices, and commitment). This article
narrowed its research population to sophomore resident assistants. Based on two year
interview of total 11 sophomore resident assistants, the authors analyzed sophomore RAs
perception and decision in the aspects of academic major, relationships, self; analyzed
these RAs academic and social challenges, contradiction between new friendship and old
friendship, confrontations from residents. The finding is the echo of Schaller (2005), and
it urge student affairs professionals design a supportive environment for sophomore
leaders, to aid in their development toward becoming self-authored, healthy, and
positive contributing members of society.
This article is empirical research of sophomore development theory, and focusing on
specific sophomore population explicitly, which made the research meaningful to employ

SECOND YEAR STUDENTS

30

in our work. However, it is not easy to generalize the research outcomes to the whole
sophomore population.
Tobolowsky, B. F. (2008). Sophomores in transition: The forgotten year. New Directions For
Higher Education, (144), 59-67.
The second year experience has generated much conversation throughout the years and
private campuses developing four years plans for their students initiated the initial
conversations. During that time, an in depth look at the second year experience was taken
a look at to analyze the challenges that many of these students faced. Colleges and
universities were made aware of a problem associated with second year students and their
retention. In comparison to the other four years, the article mentions that these students
drop out at a higher rate in comparison to other grade levels. The research conducted for
this study was the development a survey to measure sophomore students participation
and involvement in a scope of different activities. Many students felt invisible on
campus and lacked support from personnel on campus. The second year is a tough and
important year for sophomores who have to declare a major, participate in experiential
service learning, or are confused about career exploration. The article will be useful
because it highlights many of the struggles that sophomore students face in their second
year and links those issues with retention. The study goes on further to list
recommendations of how to implement a successful program to support many of the
complex situations that second year students will face.
Vuong, M., Brown-Welty, S., & Tracz, S. (2010). The effects of self-efficacy on academic

SECOND YEAR STUDENTS

31

success of first-generation college sophomore students. Journal of College Student

Development. 51(1), 50-64.
Vuong, et al. conducted a survey with students in the California state university system to
measure the effects of self-efficacy on GPA and persistence rates of first-generation
sophomore students. The results of the survey demonstrated that generational status did
not have an impact on self-efficacy. However, the results also showed that for all
sophomores surveyed, self-efficacy had a positive relationship with GPA and academic
persistence.
While the researchers did not reach the goals of this study, the data provides information
on the effects of self-efficacy for sophomore students in general. This research will most
likely not be very helpful for our project, but the result that is the most relevant is the
effects of self-efficacy on academic persistence. We will most likely be focusing on
sophomore retention, which is related to this relationship. Also, academic performance
persistence as used by Vuong, et al., relates to the concepts of the sophomore slump
discussed by Kennedy and Upcroft (2010).
Wang, X. & Kennedy-Phillips, L.(2013). Focusing on the sophomores: characteristics
associated with the academic and social involvement of second-year college students.
Journal of College Student Development. 54(5), 541-548.
The research from this article discusses research done by Tinto and concludes that
institutional commitment is a strong predictor for overall student success during the
second year. In line with previous research, this article discusses the importance of

SECOND YEAR STUDENTS

32

having a sense a belonging that will continue to keep second year students committed and
engaged with academic related work. The research in this article discusses different
demographics such as African American students being more involved with the social
aspect of collegiate life (faculty, advisors and peers) and Asian American students less.
This article focuses heavily on commitment between the sophomores and institutions and
addresses the need for colleges and universities to create intentional second year
experiences for students to allow them to be engaged and develop the needs that are
different than first year freshman. Within the second year experience research analyzed,
research points to creating positions and programs that highlight the diversity within this
population and addressing the needs of students to be more involved in hopes of making
them feel more connected to succeed.
Wernersbach, B. M., Crowley, S. S., Bates, S. C., & Rosenthal, C. (2014). Study skills course
impact on academic self-efficacy. Journal Of Developmental Education, 37(3), 14-33.
This study focuses on study skills courses overall in improving the retention through the
lens of self-efficacy. Self-efficacy has been in researched to conclude that ones belief in
his or her self is a contributor to success in college. Bandura (1989) defined self-efficacy
as a persons ability to measure how different factors motivate a person to be successful.
Literature has concluded that characteristics of students such as their sex, race, financial
and income status are all factors that impact persistence in an academic setting. The more
self-efficacy, which is similar to confidence in the context of this article one, has the more
likely they will persist to finding a successful outcome. In one study, self-efficacy was
not a predictor for retention during the following year (sophomore year). This study

SECOND YEAR STUDENTS

33

focused on a comparison of a SAS course with a GP (General Psychology) course to

measure the relationship between self-efficacy to successful academic completion. In an
analysis of self-efficacy, research has concluded that academic self-efficacy for
underprepared students increased over the course of a semester compared to their
comparison group in the psychology course. In one of the measurements, self-efficacy
for learning and performance scale at posttest with academically underprepared students
scoring higher than comparison students indicated that being a participant in the SAS
course did improve the self-efficacy of these students. Other results from the study
indicated that students enrolled in such course using the variable t (time) concluded that
they developed more self-efficacy than the comparison group (author, date). Providing
students with the means to be academically successful include providing resources on
campus that enable their behavior and cognitive thinking, our researchers suggest the
best way for students to believe that they can be successful is to demonstrate that success
to themselves (Wernerbach et. al, 23).
Whitt, E. J., Edison, M. I., Pascarella, E. T., Terenzini, P. T., & Nora, A. (2001). Influences on
students' openness to diversity and challenge in the second and third years of
college. Journal of Higher Education, 72(2), 172-204.
The impact of students openness to diversity and challenge in both the second and third
years of college is import for our study because it can help determine how open students
are to change and acceptance during their time at colleges and universities. The
researchers studied the wide range of college experiences including their environment,
academics and nonacademic across three years of college and tracked any changes on

SECOND YEAR STUDENTS

34

their attitudes about race and other aspects of diversity. A major challenge the researches
had was having student talk about some of their serious race questions. Their findings
were that many students displayed a tolerance of diversity but did not have an acceptance
of it. The research also found that there was a lot of negative stigma associated with
talking about diversity so it made many students uncomfortable. This information is
important for our research because it brings about another layer of reasons some students
dont stay in school or thrive in school during their sophomore year.

SECOND YEAR STUDENTS

35
Interview Summary

Second year students are often a forgotten population despite the possible challenges they
may face after the first year. In order to gain more insight into the experiences of second-year
students, we conducted four interviews with current second semester sophomores. The
information gained from these interviews can be compared to current literature on sophomore
students in order to evaluate possible areas for further research and exploration. This summary
will present the interview methods, data analysis, and research limitations.
Methods
This study involves four current second-year college students currently attending two
four-year public institutions in New York were surveyed. One of the two institutions is a
research-intensive institution, and the other is a primarily undergraduate college with some
Masters programs. The participants were contacted based on researcher knowledge of this
population at their respective institutions. In addition, did not use the term sophomore
specifically because of the related connotations at some institutions in regards to credit hours.
Therefore, each of the participants is a second-year student because he or she has been enrolled
at college or university for two consecutive academic years. Two of the participants identify as
male, and the other two identify as female. Three out of the four students currently has a
declared major. Each student was interviewed using the pre-determined interview protocol (see
page x). General themes within the interview questions include course or major decisions, issues
of retention, and campus involvement. Each interview lasted approximately 30-45 minutes and
was the responses were noted in written form. Participants were given the option to ask questions
of the interviewers at the beginning and end of each session. The identities of the respondents
will remain anonymous. To this end, the names used to distinguish their responses are Jill,

SECOND YEAR STUDENTS

36

Ethan, Rita, and Mark. Jill is a history major, Ethan was recently accepted into a nursing
program, Rita is intended psychology, and Mark is a double major in civil and environmental
engineering. The data analysis is comprised of similarities across the participant responses as
well as notable differences among them.
Data Analysis
Based on the participant responses, three main themes emerge from their experience as
sophomore students: academic challenges, change in academic and career plans, and connections
to campus. At this point in their college careers, each of the four participants has faced some
difficulty in regards academics. All four have considered resigning, withdrawing from, or
dropping a course, and Jill is the only student out of the four that has failed a course. Also while
each of the students has faced challenges academically at this point, these challenges were
different depending on their individual characteristics. For example, Ethan faced difficulty in the
second semester of his first year with one course in particular that was required as a prerequisite
for the nursing program he was trying to get into. He also considered resigning a course that was
a general education requirement that by mid-semester he thought he wasnt getting an A. Rita
faced some difficulty in the physical therapy program she was enrolled in during her first
semester. Her main struggle with academics is finding a balance between her courses and
involvement on campus. Since changing programs, she has still considered resigning a couple
courses but has not done so. Jill has had difficulty with courses in her previous major, history
education, and dropped that major based on her poor grades. She is tenuous about how she is
going to proceed, saying, I am kind of lost in like what I am going to do if this doesn't work
out." On the other hand, Mark faced some difficulty during his first semester, but because the
class he was considering resigning was required, he stated, Resigning wouldnt help me. I

SECOND YEAR STUDENTS

37

chose to keep going because it was a challenge. His description of his academic challenges
were also slightly different in that he considered his main challenge is to raise his GPA to a level
that he has defined for himself based on his future goals. A large amount of his current credits
are from credits he took at his current institution during high school, therefore they are counting
towards his GPA. He is considering repeating some of these courses to raise his GPA.
In regards to a change in academic or career plans from their first to second years, each
of the four participants expressed some level of change, although the level was different for each.
In addition, most of these changes were related to formal processes such as a change in major.
For Jill, her apparent level of change is involved with the choice to change her major from
history education to just history after facing some difficultly in her required classes for her first
major. Ethan began his time at college as an undecided student, but has plans to go into
healthcare. He began exploring nursing and during his second year was accepted into the
nursing program at his university. Rita has begun her second year with a different intended
major, and it is important to note that her second year is her first year at her current university.
She began at a different intuition, then spent a semester undecided at a community college,
which helped her figure out what she wanted to do and informed her decision to pursue an
intended psychology major at her current institution. During the end of his first year, Mark
added a second major, but in regards to a change in his second year, his overall plans have
stayed the same since first year, but have become more defined. Theyve clarified into wanting
going to grad school and becoming a research professor. Therefore, while Marks change
appears to be subtle in that it did not include a formal academic change, these goals are new to
him for his second year and are affecting his behavior within the university.

SECOND YEAR STUDENTS

38

One final theme of connections to campus can be seen from the participant responses.
The principle similarity is that each of the four respondents said that they feel connected to their
respective campuses. However, the ways in which they feel connected and the degree of that
feeling varied with each of them. Mark expressed the most ways in which he felt connected to
campus among the four participants. He is a Resident Advisor in an on-campus residence hall,
has participated in a study abroad program, is in the Honors College, and does research with one
of his faculty mentors. The most significant of these connections is his research position which
is feels he is extremely lucky to have as a second-year student. In contrast, while Jill feels
connected to her campus, it is mostly because of [her] friends. Despite Rita feeling lost as a
transfer student, she discussed some connection to campus through faculty and a special interest
area seminar that she took, as well as a lot of student organizations that she is involved in. She
enjoys a lot of club events that she attends, and feels like she always has someone to go do
something with like get coffee or go to dinner. Finally, while Ethan expressed that his
experience at his campus has been overall good because of his acceptance into his new major,
which was highly selective, and because he is satisfied with his social life. He is not involved in
any clubs or organizations, but seemed to find his connection to the campus to be through his
new academic program.
While differences within the three themes have been discussed there is one additional
significant difference across the four students responses is in regards to how each of them
defined success (pertaining to their lives as second-year students). While Ethan expressed that
he feels that success is related to the skills that he gets out of his time in college, Rita believes
that success for her is finding a balance between her academics and her campus involvement.
Jill believes that success is being successful academically, and receiving good grades. However,

SECOND YEAR STUDENTS

39

because of this she also noted that she does not feel very successful. Mark defined success for
himself as setting himself up for a good graduate school placement and to publish a research
paper before he finishes his undergraduate work. He also has taken this concept a step further
than the other participants and explained his plan to be successful through planning to be an
undergraduate for five years in order to have a GPA that will help him get into a competitive
graduate program. During his second year he has tried to be more successful by creating the goal
of excelling at classes rather than just trying to get by. This was transition for him moving from
high school to freshman year and now into his core classes for his majors.
Limitations
This survey has several limitations based on sample size, diversity of participants, and
institution type. The sample size of four participants is relatively small compared to the number
of second-year students at their respective institutions. Therefore, while the responses in this
study provide solid examples of what second-year students may be experiencing, this data cannot
be generalized for the overall second-year population within New York, or the United States.
This corresponds to the limitation of the participants currently attending public institutions in
New York State. It is unknown if students at public institutions elsewhere, or at private
institutions would have similar or different experiences. In addition, participants were not asked
to provide any aspects of their social identity characteristics aside from gender. Therefore, it is
unknown what the diversity of the participants is in regards to categories such as race/ethnicity,
sexual orientation, and socioeconomic status. In addition, the students were surveyed in the
second semester of their second year. More extensive research could collect data at multiple
points during the first and second years to then compare to the near end of the second year.
Conclusions

SECOND YEAR STUDENTS

40

Despite the limitations involved in these interviews, each student account provided
information about issues and experiences of second-year students. Jill, Ethan, Rita, and Mark
each defined success differently in regards to their lives as students, but had each experienced
some level of academic difficulty, change in academic or career plans, and developing a
connection to the campus. The ways in which they had experienced these three themes varied
among them, possibly due to differences in academic major, supports and involvement on
campus, and high school preparation. These interview results are relevant to our overall research
on second-year students, especially in regards to our comparison of these results to previous
research.

SECOND YEAR STUDENTS

41
Protocol

Introductions
Hello, thank you for agreeing to be a part of my undergraduate student interviews for a
class project in my graduate program. My name is (instert name) and I am a (insert degree)
student at UB. I am interested in hearing your thoughts about your experiences as a second-year
student.
Ground Rules
Before we begin, let me mention a few things about how we are conducing our
interviews. My role s the interviewer is to listen to your experiences and ask questions to further
understand what you are saying. It is important to note that there are no right or wrong answers.
Your experiences and opinions are valid, and we want to hear your genuine responses to our
questions. Also feel free to ask questions to clarify if we ask anything that you are unclear about.
Lets begin.
Questions
1. Do you have a declared major? Or an intended major?
2. How confident are you in that major and why?
3. What has informed your decision to declare that major? (If not yet declared, what is
impacting your decision process?)
4. Have your academic or career plans changed between your first and second years?
5. How would you define success in regards to your life as a student? (What does the phrase
student success mean to you?)
6. What resources at (institution) do you currently use to improve your experience?
7. What clubs or activities have you been involved with during your first two years? Which
ones do you hope to be involved with during the next two years?
8. What is one thing you have found to be rewarding in your time on campus thus far?
9. What one thing has been difficult or challenging?
10. Have you ever considered dropping or resigning a class?
11. Did you participate in a freshman seminar course? What was it like?

SECOND YEAR STUDENTS

42

12. Comment on your first two years at (institution). Are you happy or unhappy about your
experiences? Consider academics, social life, etc.
13. Is there anything you can distinguish as being unique to being a second year or
sophomore?
14. In general, what are you looking forward to in the next two years?
15. Is there anything weve missed? Anything else we should know?