RunningHead:ALEXANDERASTINSSTUDENTINVOLVEMENTTHEORY 1

Alexander Astins Student Involvement Theory

Damienne C. Souter

Northern Illinois University

CAHE 522

September 2016
ALEXANDERASTINSSTUDENTINVOLVEMENTTHEORY 2

Introduction

ThepurposeofthispaperistodiscussAlexanderAstinsStudentInvolvementTheory,

whichhedevelopedin1984.Theroleoftheinvolvementtheoryisthatitfacilitatesdevelopment

ofthestudent.AccordingtoRennandReason(2013),whiletraditionalmodelsofstudent

developmenttheorydescribeaprocessthatmovesastudentfromlesscomplextomorecomplex

waysofbeing,knowing,anddoing,Astinsstudentinvolvementtheoryisbehaviorbased.As

RennandReason(2013)described,studentslearnanddevelopinaccordancewiththeir

involvementineducationallymeaningfulactivities(p.116).Itanswersthequestionofhowa

studentmovesfromonedevelopmentalstagetoanother.Studentsadvancebasedontheirvarious

involvementsandinteractionsinthecollegeenvironment.

OverviewoftheTheory

DevelopedbyAlexanderAstinandfirstpublishedin1984,thistheorybringstolightthe

notionthatthemoreinvolvedastudentbecomesinhisorhereducationalendeavors,thegreater

chancethatthestudentwillpersistthroughhisorhercollegeprogramandgraduatewitha

degree.Thistheoryismadeupoffivebasicpostulates:

1. Involvementreferstothephysicalandpsychologicalenergyinvariousobjects(ie

thegeneralstudentexperience,studyingforaparticularexam,etc.).
2. Regardlessofitsobject,involvementoccursalongacontinuum;differentstudents

utilizedifferentdegreesofinvolvementindifferentobjectsatdifferenttimes.
3. Involvementhasbothquantitativeandqualitativefeatures.Forexample,astudent

mayspendxnumberofhoursstudying,andthequalityofthatstudyingcanvary.
4. Theamountofstudentlearningandpersonaldevelopmentinaprogramisdirectly

proportionaltothestudentsinvolvementinthatprogram.
ALEXANDERASTINSSTUDENTINVOLVEMENTTHEORY 3

5. Theeffectivenessofanyeducationalpolicyorpracticeisdirectlyrelatedtothe

capacityofthatpolicytoincreasestudentinvolvement(Astin,1984,p.519).

Putintocontext,thetheoryofstudentinvolvementencourageseducatorstofocusless

onwhattheydoandmoreonwhatthestudentdoes(Astin,1999,p.522).Oneoftheprimary

limitingfactorsisastudentstime.Accordingly,theextenttowhichstudentscanachieve

particulardevelopmentalgoalsisadirectfunctionofthetimeandefforttheydevotetoactivities

designedtoproducethesegains(Astin,1999,p.522).Collegesandeducatorsmake

opportunitiesavailableforstudentstobecomeinvolvedandmakedevelopmentalstrides.These

involvementopportunitiesincludeparticipationinstudentorganizations,fraternitiesand

sororities,campusspecialevents,andotheractivitiesthatencouragestudentinteractionswith

fellowstudentsandperhapsfacultymembersoutsideoftheclassroom.Theseinteractionshelp

enrichthecollegeexperienceandbuildconnectionswiththecampuscommunity,thereby

facilitatingpersistence.Butinstitutionsandfacultymustbeawarethattimeandenergyof

studentsisfiniteandmustbebalancedappropriately.Toomanyopportunitiesforinvolvement

erodesthetimeandenergyneededforeffectivestudying.

StudentInvolvementinPartTimeJobs

Inhisnarrativeofhistheory,Astinnotesthatoneofthewaysstudentscanengageand

becomeinvolvedisthroughaparttimejob,preferablyoncampus,wherethereisagreater

potentialforinteractionwithstudents,andhencegreaterconnectionwiththecollege

environment.AsreportedbyPike,Kue,andMassaMcKinley(2009),nationaldataindicatesthat
ALEXANDERASTINSSTUDENTINVOLVEMENTTHEORY 4

68%ofallcollegestudentsworkforpayduringtheacademicyear,andonethirdofthese

studentsworkmorethan20hoursperweek.

Studies

AscitedbyKuh(2009),Astin(1993),andPascarella&Terenzini(2005)foundthatfull

timestudentswhoworkedoncampusforuptotenhoursperweekhadslightlyhigherself

reportedgrades,whilethosewhoworkedmorethan20hourshadslightlylowergrades;thelatter

wasalsofoundtobethecasebyPike,Kuh,andMassaMcKinley(2009).Intheirstudythat

measuredtherelationshipbetweenthenumberofhoursastudentworkedandhis/her

correspondingselfreportedgrades,theyperformedextensivestatisticalanalysisfrom55,184

firstyearstudentsfrom392fouryearcollegesanduniversities.Theyalsofoundapositive

correlationbetweenhighergradesandworkinglessthan20hoursperweek.Further,theyfound

thatthisalsofueledpersistence,whereasstudentswhoworkedmorethan20hoursperweek

foundthattheylackedsupportfromtheinstitution(Pike,Kuh,&MassaMcKinley,2009).

Implications

Basedonthepremiseofthistheoryandthestudiesdonethatverifyit,studentaffairs

professionalsshouldcontinuetomakestudentjobsavailable,particularlytofirstyearstudents.

Theyshouldalsobemindfulofthenumbersofhoursworkedbyeachstudent,inordertohelp

ensurestudentsuccessintheclassroomandthus,higherratesofpersistence.

Thisapproachtoinvolvementintheformofparttimeworkoncampushastheadditional

benefitfortraditionalagecollegestudentsinthatitalsodevelopstheirskillsandreadinessfor

fulltimeemploymentupongraduation.AccordingtoHearin(2013),relativetotheultimategoal

ofattainingafulltimejobupongraduation,thereareseveraladditionalwaysthatcollegesand
ALEXANDERASTINSSTUDENTINVOLVEMENTTHEORY 5

facultycanfacilitatestudentinvolvementintheirdevelopmentofcareerrelatedknowledgeand

skills.Thisincludesoncampusparttimejobs,participationincareerrelatedstudent

organizations,andexperientialeducation(Hearin,2013).

CritiqueoftheTheory

Whilewidelyacceptedthatthistheoryhassignificantrelevancetotodaystraditional

collegestudentswhoaretransitioningfromhighschooltothehighereducationenvironment,it

doesnothavemuchrelevancetonontraditionalstudents,namelythosewhoarereturningto

highereducationaftersomeyearsasfulltimeemployees.Typically,thesestudentsdonotlive

oncampus.Theyhavefulltimejobsandattendcollegeonaparttimebasis.Assuch,theyare

limitedintheirabilitytobecomeinvolvedoncampus,andcanbehighlysuccessfulwithoutthe

additionalinvolvement,astheirmotivatorsandconstraintsaremarkedlydifferentfromtheir

traditionalagedcounterparts.

NewChallengesfortheTheory

Duringrecentyears,studenthabitshavebeenchangingduetotheproliferationofhand

heldtechnology.Thisaffectshowtheylearn,howtheyinteract,andevenwheretheylearn.Astin

(2012)describesthecurrentstateofstudentinvolvement:

Elearningandalotofproprietarycollegeshavedetractedconsiderablyfromthe

opportunitiesthatstudentshaveforthetraditionaltypeofengagement.Inthatsense,

engagementhasdeclined.Also,Ithinktechnologyhasservedthesamefunctionof

keepingstudentsphysicallyseparatefromeachother,withtheirnosesintheircellphones

orcomputers.(Q&AwithAstin,2012)
ALEXANDERASTINSSTUDENTINVOLVEMENTTHEORY 6

Whilethegrowthofsocialmediahasimpactedstudentshabits,itcontinuestoimpacthow

institutionseffectivelycommunicatewithstudentsandseektocontinuetoengagetheminan

efforttohelpensuretheirpersistenceandsuccess.
ALEXANDERASTINSSTUDENTINVOLVEMENTTHEORY 7

References

Astin,A.W.(1999)StudentInvolvement:ADevelopmentalTheoryforHigherEducation.

JournalofCollegeStudentDevelopment,40(5),pp.518529.(Originalworkpublished

1984)

Hearin,R.(2013)FacultyPartnerships:CriticalEnablersandKeyAlliances.InE.

Contomanolis&T.Steinfeld(Eds.),LeadershipinCareerServices:Voicesfromthe

Field.(pp.6773).Charleston,SC.

Kuh,G.D.(2009)WhatStudentAffairsProfessionalsNeedtoKnowAboutStudent

Engagement.JournalofCollegeStudentDevelopment,50(6),pp.683706.

Pike,G.R.,Kuh,G.D.,MassaMcKinley,R.C.(2009)FirstYearStudentsEmployment,

Engagement,andAcademicAchievement:UntanglingtheRelationshipbetweenWork

andGrades.NASPAJournal,45(4),pp.560577.

Q&AwithAlexanderAstin.(2012,July).TheBulletin,publishedbytheAssociationofCollege

UnionsInternational.Retrievedfrom

https://www.acui.org/Publications/The_Bulletin/2012/201207/18393/

Renn,K.A.,Reason,R.D.(2013)CollegeStudentsintheUnitedStates:Characteristics,

ExperiencesandOutcomes.SanFrancisco:JosseyBass.