NASPA JOURNAL, VOL. 31, No.

4, SUMMER 1994

The Effect of College

Activities and Grades on
Job Placement Potential
Donald D. Albrecht, D. Stanley Carpenter,
and Stephen A. Sivo

The authors present results of a study examining the impact of grades and
student activities involvement on recruiter preferences in business, education,
and engineering.

Most colleges and universities have as a goal the development of the "whole
person." This is often couched in twin ideals: to provide students a liberal
education and to prepare them for vocations and professions (Voien &
Hughes, 1983). If such a goal exists, then university personnel should assist
students in learning not only how to make a living, but also how to make
meaning from their experiences. A student development approach to what Litt
(1984) called "life-work planning" would provide students opportunities to
acquire all the skills necessary for success both on and off the job. Student
affairs professionals and other university personnel, therefore, encourage
students to be involved in extracurricular activities, in addition to making good
grades. Astin (1984) put it this way: "The greater the student's involvement in
college, the greater will be the amount of student learning and personal
development" (p. 307).
Boyer (1987) reported, however, that the main reasons students attend
college, in rank order, are: (a) to have a more satisfying career, (b) to prepare
for a specific occupation, and (c) to get a better job. Such a utilitarian

Donald D. Albrecht, Dean of Student Services, West Texas A&M University, Canyon,
TX 79016-0001. D. Stanley Carpenter, Associate Professor of Educational Administration,
Texas A&M University, College Station, TX 77843-4226. Stephen A. Sivo, Doctoral Student,
Texas A&M University, College Station, TX 77843.

290
 ALBRECHT, CARPENTER, SIVO

philosophy may conflict with the student affairs goal of developing the whole
person if students do not recognize the relationship between the two. Boyer
(1987), Golden and Provost (1987), and Levine (1983) have described
contemporary students as more practical, career-oriented, me-oriented,
competitive, self~oncemed, and interested in money. While some criticize
such motives,' virtuhllyall institutions have offices of career planning and
placement (or equivalents) whose main function is to aid students in finding
full-time employment after graduation.
A student affairs perspective suggests that holistic development is critical to
both job place~ent and performance. Indeed, Williams and Winston (1985)
found that students~ "Vho participate in organized student activities have a
heightened awareness of the world of work and of their personal skills and
limitations as workers. In studying students who work on campus, Healy and
Mourton (1987) found that high level jobs positively influenced grade point
average while streng~hening communication skills and motivation. Moreover,
Howard (1986), reporting results of extensive AT&T longitudinal studies, found
that: '
1. The number of activities correlated significantly with the general
effectiveness factor and predictions of making middle management.
2. Involvement in more extracurricular activities was positively related to
decision-making, creativity, and organizing and planning.
3. The number of extracurricular activities was significantly related to
leadership skills, behavior flexibility, and personal impact.
4. The number of activities and leadership skills were both correlated
significantly with need for advancement, energy, and low willingness to
delay the gratification of a promotion.
5. The number of activities and leadership positions were correlated with
tolerance of uncertainty and resistance to stress. (p. 544)
Many students, professors, and administrators assume that prospective
employers look for individuals who, have a broad background and varied
experiences, have high grades, and are well-rounded. Unfortunately, scant
research supports this assumption. In fact, Rosson, Schoemer, and Nash (1973)
found no correlation between such factors and success in obtaining initial
employment. Because large amounts of money fund student activities,
justification must be provided for existing programs and services. The purpose
of this study was to observe the relationship between extracurricular
involvement, grades, and the job placement potential of graduating students at
a large research university in the Southwest. More specifically, the study
sought answers to the following questions:
1. How do prospective employers rate the likelihood of employing college
graduates based on the ,students' level of grades, level of activities
involvement, and major?
2. Do prospective employers prefer a minimum grade point ratio when
considering college graduates for employment?
The study's aim was to provide systematic data in an area surrounded by
conjecture. Such information would help students and their advisors in making
decisions'about academic and extracurricular opportunities.

291
NASPA JOURNAL

METHOD
Participants
All of the 664 employers who recruited business (n=223), education (n=78),
and engineering (n=363) students at the university during one academic year
were invited (through the mail) to participate in the study. Seventy-five
percent of the business, 80% of the education, and 74% of the engineering
recruiters did so.
Instrument
A 2-part questionnaire was developed to assess the current recruiting practices
of recruiters and prospective employers. Part One asked recruiters to rate and
rank nine student profiles that varied in academic and extracurricular standing.
Grade point ratios (GPRs) and student activities involvement represented in
the profiles were each designed to be low, moderate, or high. Hence, nine
protocols were created for each of the three majors (e.g., low grades-high
activities, moderate grades-high activities). Recruiters responded to the profiles
using a 5-point Likert scale, ranging from a very high likelihood of being
employed (5) to a very low likelihood (1). Interviews and references, which
obviously skew results in an actual employment process, were not simulated.
Recruiters were also asked if they used aGPR cut-off or minimum and, if so,
what it was.
To validate each of the protocols, a panel of six experts was chosen to
comment on the overall questionnaire and to specifically judge whether each
level of grades or activities involvement adequately represented the low,
moderate, or high range. The judges were experienced professionals in student
activities administration. They judged all of the items clear and valid. A sample
form appears opposite, without the answer sheet. The order of student profiles
varied and activities were changed for each college.
Analyses of variance were conducted to report the effects of four variables:
college (College), level of grades (GPR), level of activities involvement (ACTV),
and the form used (Form). There was no significant effect attributed to the
form used or for any interaction of form with the other variables, indicating the
forms were equivalent.
Table 1 shows the results of univariate tests for main effects of the three
variables-College, GPR, and ACTV-and all possible interactions of those
variables. All main effects and interactions were significant at the .01 level
except the three-way interaction (significant at the .02 level). According to Kirk
(1982), "A significant interaction is a signal that the interpretation of tests of
treatment ... must be qualified" (p. 356). It would be misleading to interpret
directly the significance of a variable or lower level interaction if the three-way
interaction is significant.
Therefore, a contrast interaction analysis was used to interpret the three-way
interaction. This process tests the significance of interactions among specific
groups and is somewhat analogous to post-hoc means comparison tests.
Table 2 lists the means and standard deviations for the nine student profile
types; the results of the contrast interaction analyses appear in Table 3. Three
significant interactions (.05 level) were found: (a) grades at level of activities
between business and education, (b) activities at level of grades between

292
 ALBRECHT, CARPENrER, SIVO

Student Resumes
Please review the following abbreviated resumes With the assumption that all the candidates
have the same maj?r/academic preparation. Their differences are noted below.
STUDENT A GRP: 2.85 ACTIVITIES: Hometown club member; intramurals
STUDENT B GRP: 2.30 ACTIVITIES: Student Senator; Student Center Concert chairman;
Student Center Council vice president; Student
Government executive vice president; social
fraternity rush chairman; Freshman Orientation
Camp (Fish Camp) counselor and chairman; Delta
Sigma Pi business fraternity member; Musicians
Club member; Hall Council vice president;
intramurals chairman and president
STUDENT C GPR: 3.75 ACTIVITIES: Beta Gamma Sigma business honor society
member; intramurals
STUDENT D GPR: 2.30 ACTIVITIES: Snow Ski Club member; Student Y Association
member .
STUDENT E GPR: 2.95 ACTIVITIES: Junior Class president; Senior Class president; Fish
Camp counselor, chairman, and assistant director;
fraternity member and intramurals chairman; Alpha
Kappa Psi business fraternity vice president;
Student Senator; Student Government vice
president; Alpha Lambda Delta honor society
member
STUDENT F GPR: 3.65 ACTIVITIES: Cap and Gown Senior Honor Society secretary;
Student Center Speakers Series chairman;
Concessions Committee member; Fish Camp
counselor (2 years); intramurals
STUDENT G GPR: 2.90 ACTIVITIES: Student Senator; Parents Weekend committee
chairman; Student Conference on National Affairs
delegate; Pi Sigma Epsilon business fraternity
member; Fish Camp counselor
STUDENT H GPR: 3.90 ACTIVITIES: Speaker of Student Senate; Athletic Council student
representative; Conference of Student Government
Associations (COSGA) committee chairman; Fish
Camp counselor; Beta Gamma Sigma business
honor society member; Business Student Council
representative; Cap and Gown Senior Honor
Society member; Student Organizations Board
member; Student Center Endowed Lecture Series
committee chairman; intramurals; hometown club
member
STUDENT I GRP: 2.35 ACTIVITIES: Fish Camp counselor; Fish Camp chairman; Hall
Council representative, treasurer, and social
chairman

business and education, and (c) activities at level of grades between business
and engineering. A graph of the means in Table.2 (not shown) indicated these
significant contrast interactions existed only between student profiles 5 and 6,
meaning that business recruiters rated the high grades-medium activities
profile higher than education and engineering recruiters, who, in turn, rated
the medium grades-high activities profile higher than business recruiters.

293
NA5PA JOURNAL

Table 1
Univariate Tests for Main Effects
Source SS df MS F P
College 52.882 2 26.440 19.56 .0001
GPR 2223.879 2 1111.939 1144.81 .0001
ACTV 888.135 2 444.068 810.21 .0001
GPR*ACTV 95.356 4" 23.839 86.17 .0001
GPR*College 39.309 4 9.827 10.12 .0001
ACTV*College 8.124 4 2.031 3.71 .0053
GPR*ACTV*College 5.079 8 0.635 2.30 .0191
Error 530.066 1916 0.277
Note: GPR*ACTV"College: eta =.554 (55 explained/55 total)
2

RESULTS
How do prospective employers rate the likelihood of employing college
graduates based on the students' level of grades, level o/activities
involvement, and major?
As Table 2 shows, education employers rated the student profiles higher than
business and engineering employers acrosS the board. Otherwise, the ratings
followed the same pattern across the colleges except in one instance: business
recruiters rated high grades-medium activities better than medium grades-high
activities. Education and engineering recruiters did just the opposite.
The combinations of grades arid activities provide important information for·
the study. To be rated high or very high in likelihood of employment (mean
greater than 3.5), the profile generally had to show t:;ither high grades or a
combination of medium grades and high activities. The one exception to this
was in education where. the medium grades-medium activities profile had a
mean of 3.60. To be rated low or very low (mean less than 2.5), the profile
generally had to show either low grades or a combination of m.ediumgrades
and low activities .. The two exceptions to this were again in education where

Table 2
Means and Standard Deviations for Employers' Ratings of Likelihood
of Employment by College
Business Education Engineering
Level (n=166) (n=60) (n=.265)
Student GPR ACTV MEAN SD . MEAN SD MEAN SD
1* Med Low 2.201 0.808 2.512 0.725 2.366 0.806
2 Low High 2.355 1.068 3.250 0.968 2.483 0.966
3 High Low 3.554 0.790 3.633 0.712 3.800 0.909
4 Low Low 1.319 0.551 2.017 0.701 1.472 0.634
5 Med High 4.072 0.791 4.483 ,0.596 4.260 0.746
6 High Med 4.283 0.621 4.233 0.745 4.121 0.718
7** Med Med 3.388 0.729 3.600 0.643 3.358 0.850
8 High High 4.651 0.769 4.733 0.482 4.619 0.739
9 Low Med 1.699 0.789 2.417 0.829 1.800 0.729
Note: *n=l64 (Business); ....n=l65 (Business)

294
 ALBRECHr, CARPENrER., SIva

Table 3
Contrast Interaction Analysis
Effect Variate 5tatistic F df p
GPR@ACTV College 55=5.1498 2.92 2;485 .055
M5=2.5749
Bus vs Educ 55=5.0885 5.77 1;485 .017
M5=5.0885
Bus vs.Eng 55=1.3153 1.49 1;485 .223
M5=1.3153
Educ vs Eng 55=2.5090 2.85 1;485 .092
MS=2.5090
Error 55=427.664
M5=0.8818
ACTV@GPR College 55=2.8102 3.50 2;485 .031
M5 = 1.4051
Bus vs Educ 55=1.7747 4.42 1;485 .036
M5 = 1.7747
Bus vs Eng 55=2.1689 5.40 1;485 .021
M5=2.1689
Educ vs Eng 55=0.1456 0.36 1;485 .547
M5=0.1456
Error 55=194.8223
M5=0.4017

the medium grades-low activities profile had a mean of 2.52 and the low
grades-high activities profile had a mean of 3.25.
Do prospective employers prefer a minimum grade point ratio when
considering college graduates for employment?
Overall, 80.5% of all recruiters reported a preferred minimum grade point
ratio. Education recruiters reported the lowest level of such preferences with
63.2%. If the answer was yes, the employer was asked to identify the ratio.
That information appears in Table 4, by college and by level of grades. The
level of grades corresponds to the same level used in the student profiles. Of
those reporting a preference, 96.1% preferred a minimum at or above the
medium level, while 61.3% preferred a minimum at or above 3.0. Business
recruiters held true to their emphasis on grades, as 71:.2% reported a
preference at or above 3.0. Only 27% of the education recruiters reported a
preference of 3.0 or above, while 56.6% of the engineering recruiters did.
Limitations on Interpreting the Findings
This study investigated only two aspects of job placement. Obviously, there
are many that affect a true hiring situation. The entire area of work experience,
for example, was not represented in the study, and a strong (or weak)

Table 4
Frequency of Minimum Grade Point Ratio Preferences
GPR Level Business Education Engineering
Low (2.00-2.40) 4.2% 19.5% 0.9%
Medium (2.41-3.20) 88.6% 80.5% 91.1%
High (3.21-3.50) 7.2% 0.0% 8.0%

295
NASPA JOURNAL

interview can sometimes nullify resume factors, including grades and activities.
The desire to control the research to a limited number of variables may have
hindered the respondents from answering as thoroughly as they desired.
Other limitations of the research are listed below:
1. The social desirability of responses may have created response bias. For this
reason, the recruiters may have over-compensated for activities or grades.
2. Although every effort was made to represent real students in creatin~ the
student profiles, certain aspects such as gender and membership in
traditionally single-gender organizations were not included. A more realistic
approach would have been to include gender designations, membership in
all organizations, and work experience, but this would have infused extra
variables not within the scope of the study.
3. As noted before, the research was limited to the job placement process at
only one campus. Caution should be observed in generalizing results to
other institutions.

DISCUSSION
The results of this study indicate that employers value both strong academic
achievement and strong out-of-class experiences. Student affairs professionals
must be aware of the value employers place on these components of college
life and readily provide this information to the students they advise.
Implications for Student Activities Professional Practice
Professionals in student activity programs who view themselves as educators
must continue to encourage students to achieve excellence in all areas of the
college experience. The results of this study indicate that employers value both
high grades and high involvement, although the value placed on grades is
somewhat higher. Knowing that strong extracurricular activities are no
substitute for strong academic credentials, practitioners should not allow
students to believe that great success in activities can compensate for poor
academic performance.
This study's results should be viewed as a strong commendation for the
positive outcomes of student development and student involvement. They
should also serve as a challenge for student activities professionals to continue
to educate the campus community, as well as recruiters and employing
organizations, about the many benefits of activities involvement.
Implications for Career Counseling and Placement Office
Professional Practice
The results of this study provide those who aid students in developing career
plans with important information about employer values regarding grades and
activities involvement. The information can serve as a guide as they advise
students, particularly in business, education, and engineering.
As the survey of literature indicated, students today are very career-oriented,
competitive, and interested in earning money. If they seek to base their college
experience on a "formula for success," they could use this study's results to
tailor their activities to acquiring the best job. But this would be an unfortunate
outcome and contrary to student development theory. Counselors and others

296
 ALBRECHT, CARPENrER, SIVO

in career planning and placement operations must exercise care in prescribing

paths to careers and always advise against any plan that is not broad-based.
Personnel in placement operations should also use every opportunity to
educate recruiters and their organizations about the scope of involvement in
student activities and about the benefits derived from participation in them.
Recommendations for Further Research
Future research in this area should seek to minimize the limitations listed
above and broaden this study's scope to include more information about the
organizations that recruit graduates. An interesting addition would be to note
organizational size and determine if that variable has any effect on the ratings
of student profiles. Another interesting addition would be, to consider gender
and/or ethnic background as factors. Replicating this type of research at other
institutions could also offer a broader perspective on the relationship of grades
and activities involvement to the job placement of graduates.

References
Astin, AW. (1984). Student involvement: A developmental theory for higher education.
Journal of College Student Personnel, 25(4), 297-308.
Boyer, E.L. (1987). College: The undergraduate experience in America. Carnegie Foundation for the
Advancement of Teaching. New York: Harper and Row.
Golden, V.J., & Provost, J.A (1987). The MBTI and career development. In J.A Provost &
S. Anchors (Eds.), Applications of the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator in higher education (pp. 15~
179). Palo Alto, CA: Consulting PsycholOgist Press.
Healy, c.c., & Mourton, D.L. (1987). The relationship of career exploration, college jobs, and
grade point average. Journal of College Student Personnel, 28(1), 28-34.
Howard, A (1986). College experiences and managerial performance. Journal of Applied
Psychology, 71, 53~552.
Kirk, R.E. (1982). Experimental design: Procedures for the behavioral sciences. Belmont, CA:
Brooks/Cole Publishing.
Levine, A (1983). Riding first class on the Titanic: A portrait of today's college student.
NASPA Journal, 20(4), 3-9.
Litl, B. (1984). Life-work planning for the individual in a changing work world. Journal of
College Placement, 44, 56-59.
Rosson, J.G., Schoemer, J., & Nash, P.A (1973). Grades and extra-curricular activities: How
important are they in landing the first job? Journal of College Placement, 33, 73-76.
Voien, B., & Hughes, R.E. (1983). College to careers: An integrated model for successful
college completion and career entry. Journal of College Student Personnel, 24(4), 37~71.
Williams, M.E., & Winston, R.B., Jr. (1985). Participation in organized student activities and
work: Differences in developmental task achievement of traditional aged college students.
NASPA Journal, 22(3), 52-59.

297