support services hinges on their accessibility and ability to build confidence in students to access support.
2.7 Livelihood Context and Social Capital Creation at the University
It is the individual’s integration into the academic and social system of college that most directly relates to his persistence or continuance in that college (Tinto, 1975). The higher the degree of integration of the individual into the college systems the greater his/her commitment to the specific institution and the goal of college completion. To this effect, Summerskill (1962) observed that it is not simply the absence or presence of intellectual development that matters in persistence; but the degree of congruency between the intellectual development of the individual and the prevailing intellectual climate of the institution.
However, adequate social integration is an insufficient measure of whether one or not one will dropout. Some will learn to endure the hardships and persist. Persistence in college goes beyond individual characteristics or prior experiences; thus, dropout in college is seen as the outcome of a longitudinal process of interactions between the individual and the institution (peers, faculty, administration etc) in which s/he is enrolled (Tinto, 1975).
Intellectual development, as an integral part of a person's personality development and a reflection of his/her intellectual integration into the academic system of the college, has also been found to be related to persistence in college (Pascarella and Terenzini, 2005; Tinto, 1975, 1993; see also Cabrera et al., 1992). Intellectual development relates to the individual’s identification with the normative aspects of the academic system. According to Bourdieu (1984, 1997), familial factors, initial social conditions, individual disposition such as attitudes toward school, intellectual ability, academic achievement, and aspirations, affect the academic success of students at university. A number of authors who have analysed student change and persistence or dropout (Pascarella and Terenzini, 2005; Tinto, 1975;
Marjoribanks, 1998; Ho, 2003) concur.
2.7.1.1 Interactions with Faculty members
Student contact with Faculty members outside the classroom promotes persistence, educational aspirations and degree completion, even when other factors are held constant (Pascarella and Terenzini, 2005). According to Pascarella and Terenzini (2005), the nature of this relationship assumes two processes. The first is that students are socialised to the normative values and attitudes of the higher education institution. The second is commitment
attachment between student and institution that appears to be facilitated by positive interactions with Faculty members and peers (Pascarella et al., 2005). However, Ruddock (1999,in Pascarella et al., 2005) found that the positive relationship between student and staff interactions outside of the classroom should not be overstated as other studies have found that not all these interactions are positively associated with persistence. Most studies have found that a positive relationship between students and faculty members outside of the classroom promotes academic progress (Astin, 1993; Moletsane, 1995; Kuh and Hu, 2001). Such interactions foster social integration into the university system, and determine to a certain extent whether or not the student will persist or dropout (see Bailey et al., 2005; Beggs et al., 2003).
2.7.1.2 Interactions with Peers and Study Groups
A number of studies have found that peers are one of the most potent socialising agents in promoting persistence and degree completion (Pascarella et al., 1991; Astin 1993). This, according to Astin (1993) is more evident during the undergraduate years, when growth and development seem to take place. Other studies have shown that peer influence is statistically significant and a positive force in persistence and progression to graduation (Pascarella et al., 2005; see also Astin and Astin 1993; Steel, 1997, 1999, 2000). Some departmental experiences at UKZN support the findings of these studies. For instance, one academic noted that group study, peer learning and peer tutoring were related to academic success (Symposium on Matric and First Year Experience, 2010).
According to Kuh (2001, cited in Bitzer, 2005) the best single predictor of student learning and personal development is the time and energy students devote to educationally purposeful activities. Thus, institutions should meaningfully engage students in a diverse range of activities that add to valued outcomes to achieve high quality results.
Social integration through extracurricular activities has not been found to negatively affect academic performance or persistence at university or college(Nora, 1993). Persistence or dropout is seen as the end product of the individual's experiences in the academic and social systems of the college (Tinto, 1975). Some of the participants in this study counsel freshmen at university to form study groups and join mentorship programmes. A compelling reason for
such advice is that a study group accommodates a relatively small number of members which facilitates interaction. This theme is discussed further at a later stage. In a group mode of teaching and learning small groups of students work together on course material, discuss ideas, or prepare talks and essays while making provision for students who like to work alone, and the role of an educator is that of an advisor rather than the expert (see Martin, 1998).
2.7.1.3 Emotional Integration of Students in the University System
The literature surveyed for this study points to a number of factors that influence students’
academic progress at university; however little attention has been paid to the emotional life of students. Recent studies have shown that students’ emotional lives have an impact on their academic performance. Therefore, student services should focus on motivating students to uncap their creativity; and promote their self-esteem, which then becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy (see Ochse, 2005). Cross et al. (2008) noted the presence of what they call
‘campus membership’ in their analysis of the University of the Witwatersrand student experience. In their study titled the “Added Value of a Foundation Programme” conducted at the Nelson Mandela Metropolitan University, Wood et al. argue that foundation programmes should explore the possibility of integrating social and emotional learning programmes. The focus should be on developing intrapersonal and interpersonal skills, an internal locus of control and the habit of frequent self-reflection (see Wood & Olivier, 2004 in Wood et al., 2005; and Summerskill, 1962). Programmes for disadvantaged students should focus on the inner abilities and thoughts of these students.