22. Research in Higher Education
Paper
Higher Education For People With Disabilities: The Voices Of Portuguese Students
Rosa Oliveira1, Isabel Martins2, Oksana Tymoshchuk3
1Instituto Politécnico de Viana do Castelo; Instituto Politécnico de Bragança, Portugal; 2Instituto Politécnico do Porto - ESE, Portugal; 3Universidade de Aveiro - DeCA, Portugal
Presenting Author: Martins, Isabel
In Portugal, in recent years, there has been a growing attendance of students with disabilities in higher education (HE), which makes a deepening reflection on inclusive education (Antunes et al., 2020; DGES, 2023). This is a challenge, both for students with disabilities and teachers, non-teaching staff, colleagues and the institutions themselves. According to the data collected by the DGES (2023), in the academic year 2022/23, the overall number of students with disabilities enrolled in HE increased 35% compared to the previous academic year. The completion rates of HE courses for students with disabilities, however, do not follow this trend due to various challenges they face including contextual barriers, lack of resources and support materials, content inaccessibility issues, and attitude barriers (Pires, 2018). University support is typically delayed and palliative (Björnsdóttir, 2017; Mara, 2014). Thus, research and work in the area are urgent not only for students, but also for teachers, non-teaching staff and institutions. Some isolated initiatives seek to support teachers' actions and encourage students with disabilities in HE. This data evidence suggests that, for HE institutions to deliver the most inclusive solutions, it is vital to discuss the changes that must occur regarding students with disabilities.
The development of inclusive practices raises concrete questions in institutions and demands immediate answers. The arrival of students with disabilities has created challenging situations in the classroom, that sometimes don’t even reach the level of institutional discussions. On this path towards inclusive HE, developing and implementing effective policies that empower the academic community and society is crucial. As defined by the international convention on the Rights of People with Disabilities (UN, 2018), it is essential that everyone actively participate in this inclusive process, so that education and participation may become a reality for everyone. In this context, it is essential to give voice to students with disabilities to better understand the challenges they face in HE and to collect good inclusion practices in their institutions (Martins et al., 2022).
Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources UsedThe main objective was to find out the perceptions of students with disabilities on the challenges of the HE experiences in Portugal. In addition, the researchers defined four secondary objectives: i) to understand their perceptions of the support services for their inclusion in ES; ii) their opinion on the relationship and attitude of their teachers; iii) the perception of the attitudes of their colleagues; and iv) the viability of technologies and the adequacy of the infrastructures.
This study adopted the case study methodology, which allows an in-depth investigation of a current reality problem (Yin, 2005). This online questionnaire was administered for two months. The research involved 24 students with disabilities from two Portuguese HE institutions (16 female, 8 male; aged 18-43), who voluntarily agreed to participate in the study. Participants responded to a survey with 39 questions, concerning their perception about their inclusion in HE, divided into the following groups: i) student characterization; ii) the support services; iii) relationships with teachers; iv) relationships with peers, and v) the role of technologies and infrastructures.
Most of the surveyed students were graduating (11/ 45.8%), seven (29.2%) were attending Higher Technical Professional Courses and six (25%) Master's Degree courses. Nine of the students (37.5%) attended computer science courses, eight (33.3%) engineering courses, four (16.7%) marketing courses and three (12.5%) management courses.
Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or FindingsRegarding the perception of inclusion support services in HE, most respondents were happy with individual support. However, 16.7% of students were dissatisfied with the support provided regarding requests associated with their special needs. A large majority of the respondents mentioned that specialized professionals are available to help them in educational institutions. Concerning ensuring the rights of students with disabilities, 66.7% of participants agreed that the inclusion support offices ensure these rights. Participants bring out the fact that the faculty is still not used to welcoming and including students with disabilities.
Regarding the relationship with teachers, 45.8% of students considered that there was prejudice towards people with "disability", and 50.0% even said teachers are not flexible regarding their needs. One of the students said that a teacher advised him to leave the course because of his condition. No student considers that teachers have the needed training to help them understand their characteristics and adapt their methodology accordingly.
The majority of students mentioned prejudice towards people with disabilities or stated that their colleagues are not flexible. Respondents believe that digital technologies can positively impact their academic paths, offering them individualized help according to their needs. Students suggest implementing initiatives that support eradicating stereotypes and deepening an inclusive culture, including efforts to increase technical, human, and technological resources for the entire academic community, as well as activities to provide knowledge and training to everyone. According to participants in this study, relationship-related issues are essential to the inclusion process.
HE for all, requires measures, policies, and practices in line with truly inclusive education. According to the study findings, inclusion in HE depends on several factors: curriculum adaptation, effective pedagogical methodologies and strategies. Cooperation between teachers/families/students, the viability of technologies and the adequacy of the infrastructures are also some of the factors that influence inclusion in HE.
ReferencesAntunes, A. P., Rodrigues, D., Almeida, l. S., & Rodrigues, S. E. (2020). Inclusão no ensino superior português: análise do enquadramento regulamentar dos estudantes com necessidades educativas especiais. Revista Fronteiras: Journal of social, technological and environmental science, 397-422.
Björnsdóttir, K. (2017). Belonging to higher education: inclusive education for students with intellectual disabilities. European journal of special needs education, 32(1), 125-136.
DGES (2020). Contingente especial para candidatos com deficiência. Retrieved january, 2023 from:
https://www.dges.gov.pt/pt/pagina/contingente-especial-para-candidatos-com-deficiencia
Machado, M. M., Santos, P.. C., & Espe-Sherwindt, M. (2020). Inclusão de pessoas com dificuldades intelectuais e desenvolvimentais no ensino superior: contributos da literatura no contexto europeu. Revista portuguesa de investigação educacional, (20), 143-165.
Mara, D. (2014). Higher education for people with disabilities - Romanian education experience. Procedia - Social and behavioral sciences, 142, 78-82.
Martins, I. C, Tymoshchuk, O., Albuquerque, E., Santos, P., & Van Hove, G. (2022). Parents’ voices: Inclusion of students with intellectual and developmental disabilities in higher education. In Polyphonic construction of smart learning ecosystems: Proceedings of the 7th conference on smart learning ecosystems and regional development (pp. 157-175). Springer Nature. Singapore.
Pires, l. A. (2018). O processo de inclusão no ensino superior nos últimos 30 anos. In "Inclusão no ensino superior”. Assembleia da República, Lisboa, Portugal.
UN (2018). Convention on the rights of persons with disabilities. Retrieved january, 2023 from: https://www.un.org/disabilities/documents/convention/convoptprot-e.pdf
22. Research in Higher Education
Paper
Does Poverty Chill Expectations? The Shrinking Educational Expectations for Higher Education of Low Socioeconomic Status Students in China
Qiuxiang Wu, Sheng Cui
Renmin University of China, China, People's Republic of
Presenting Author: Wu, Qiuxiang
The formation of educational expectations is crucial for students’ future academic achievement and social mobility, but it depends on students’ capacity to sustain their subjective expectations, so that their expectation will truly motivate individual agency and self-efficacy. Social class is an important predictor factor influencing educational expectations in sociological and educational fields. The traditional literature has largely found a negative relationship between family social background and educational aspirations. This is mainly because Rational Action Theory suggests that individuals’ expectations are based on their family background and academic performance. Children from disadvantaged family tend to lower their educational expectations due to the pressure of college fees and their own academic level. However, a different voice is beginning to emerge in the current literature on educational expectations. It claims that disadvantaged classes do not have low expectations. This is mainly due to the specificity of cultural contexts and family climate. For example, a deprived home environment can sometimes also inspire greater resilience and educational aspirations for students.
Some articles that focus on academic behavior and performance of Confucian Heritage Culture (CHC), they find that disadvantaged families in most CHC countries or regions, including China, Japan, Korea, Singapore, tend to have higher educational expectations because of the perceived importance of education and schooling. Even when these students migrate to developed Western countries, these immigrant families have far higher educational expectations and academic standards than other immigrants from other countries or regions (e.g. Africa/Latin America/East Europe). More recently, some of the emerging literature has begun to explain this high expectation from a moralizing perspective, arguing that disadvantaged students treat high expectations as a mechanism or label for their own signaling actions. They believe that higher educational expectation is a good indicator for good students, son (or daughter), person.
The inner Confucian Heritage Culture also differs considerably in its examination systems, unique climate and educational system contexts compared to Western cultural contexts. Within the Confucian Heritage Culture, some researchers have used the concept of education fever to describe the popular pursuit of education success. In the Chinese context, extremely selection based on the national college entrance examination (Gaokao) is an important feature of higher education admissions, but the system has attracted both praise and disparagement. For example, people who fail in their studies or fail to get into university are perceived as losers. Although the reform of Chinese national college entrance examination is still underway, the basic feature of one-chance examination but for whole life are essentially unchanged.
Thus, based on data from 4781 senior high school graduates in a city in Guizhou, China, this study analysed the impact of SES on students’ educational expectations in the context of Chinese Gaokao system. In particular, it revealed the phenomenon of shrinking educational expectations of students with low socioeconomic status. These students were more likely to suffer from the failure of examination, which negatively affected their personal short-term and long-term educational expectations. In contrast, high socioeconomic status students hold stable educational expectations, because their families can serve as a strong support for future success, whether they failed in the examination.
Finally, this study addresses the relationship between the examination system, individual educational expectations, and socioeconomic status. It also dialectically discusses how the examination system became a socially revered culture in the Confucian Heritage Culture. The findings provide a reference for countries with similar examination systems and for researchers concerned with educational expectations and educational opportunities for low socioeconomic status groups.
Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources UsedOur study used self-collected student survey data and administrative data from the education department. The sample consisted of graduating high school students in a county-level city of Guizhou Province, China, covering all seven public and private high schools in the city. The project and questionnaire were ethically reviewed by the academic committee of School of Education, Renmin University of China, and the permission was also obtained from the city's education bureau. The survey was conducted in two rounds. After data matching, the first round of surveys involved a sample of 4,781 students, accounting for 69.93% of the number of students who registered for the college entrance examination in the city that year. The second round of surveys successfully tracked and matched 2,166 students.
The main variable involved in the study was student’s socio-economic status, which is a composite of four variables including household registration, subjective family economic conditions, parental education level, parental occupational hierarchy. In addition, we classified educational expectations into two categories, one is access expectation, which reflects the quality level of the HEI that students expect to enter. The other category is sequential expectation, which is represented using the level of the educational qualification the student expects to receive.
We used Stata 14 to process the data in this study. The two types of educational expectations were the dependent variables, SES was the core independent variable, and the control variables included sex, ethnicity, sibling, retaking Gaokao, course track in high school, A-test score or Gaokao score, and high school variables. When the educational expectation was a continuous variable, the ordinary least squares regression model was used to analyse the impact of SES; when the educational expectation was a dummy variable, the probit model was used for analysis.
Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or FindingsThe study found some differences in access expectation and sequential expectation among students of different SES before Gaokao, with higher educational expectations among high-SES students. However, this statistically significant difference does not have economic explanatory utility. The largest difference in expectations across SES students is that for sequential expectation, low-SES students have a higher probability of expecting an undergraduate education, while high-SES students have a higher probability of expecting master education.
The effect of SES on educational expectation was significantly enhanced after experiencing Gaokao. SES had a significant negative effect on both of educational expectations. The effect of SES on sequential expectation was more significant. For students with low socioeconomic status, there was a higher probability of expecting to enter a vocational HEI or to achieve higher vocational education and undergraduate education. At the same time, they were significantly less likely to expect to enter first-tier HEIs and significantly less likely to expect to receive master education and doctoral education. We call this change the phenomenon of shrinking educational expectations.
Finally, this study analysed the effect of SES on the change of educational expectation before and after Gaokao. There is a significant interaction between SES scores and Gaokao scores, with the negative impact of SES diminishing as Gaokao scores improve. But this also means that low-SES students with low test scores are disadvantaged, experiencing a double whammy from SES and the college entrance examination, and significantly lowering their long-term future educational expectations, e.g., from to receive undergraduate education to higher vocational education. The fragile “educational dreams” they had hoped to achieve are dashed with Gaokao. However, those peers with high SES were able to maintain a stable, high level of educational expectations to achieve their future educational goals.
ReferencesAlexander, K., Bozick, R., & Entwisle, D. (2008). Warming Up, Cooling Out, or Holding Steady? Persistence and Change in Educational Expectations After High School. Sociology of Education, 81(4), 371-396.
Anders, J. (2017). The Influence of Socioeconomic Status on Changes in Young People’s Expectations of Applying to University. Oxford Review of Education, 43(4), 381-401.
Asha Cooper, M. (2008). Dreams Deferred?: The Relationship Between Early and Later Postsecondary Educational Aspirations Among Racial/Ethnic Groups. Educational Policy, 23(4), 615-650.
Byun, S. Y., Meece, J. L., Irvin, M. J., & Hutchins, B. C. (2012). The Role of Social Capital in Educational Aspirations of Rural Youth. Rural Sociol, 77(3), 355-379.
Clycq, N., Ward Nouwen, M. A., & Vandenbroucke, A. (2014). Meritocracy, Deficit Thinking and the Invisibility of The System: Discourses on Educational Success and Failure. British Educational Research Journal, 40(5), 796-819.
Gu, X., & Yeung, W.-J. J. (2020). Hopes and Hurdles: Rural Migrant Children’s Education in Urban China. Chinese Sociological Review, 52(2), 199-237.
Khattab, N. (2015). Students’ Aspirations, Expectations and School Achievement: What Really Matters? British Educational Research Journal, 41(5), 731-748.
Kim, J.-S., & Bang, H. (2017). Education fever: Korean Parents’ Aspirations for Their Children’s Schooling and Future Career. Pedagogy, Culture & Society, 25(2), 207-224.
Li, W., & Xie, Y. (2020). The Influence of Family Background on Educational Expectations: A Comparative Study. Chinese Sociological Review, 52(3), 269-294.
Liu, A., & Xie, Y. (2016). Why do Asian Americans academically outperform Whites?–The cultural explanation revisited. Social Science Research, 58, 210-226.
Marginson, S. (2010). Higher education in East Asia and Singapore: Rise of the Confucian Model. Higher Education, 61(5), 587-611.
Reynolds, J. R., & Pemberton, J. (2001). Rising College Expectations among Youth in the United States: A Comparison of the 1979 and 1997 NLSY. The Journal of Human Resources, 36(4), 703-726.
Thapar-Bjorkert, S., & Sanghera, G. (2010). Social Capital, Educational Aspirations and Young Pakistani Muslim Men and Women in Bradford, West Yorkshire. The Sociological Review, 58(2), 244-264.
Winterton, M. T., & Irwin, S. (2012). Teenage Expectations of Going Tto University: The Ebb and Flow of Influences from 14 to 18. Journal of Youth Studies, 15(7), 858-874.
Wu, X., & Treiman, D. J. (2004). The Household Registration System and Social Stratification in China: 1955-1996. Demography, 41(2), 363-384.
XIANG, X. (2018). My Future, My Family, My Freedom: Meanings of Schooling for Poor, Rural Chinese Youth. Harvard Educational Review, 88(1), 81-102.
22. Research in Higher Education
Paper
Student Engagement Practices from a Student Equity Perspective – Case Studies from Austria
Franziska Lessky1, Sabine Freudhofmayer2, Magdalena Fellner3, Katharina Resch2
1University of Innsbruck, Austria; 2University of Vienna, Austria; 3University for Continuing Education Krems, Austria
Presenting Author: Lessky, Franziska
This study provides insights into student engagement practices in Austrian higher education. By presenting three case studies, we, first, illustrate how student engagement practices vary across Austrian universities, and second, critically reflect upon how those practices can be enhanced to broaden access and inclusion for all.
Within the European context, student engagement is mainly conceptualised as part of the community engagement and civic involvement of universities. This understanding has emerged from several developments – such as the Bologna Process, the European Union’s funding and mobility programmes, widening participation of under-represented and vulnerable student groups – that have contributed to a shifting of the (self-)image of universities and facilitated an ongoing debate about universities’ role and responsibilities in society (Resch & Fellner, 2022). It is argued that universities should deliberately contribute to society by addressing specific needs through civic involvement of students and staff. Therefore, strengthening the civic engagement of students (e.g., via student engagement practices) is seen as an integral part of universities’ societal contribution (Fellner et al., 2022).
While there are multiple efforts to strengthen student engagement at the European level (e.g., via Erasmus+ projects dedicated to this topic, European networks and initiatives such as GUNI network (Global University Network for Innovation) or the European Association of Service-Learning in Higher Education), and at the national as well as institutional level (e.g., through Third Mission strategies), little research focuses on whether all student groups have access to student engagement practices and whether they are able to equally participate in and benefit from such practices. From a student equity perspective, asking such questions is highly relevant, since not all students stand to benefit equally from engagement, especially regarding extra-curricular activities (Winstone et al., 2022). Furthermore, student engagement is seen as crucial in terms of student retention and success (Tight, 2020).
Already a decade ago, scholars such as Butin (2010) argued that “[t]he overarching presumption is that the students doing the service-learning are white, sheltered, middle-class, single, without children, unindebted, and between the ages 18 and 24“ (p. 31). However, these characteristics do not apply (anymore) to the majority of the Austrian student population (Lessky & Unger, 2022). In addition, participating in student engagement activities often requires financial and time resources that might be limited to students from equity groups due to their responsibilities outside of university (e.g., term-time employment. caring obligations, etc.).
Our research tackles this concern by investigating the following research questions: (1) How are student engagement practices designed across the Austrian higher education sector?, and (2) How do these practices enable or hinder the participation of students from equity groups?
Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources UsedTo address these questions, we analyse case studies of student engagement practices at three Austrian universities. Our data is based upon two Erasmus+ projects that have been financed by the European Commission (The ‘Students as Digital Civic Engagers’ project and the ‘Service-learning in Higher Education’ project). The cases include the ‘Intercultural Mentoring for Schools Project’ at the University of Vienna, the ‘Student Projects for Caritas’ at the University of Klagenfurt and the module ‘Renovation and Revitalisation’ at the University for Continuing Education Krems. Based on semi-structured interviews with students, programme coordinators and lecturers as well as official documents (e.g., course descriptions and universities’ mission statements), we apply a case study methodology to analyse the student engagement practices (Flyvbjerg, 2006; Yin, 2003). The selected cases provide a maximum of variation according to (1) the size of the universities and the socio-economic characteristics of their student population, and (2) the level of institutionalisation and the amount of students’ power in co-designing the practices.
Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or FindingsThe analysis shows that one major factor for students to participate in engagement practices is their personal connection to the content of the respective practice. For example, most of the students in the ‘Intercultural Mentoring for Schools Project’ felt a personal connection with the migrant children they support. This perceived connection is based on their own biographical experiences with migration, which is why they were keen to dedicate extra time in addition to their regular study programme. Moreover, the findings reveal that elective courses on civic engagement, as demonstrated by the ‘Student Projects for Caritas’, are especially appreciated by students who are not yet very familiar with civic engagement and are interested in applied coursework. Furthermore, results indicate that the students’ say in co-designing engagement practices varies along the degree of institutionalisation, showing that those practices with a higher level of institutionalisation (e.g., the mandatory module ‘Renovation and Revitalisation’ at the University for Continuing Education Krems) provide less opportunities for students to co-create the respective practices. However, from an equity perspective, highly institutionalised practices provide broader access for diverse student groups, since they are scaffolded within the curriculum.
The paper closes by reflecting how engagement practices can be designed to provide access and to be beneficial for all students, especially in a changing university environment vastly accelerated by the COVID-19 pandemic. This requires innovative ways of strengthening student engagement, for example via digital civic engagement (Freudhofmayer & Resch, forthcoming).
ReferencesButin, D. W. (2010). Service-Learning in Theory and Practice. The Future of Community Engagement in Higher Education. New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan.
Fellner, M., Rusu, A. S., & Pausits, A. (2022). Facets of Service Learning in Higher Education: A Cross-Case Analysis of Diverging Conceptualizations. In Role of Education and Pedagogical Approach in Service Learning. Emerald Publishing Limited, pp. 95-111.
Flyvbjerg, B. (2006). Five Misunderstandings About Case-Study Research. Qualitative Inquiry, 12(2), 219-245.
Freudhofmayer, S., & Resch, K. (forthcoming). Digital Civic Engagement. Case studies in the Interplay Between Civic Engagement, Student Voice and Digitalization of Higher Education. In Conner, J.; Gauthier, L.; Guzmán Valenzuela, C. & Raaper, R. (eds.) Bloomsbury Handbook of Student Voice in Higher Education. London: Bloomsbury Publishing.
Resch, K.; Fellner, M. (2022). European and Austrian perspectives on service-learning. In Rodríguez-Izquierdo, R.M. (ed.). Service Learning at a glance. New York: Nova Science Publishers, pp.63-80.
Lessky, F., & Unger, M. (2022). Working long hours while studying: a higher risk for First-in-Family students and students of particular fields of study? European Journal of Higher Education, 1-20.
Tight, M. (2020). Student retention and engagement in higher education. Journal of further and Higher Education, 44(5), 689-704.
Winstone, N., Balloo, K., Gravett, K., Jacobs, D., & Keen, H. (2022). Who stands to benefit? Wellbeing, belonging and challenges to equity in engagement in extra-curricular activities at university. Active Learning in Higher Education, 23(2), 81-96.
Yin, R. K. (2003). Case study research: Design and methods. 3rd Edition. California: Sage Publications.
22. Research in Higher Education
Paper
Changes in Perceived Mental Health: Student Characteristic Differences Within the Higher Education Environment
Katherine Aquino, Kyle Cook
St. John's University, United States of America
Presenting Author: Aquino, Katherine
According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, mental health affects how individuals feel, think, and respond to the world around them and includes "our emotional, psychological, and social well-being". An environment may also affect an individual's mental health, with environmental stressors potentially changing how an individual feels or responds to the world around them. This can also apply to the educational environment; students face several stressors entering into and progressing within the higher education environment - all of which can influence their mental health.
Almost half (41%) of postsecondary students identify as having diagnoses related to mental health and nearly one-third (29%) of postsecondary students were in mental health therapy/ counseling in the past year. Eisenberg et al. found that, as of fall 2021, of the more than 33,000 participants surveyed for the American College Health Association's National College Health Assessment, 27.4% were diagnosed with anxiety and 21.7% were diagnosed with depression. While there is an overall increase in students' poor mental health, Lipson et al. found that students from different ethnic and racial identities may be at a greater likelihood for mental health complications.
When navigating the higher education environment, Ennals et al. found that "knowing oneself and negotiating social spaces of educational settings are key processes" for students to improve their mental health -- factors that support their ability to thrive within the postsecondary environment. However, research indicates a negative relationship between poor mental health and postsecondary success. Poor mental health can impact a student's ability to persist within and graduate from higher education. Other postsecondary student characteristics may further complicate their mental health which may have subsequent challenges to their success within the higher education environment. A student's first-generation status11, military status, and other "non-traditional" (e.g., age, dependency status, etc.) characteristics may impact their perceived sense of belonging within the higher education community and subsequently impact their mental health. Additionally, the specific institutional environment and their academic performance within that postsecondary setting can also impact student mental health.
With the increase in student requests for mental health services and resources, there is a greater need to provide more comprehensive support services that better address student mental health needs. More recently, the COVID-19 pandemic disrupted the lives of many college students, negatively impacting their mental health and creating the need to seek support services. Though more students are seeking mental health services, institutions may not allocate appropriate funding to support the increased need for student mental health initiatives. Limited mental health support services may impact the overall experience and success of the student with mental health needs. As such, it is necessary to further explore student mental health and different student mental health patterns. The investigation of student mental health patterns in a nationally representative sample of students will provide insight into key student and institutional characteristics that can be associated with poor mental health and help postsecondary institutions with student advocacy efforts in the future.
The following research questions guided this project:
1. What are the descriptive differences in student and institutional characteristics based on variation in students’ perceived mental health over time?
2. To what extent do student and institutional characteristics account for varying students’ perceived mental health statuses?
Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources UsedData included in this paper were drawn from the restricted use Beginning Postsecondary Students Longitudinal Study 2012/2017 dataset (BPS:12/17), a nationally representative sample of first-time beginning undergraduate students in the United States. Variables included within this paper were taken from the base year and the first follow-up of the survey. The majority of the predictor variables included were student-specific, including demographic characteristics (e.g., age, race, gender) and institutional-going characteristics (e.g., full-time enrollment, first-year GPA, Pell eligibility). The inclusion of the predictor variables was based on extant literature.
This paper explored the different disclosure statuses related to students’ perceived mental health. For this paper, perceived negative mental health was defined as a student self-identifying their mental health as either “fair” or “poor” and perceived positive mental health was defined as “good,” “very good,” or “excellent.” Three mental health self-disclosure categories were established based on the first and second survey time points: (1) consistent negative mental health (student identified negative mental health at both first and second data collection); (2) shifting mental health (student identified negative mental health at either the first or second data collection); and (3) consistent positive mental health (student identified positive mental health at both first and second data collection).
This analytic sample consisted of 18,990 cases. This study focused on the first and second waves of data collection (2012 and 2014 data collections). Student subgroups organized by mental health identification status included the following: consistent negative mental health (N=480), shifting mental health (N=1,980), and positive mental health (N= 16,530). All reported sample sizes were rounded to the nearest ten, complying with our NCES restricted data use agreement. All analyses were conducted in Stata 16 and were weighted using the longitudinal weight and bootstrap replicate weights to account for attrition and to be nationally representative of the population. To address the first research question, weighted descriptive statistics were conducted to examine students’ perceived mental health statuses for the full sample and by specific student characteristics. Significance tests were conducted to assess whether there were statistically significant differences in identification based on student characteristics. To address the second research question, a weighted multinomial logistic regression analysis was conducted and the results were presented as relative risk ratios. All but one variable included in the research model had complete data. For the one variable with missing data, GPA, listwise deletion was used.
Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or FindingsThe aim of this study was two-fold: (a) to investigate the differences in student and institutional characteristics based on students' perceived mental health over time and (b) to examine the influence of these characteristics on perceived mental health. The findings of this study revealed students had greater perceived mental health when they perceived greater support (e.g., perceived belonging and dependent status) and were academically successful (e.g., higher first-year GPA). Students with shifting or poor mental health were more likely to have low socio-economic status and with a low perceived sense of belonging within their campus community. Moreover, students' age, gender, and race all influenced their perceived mental health status. Lastly, students' institutional environment also contributed to their perceived mental health. Findings highlight the many factors associated with differences in perceived mental health over time.
There are several implications for researchers and practitioners from the data presented in this paper. While there is an active research presence around student mental health, there will also be a need to further explore this area in new and unique ways. A person’s mental health can be influenced by their surroundings and daily activities; conversely, how a person feels and responds to the world around them can also be related to their perceived mental health. As such, it is important for researchers to explore the various internal and external elements of developing and maintaining one’s mental health. Similarly, practitioners (namely postsecondary administrators, including counselors, advisors, and disability resource professionals) must advocate for and support the increased requests for mental health services. Moreso, with the increased cases of student mental health challenges, it is vital that higher education leadership maintain, if not increase, resources and appropriate funding to allow for suitable services to support the wide range of students' mental health needs.
References1. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. About mental health. https://www.cdc.gov/mentalhealth/learn/index.htm Updated 2021. Accessed October 22, 2022.
2. Bratman GN, Hamilton JP, & Daily GC. The impacts of nature experience on human cognitive function and mental health. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences. 2012; 1249, 118-136. doi: 10.1111/j.1749-6632.2011.06400.x
3. Fernandez A, Howse E, Rubio-Valera M, Thorncraft K, Noone J, Luu X, & Salvador-Carulla L. Setting-based interventions to promote mental health at the university: a systematic review. International Journal of Public Health. 2016; 61:797-807. doi: 10.1007/s00038-016-0846-4
4. Pascoe MC, Hetrick SE, & Parker AG. The impact of stress on students in secondary school and higher education. International Journal of Adolescence and Youth. 2020;25: 104-112. doi: 10.1080/02673843.2019.1596823
5. Eisenberg D, Lipson SK, & Heinze J. The health minds study: Fall 2020 data report. https://healthymindsnetwork.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/02/HMS-Fall-2020-National-Data-Report.pdf Updated 2020. Accessed October 22, 2022.
6. Lipson SK, Zhou S, Abelson S, Heinze J, Jirsa M, Morigney J, & Eisenberg D. Trends in college student mental health and help-seeking by race/ethnicity: Findings from the national healthy minds study, 2013–2021. Journal of Affective Disorders. 2022;306: 138-147. doi: 10.1016/j.jad.2022.03.038
7. Ennals P, Fossey E, & Howie L. Postsecondary study and mental ill-health: a meta-synthesis of qualitative research exploring students’ lived experiences. Journal of Mental Health. 2015; 24(2): 111-119. doi: 10.3109/09638237.2015.1019052
8. Eisenberg D, Lipson SK, & Posselt J. Promoting resilience, retention, and mental health. New Directions for Student Services. 2016;156: 87-95.
9. Hartley MT. Examining the relationships between resilience, mental health, and academic persistence in undergraduate college students. Journal of American College Health. 2011;59(7): 596-604. doi: 10.1080/07448481.2010.515632
10. Koch LC, Mamiseishvili K, & Higgins K. Persistence to degree completion: A profile of students with psychiatric disabilities in higher education. Journal of Vocational Rehabilitation. 2014;40(1): 73-82. doi: 10.3233/JVR-130663
11. Stebleton MJ, Soria KM, & Huesman RL. First‐generation students' sense of belonging, mental health, and use of counseling services at public research universities. Journal of College Counseling. 2014;17(1): 6-20. doi: 10.1002/j.2161-1882.2014.00044.x
12. Bonar TC. Mental health and military‐connected students on campus: Culture, challenges, and success. New Directions for Student Services. 2016;156): 41-51. doi: 10.1002/ss.20190
13. Trenz RC, Ecklund-Flores L, & Rapoza K. A comparison of mental health and alcohol use between traditional and nontraditional students. Journal of American College Health. 2016;63(8): 584-588. doi: 10.1080/07448481.2015.1040409
|
