|
| Personal Background |
| • |
Although the transfer student population at UCLA has a wider age range than the group of students who enter directly from high school, the majority of both groups of students tend to originally enter college at approximately the same age (i.e., 18-20 years old) (Table 2). |
| • |
There are very few significant differences in the racial/ethnic composition of students who enter UCLA directly from high school and those who enter as transfer students (Table 2). Instead, data on students' financial history and current concerns suggest that socio-economic status is a more salient difference between the two groups of students (Figure 6). |
| • |
Marital status, dependent children, and time spent on household, childcare, and other family responsibilities indicate that balancing domestic responsibilities and the demands of college is likely to be a significant challenge for a small proportion of transfer students (Table 3). |
| • |
Responses to survey items about students' health and wellness indicate a transfer student population that drinks at least some wine, beer, or liquor; does not exercise very much; feels overwhelmed; and includes a small but important contingent who feel depressed and that are seeking professional or pharmaceutical assistance with a diagnosed mental health condition (Table 4). |
| • |
Although students who transfer to UCLA and those who enter directly from high school are actually similar in self-concept in many ways, transfers rate themselves higher in personal and interpersonal skills and lower in academic abilities (Table 6). |
|
Academic Background |
| • |
Transfer students and students who enter UCLA directly from high school tend to have similar reasons for attending college (Table 7). Further, the most important reason for both groups, “to learn more about things that interest me,” represents an intrinsic interest in ideas and knowledge. |
| • |
Almost one in four of the 2005 TSS respondents had applied to UCLA prior to their current admission but had not been accepted to UCLA on their first attempt (Figure 2). |
| • |
Reflective of the UCLA transfer student population at large, over 90% of TSS respondents indicated the California Community Colleges as the type of college where they had taken the most classes prior to UCLA (Figure 3). |
| • |
Information from the Transfer Student Survey such as GPA comparisons (Table 8) and the high level of confidence among transfers that the courses at their previous institution prepared them well for the academic standards of UCLA (Figure 5) suggest that the 2005 entering cohort of transfer students is comparable to direct-entry students with respect to academic performance and preparedness. Further, frequency of consultation with counselors regarding transfer (Table 9) and personal assessments of their previous institution's academic rigor (Figure 4) indicate that transfers have taken important steps to prepare themselves for the academic demands of UCLA. |
|
Financial Status and Employment |
| • |
Respondents to the 2005 TSS reported a much higher degree of overall concern about finances than did new students who entered directly from high school (Figure 6). |
| • |
Transfer students have a greater history of student employment than direct-entry students and maintain slightly higher expectations than do students who enter UCLA directly from high school to work during their time at UCLA (Figure 7). |
| • |
The most common reason that TSS respondents give for seeking employment or working during college is a need/desire to help pay for their college education, followed by the desire to earn spending money, to gain job experience for an anticipated career, and to help take care of family obligations (Table 10). |
|
Plans for UCLA and Beyond |
| • |
While nearly all direct-entry students (97%) plan to live in UCLA residence halls or other campus student housing, less than half of transfer students (44%) had similar plans to live in campus-sponsored housing in Fall 2005 (Figure 8). Further, a small percentage of transfers (9%) have to commute a significant distance (i.e., more than 30 miles) to get to UCLA (Table 11). |
| • |
Transfer students tended to have lower expectations overall for their time at UCLA than do direct-entry students. Similar to the patterns identified in the students' self-ratings of their skills and abilities, transfer students' expectations were more positive than direct-entry students for academic experiences while their expectations for co-curricular involvement and interaction were lower than those reported by students who entered UCLA directly from high school (Table 12). |
| • |
Even though it represents a small minority of students overall, a much larger proportion of transfer students (7%) than direct-entry students (0%) anticipate that they will fall short of a Bachelor's degree (Table 13). |
| • |
The majority of both transfer and direct-entry students intend to pursue an advanced degree. While they report an equal degree of interest in a doctorate, direct-entry students express more interest in medical/dental degrees than transfers do, and transfer students have higher intentions to pursue a law degree than their direct-entry peers (Table 13). |
|
Student Responses to the Open-Ended Question |
| • |
Positive comments about transfer students' overall impressions of the institutional environment and campus culture dominated the feedback to the open-ended survey item (Table 14). |
| • |
The qualitative feedback also provided some evidence of particular areas of challenge for transfer students including a need for more information during their transition overall and at transfer student orientation in particular, difficulty managing campus bureaucracy, financial challenges, and limited opportunities to meet other students (Table 14). |
|
| |
|
|
II. Introduction & Survey Development
|
|
 According to national statistics, approximately 29% of students at four-year colleges across the country transferred from two-year institutions. In California between 1999 and 2005, the percent of community college students transferring to UC and CSU campuses grew by an annual average of around 5.5% such that over 60,000 students currently share this pathway through higher education. At UCLA, as overall enrollment grew during this same time period, the number of transfer students has increased to the point that they now represent over 40 percent of our new student population each year.
But as access to UCLA has increased for community college students, institutional assessments (e.g., 2004 UCUES, 2002 Ashe Center Student Survey, 2005 Senior Survey) have revealed that transfer students report lower levels of social integration, greater stress, and lower levels of psychological well-being and mental health than students who enter directly from high school. Understanding the source of transfers' challenges is critical to the support of UCLA transfer students and the assessment of programs designed to assist their transition to UCLA. But comparison of transfer student backgrounds and those of direct-entry students, as well as tracking the development of transfers during their UCLA careers, requires data on transfer students as they enter UCLA. Without these baseline data, it is unclear what proportion of these differences are due to transfer students' background and pre-college preparation and how much can be attributed to difficult transitions or subsequent experiences once students are at UCLA.
In response to this need for baseline data on transfer students, the UCLA Student Affairs Information and Research Office (SAIRO) developed a new on-line instrument titled the Transfer Student Survey (TSS). This survey was designed to be a companion piece to the CIRP Freshman Survey, which UCLA has administered for decades to collect baseline data from students as they enter UCLA directly from high school. The 2005 TSS included 24 questions that were developed to collect quantitative data on: demographic and background characteristics; personal skills and abilities; previous personal, social, and academic experiences; educational motivations and aspirations; and expectations of college. The instrument also included an open-ended item inviting additional comments from respondents about their experiences as transfer students at any point in their process of application, transition, or attendance, thereby allowing us to collect qualitative data on the experience of new transfer students. The instrument was developed based on current research literature about transfer student issues, existing surveys (with permission of their authors), as well as input from our colleagues in Student Affairs and the College.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
| |
Of the 2,713 new transfer students who received an invitation to complete the on-line instrument 1,140 returned the instrument for a 42% response rate. Further, 328 of these students provided open-ended responses that range from one sentence to 427 words.
Table 1 presents basic demographic and admissions statistics for the overall TSS sample as compared with all transfer students entering UCLA in Fall 2005. While the sample slightly over-represents women, residential students, Asian students, and students with lower academic performances (i.e., B- or below), it is generally representative of the target population. Comparison data were drawn from the 2005 administration of the CIRP Freshman Survey at UCLA. Nearly 3,000 (n=2,874) of the 4,422 new students who entered UCLA directly from high school completed this instrument at New Student Orientation for a 65% response rate.
_________________________
 The primary limitation of the 2005 pilot administration of the Transfer Student Survey is that the names of survey recipients were requested from the Registrar's Office just prior to the registration deadline for fall quarter in order to disseminate the survey during the first week of classes. As such, the survey was sent the 2,713 transfer students who had registered by that data. Since 3,150 transfer students registered by the deadline, the administration plan for the 2005 TSS excluded the 437 students who submitted their registration materials/payment closer to, or after, the deadline. The administration plan for the 2006 Transfer Student Survey will be adjusted to minimize this problem in the future. |
|
| |
|
|
IV. Findings on Personal Background |
A. Demographics
|
As illustrated in Table 2, the Transfer Student Survey and the CIRP Freshman Survey both include several measures that collect data on demographics and other background characteristics of new UCLA students. |
| |
| |
| |
Age
As we would expect, direct comparisons of respondents to the CIRP Freshman Survey and Transfer Student Survey yield significant age differences. |
| • |
The largest age differences are accounted for by the difference in time since graduation from high school. In fact, the most commonly reported age for each group of students (18 years old for direct students and 20 years old for transfers) suggests that the majority of both groups of students tend to originally enter college at approximately the same age. |
| • |
The one point of departure between the two groups with respect to age is the greater range of ages among transfer students (17 or 18 years old to 55 and older) as compared with the age range among direct students (17 or 18 years old up to age 24). This variation becomes particularly apparent when one considers that 17% of the transfer student sample is over 25 and no direct-entry students report ages higher than the range of 21 to 24 years old. |
|
| |
Gender
The gender breakdown of respondents to the Transfer Student Survey (TSS) and the CIRP Freshman Survey indicate that these two groups are the same in their representation of men and women. |
| |
Race
Other than a slightly higher representation of students who classify themselves as “other Latino” or “Other” among respondents to the TSS, there are no statistically significant differences in the racial/ethnic composition of students who enter UCLA directly from high school and those who enter as transfer students. These data suggest that transferring into UCLA may not be providing greater access to most historically under-represented minority groups. |
| |
Parents' education
Student reports of their parents' education indicate that UCLA transfers are more often first-generation college students (i.e., neither parent earned a college degree) than are students who entered UCLA directly from high school. Although there is no statistically significant difference in the proportion of students from each group whose parents earned a college degree, a greater percentage of direct-entry students than transfers have at least one parent who earned a graduate degree. |
| |
| |
|
B. Family Characteristics |
Although there is little comparable data on new UCLA students who enter directly from high school, the Transfer Student Survey collected valuable information on students' families, which represent another important measure of their personal backgrounds and current commitments. Table 3 summarizes these data. |
| |
|
| |
| |
|
| • |
Only a small minority of transfer students report that they are married and/or have dependent children. Specifically, approximately 11% of respondents to the 2005 TSS are married or living with a partner, and only 4% have dependent children. |
| • |
Well over one-third of transfer students reported that domestic responsibilities were a significant part of their weekly schedule in the past year, including household, childcare, and other family responsibilities. Further, a similar proportion of respondents indicated that they missed class due to family responsibilities at least occasionally. |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
C. Health and Wellness |
The 2005 Transfer Student Survey contained several indicators of students' health and wellness at UCLA entry. Overall, these results, summarized in Table 4, indicate a transfer student population that drinks alcohol (although the amount is not specified), does not exercise very much, contains many students that feel overwhelmed, and includes a small but important contingent who feel depressed and that are seeking professional or pharmaceutical assistance with a diagnosed mental health condition.
|
| |
|
|
| |
|
| • |
Although the survey did not ask how much a student drank in each sitting, the 2005 TSS findings do show that nearly two-thirds of UCLA transfer students drank at least some wine, beer or liquor in the past year. |
| • |
Just over half spent at least three hours a week exercising or playing sports, which is a much lower standard than the recommended 6-7 hours per week for optimal health. |
| • |
Just over 10% of transfers report that they frequently felt depressed in the past year and nearly one-quarter of all 2005 TSS respondents reported that they frequently felt overwhelmed by all they had to do. |
| • |
A small proportion, less than 10%, of transfers reported that they sought mental health consultation or took prescribed medication for a mental health condition. |
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
D. Personal and Co-Curricular Activities
|
Students' history of co-curricular involvement at school as well as their personal experiences and leisure activities provide valuable insight into their interests and life choices as well as suggest potential areas of engagement at UCLA. It is important, however, to note that these comparisons represent the high school activities and involvement of the direct-entry students, but the early college experiences of transfer students. As such, these comparisons should be interpreted with some caution. For example, the involvement of community college students may be artificially low due to opportunities for such involvement or because of a greater need for student employment in college, the community college students may have been quite involved in high school but have different patterns of involvement in college, etc. Despite such limitations, these data do provide valuable feedback about the personal history of these students. |
| |
| |
| |
| • |
Among transfer students, two-thirds report frequently socializing with someone of another racial/ethnic group, more than 60% engaged in volunteerism, and over half attended a religious service. While a majority of transfers were involved in these activities during the past year, students who entered directly from high school reported significantly higher levels of engagement in all three areas than did transfers. |
| • |
Over half of the respondents to the 2005 TSS spent six or more hours socializing with friends in the past year as compared with over two-thirds of direct-entry students who dedicated similar amounts of time to socializing. |
| • |
One of the most common leisure activities among transfers was watching television, which they did at a slightly higher rate than direct-entry students. However, over one-third of transfers also reported that they spent at least three hours per week “reading for pleasure” during the past year, a rate that was much higher than for students who entered UCLA directly from high school. |
| • |
Transfer students were far less likely than direct-entry students to report that they had spent three or more hours a week on student clubs and groups in the past year, although over one-third of transfers did spend three or more hours per week on their previous campus outside of class. |
|
| |
| |
|
|
E. Abilities and Self-Concept |
The 2005 Transfer Student Survey included a measure of students' perceptions of their own skills and abilities. By comparing these self-ratings with the responses of students who entered UCLA directly from high school to an identical question on the 2005 CIRP Freshman Survey, we are able to highlight their similarities and to identify specific areas of strength and weakness that are unique to each group. |
| |
|
| |
| |
|
| • |
Students who transfer to UCLA and those who enter directly from high school are actually similar in self-concept in many ways. Specifically, there were no statistically significant differences between groups with respect to physical and emotional health, cooperativeness, religiosity, and drive to achieve. Similarly, personal assessments of skills and abilities in the areas of leadership, public speaking, and computers were equal. |
| • |
Transfer students tended to rate themselves higher than direct-entry students on the remaining items. For example, over three-quarters of transfer students reported that they were at least “above average” with respect to self-understanding and understanding of others, which represent significantly higher self-ratings than direct students. Transfer students' self-ratings also indicated an advantage over students who entered UCLA directly from high school with respect to spirituality, creativity, self confidence, and writing and artistic abilities. |
| • |
While transfer students tended to have a higher self image at entry to UCLA with respect to personal and interpersonal skills, direct-entry students felt much more positively than transfer students about their academic abilities generally and their mathematical abilities in particular. |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
F. Summary and Implications for Findings on Personal Background |
The 2005 TSS and CIRP Freshman Survey data reveal many similarities between transfer students and those who enter college directly from high school. This is particularly true with respect to demographics, including gender, age students originally entered college, and, perhaps most importantly, ethnic background. In fact, there are very few significant differences in the racial/ethnic composition of transfer students and direct-entry students, which suggests that transfer to UCLA is not a path of access for students from under-represented racial and ethnic groups. However, data on parents' education indicate a higher proportion of first-generation students among transfers as compared to direct-entry students. While this is important information about access, it is also critical to consider the need for additional advising and support for first-generation students who may have fewer informational resources and personal support for college, but particularly for first-generation transfer students whose limited time to complete their requirements at the university (2-3 years as opposed to 4-5 years for direct-entry students) make academic missteps due to lack of information even more detrimental.
Beyond demographic comparisons, findings on other areas of personal background have important implications for programming and support for transfer students. For instance, data on transfer students' family characteristics indicate that several students are coping with domestic responsibilities that are likely to draw them away from the demands and opportunities of life as a college student. As such, it may be necessary to reach out to these students in particular and assist them with time management skills, offer specialized mentorship, and introduce less time-intensive but still meaningful ways to become involved in the campus community. In yet another example, transfer students appear to be distinctive in their self-concept: they appear to be less confident in their academic and mathematic abilities, but have a higher self-concept than their direct-entry peers when it comes to self-understanding and understanding of others. Given that the personal strengths of transfer students are ones that often facilitate compatibility for successful living situations, these data help support the practice of carving out housing niches for transfer students, such as those currently available in Hilgard House and Hitch Suites. Further, it provides some direction for how we fit our transfer students in with direct students with respect to residence life programming. |
| |
| |
|
| |
|
V. Findings on Academic Background |
A. Reasons for Attending College |
The 2005 TSS included a qustion asking students to rate the importance of 14 different reasons for attending college. |
| |
 |
| |
| • |
Transfer students and students who enter UCLA directly from high school tend to have similar reasons for attending college. Table 7 shows the rankings of these reasons for attending college among students at UCLA. While the order changes slightly for the transfer and direct-entry students, the five reasons that are at the top of their respective lists of “very important reasons in deciding to go to college” are the same. |
| • |
It also is interesting to note that while vocational and monetary interests are represented among the top five reasons for attending college for both transfers and direct-entry students, the most important reason for both groups, “to learn more about things that interest me,” represents an intrinsic interest in ideas and knowledge. |
|
| |
| |
| |
| • |
Despite these similarities, comparisons between these 14 items included on both the TSS and CIRP Freshman Survey result in differences between transfers and direct-entry students that are statistically significant. As shown in Figure 1: |
|
| |
 |
A higher proportion of transfers than direct-entry students reported that a desire to become a more cultured person, an interest in general education and an appreciation of ideas, encouragement from a mentor or role model, and an inability find a job were “very important” reasons for attending college. |
|
A slightly lower percentage of transfer students indicated that their desire to “get away from home” was a “very important” reason for attending college than students who entered UCLA directly from high school. This difference between the groups is consistent with the higher percentage of transfer students who plan to live with their family during their first year at UCLA. Since over 20% of transfers plan to live with family or relatives during the first year at UCLA as compared with only 3% of direct-entry students, “getting away from home” is not an imminent possibility for many UCLA transfer students. |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
B. Educational Path to UCLA |
| |
| |
• For three-quarters of 2005 TSS respondents, their most recent application to UCLA represented their first attempt for admission to this institution. However, that means that almost one in four had applied to UCLA previously and had not been admitted. |
| |
| |
| |
| • |
Reflective of the UCLA transfer student population at large, over 90% of TSS respondents indicated the California Community Colleges as the type of college where they had taken the most classes prior to UCLA. |
| • |
Just 6% of respondents reported that they had completed the majority of their college coursework at a four-year college or university. |
|
| |
|
| |
C. Academic Preparation |
Although transfer students' self-ratings indicate that they feel less academically prepared for college than do students who enter UCLA directly from high school (see Table 6, page 7), other findings from the Transfer Student Survey suggest that the 2005 entering cohort of transfer students are comparable to direct-entry students on several measures of academic performance and preparedness. |
| |
| |
| |
As shown in Table 8, the high school grade point average of transfer students was significantly lower than the academic performance of respondents to the 2005 CIRP Freshman Survey (i.e., direct-entry students). However, the cumulative grade point average of respondents to the 2005 Transfer Student Survey from their previous college experiences represent an academic performance that is significantly higher than the one indicated by their high school GPA. In other words, the comparisons illustrated in Table 8 show that transfer students' college experiences prior to UCLA (predominantly at the California Community Colleges) are allowing these students to “gain ground” academically. |
| |
| |
| |
|
| • |
Perhaps as part of their efforts to “catch up” with regard to their academic achievement, just over one-quarter of the TSS respondents engaged in developmental educational activities (i.e., special tutoring or remedial work) in the previous year. |
| • |
An overwhelming majority (87%) of TSS survey respondents at least occasionally consulted with academic counselors regarding transfer, which may reflect their efforts to maintain a focus on transfer in their college experiences prior to UCLA. Twenty-four percent of TSS respondents indicated that they participated in the Transfer Alliance Program (TAP) and 11% were involved in a transfer preparation program other than TAP. |
|
| |
|
| |
| |
|
The majority of transfer students felt that the college where they had taken the most classes had high academic standards for performance and skill development among their students. Nearly 90% agreed that their courses had developed their critical and analytical skills, over 80% felt that their courses were intellectually challenging, and just fewer than 75% agreed that their courses required extensive reading as well as intensive writing assignments. |
| |
|
| |
| |
|
Figure 5 shows the feedback of 2005 TSS respondents to a question that directly addresses their preparation for the academic standards of UCLA; 85% of transfers felt confident that their previous college coursework adequately prepared them for UCLA's academic demands. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
D. Summary and Implications for Findings on Academic Background |
Although transfer students feel less confident in their academic and mathematical abilities than direct-entry students (Section IV, Part E), information from the 2005 TSS on GPA comparisons and confidence among transfers that the courses at their previous institution prepared them well for the academic standards of UCLA suggest that the academic preparedness and performance of transfer students is on par with direct-entry students. Other statistics on the frequency of consultation with counselors regarding transfer and personal assessments of their previous institution's academic rigor indicate that transfers have taken important steps to prepare themselves for academics at UCLA. In fact, these statistics could be used in outreach efforts with the California Community Colleges (the source of over 90% of UCLA transfer students) to dispel this “deficiency myth” among incoming UCLA transfers, particularly for the nearly one-quarter of transfer students who had previously applied to UCLA but were not accepted on their first attempt, and among members of the UCLA community at large. Specifically, these data could be used as part of the counseling in the Transfer Alliance Program (TAP) or in mentoring programs at the Community Colleges, which appear to be a more significant influence for attending college among transfers than direct-entry students. Transfers and direct-entry students also are similar in their reasons for attending college, with intrinsic interest in ideas and knowledge represented in the reasons that top the list of reasons for each group. These findings can further unite the two groups in their academic self-concept as well as unify the pedagogical approaches and academic advising offered to all new students.
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
VI. Findings on Financial Status and Employment |
A. Financial Concerns and Student Employment |
Based on responses to the CIRP and to the TSS, one of the most significant differences between direct-entry UCLA students and those who transfer here is their socio-economic history and their current financial status, both of which have important implications for their transition to UCLA.
|
| |
|
|
| |
|
Respondents to the 2005 TSS reported a much higher degree of overall concern about finances than did new students who entered directly from high school. Most importantly, there is a large, statistically significant difference in the percent of transfers and direct-entry students who report “major” financial concerns. In other words, nearly one-third of transfer students are unsure whether they will have enough funds to complete college as compared with 11% of the sample of students who enter UCLA directly from high school. |
| |
|
| |
| |
|
| • |
Figure 7 illustrates that less than half of the direct-entry students report that they have worked for pay in the past year as compared to over three-quarters of the sample of transfer students that maintained employment in the past year. Further, half of the transfer students worked 20 or more hours per week as college students as compared to only five percent of direct students who worked at least 20 hours per week during their senior year of high school. |
| • |
Research literature in higher education indicates that excessive employment can interfere with academic engagement, particularly if students work off campus. Although there are large differences in the work history of transfer and direct students, both groups have high expectations for student employment as UCLA undergraduates. However, a slightly higher proportion of transfer students than direct-entry students express that there is a “very good chance” that they will get a job while at UCLA and that there is a “very good chance” that they will work full time. |
|
| |
|
| |
| |
|
| • |
The most common reason that TSS respondents give for seeking employment or working during college is a need/desire to help pay for their college education. |
| • |
Other common reasons for transfer students to maintain student employment at UCLA are the desire to earn spending money (22%), to gain job experience for an anticipated career (13%), and to help take care of family obligations (10%). |
| • |
Less than 10% of transfer students do not intend to work at all during college. |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
B. Summary and Implications for Findings on Financial Status & Employment
|
Differences in financial status and employment between direct-entry and transfer students' appear to be one of the most significant challenges to our population of new transfer students and are important to consider in all aspects of institutional support. Transfer students' greater financial concerns and higher rates of previous and expected student employment have implications for their living situation and how far they will need to commute to UCLA (e.g., living on campus vs. closer to home or a job); their involvement in co-curricular opportunities as evidenced by transfers' lower expectations to participate in student clubs/groups, join the Greek system, volunteer, and participate in student government; and the degree to which they intend to engage in educational enriching opportunities such as interacting with faculty and study abroad programs (See Section VII., Part B). The impact of campus budget cuts on the selection of campus jobs available to students and the number of hours the remaining employment opportunities will be able to fund have the potential to drive even greater numbers of transfer students to pursue off-campus student employment and to further disengage from the UCLA campus community. Since the decisions regarding transfer student employment are likely made prior to UCLA entry, it may be important for us to consider lucrative on-campus employment opportunities as part of our outreach efforts for transfer students. |
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
VII. Findings on Plans for UCLA and Beyond |
|
| |
|
| • |
While nearly all direct-entry students (97%) plan to live in UCLA residence halls or other campus student housing, less than half of transfer students (44%) had similar plans to live in campus-sponsored housing in Fall 2005. As such, many of the issues that are often associated with transfer students at UCLA may actually be the result of their commuter status on a primarily residential campus. |
| • |
As shown in Figure 8, over one-third of transfer students live in a private home, apartment or room and just over 20% live with their families. |
|
|
| |
|
| • |
Since the 2005 Transfer Student Survey collected information on the distance of transfers' residences from campus, we are able to see that 9% of these students have to commute a significant distance (i.e., more than 30 miles) to get to classes and campus activities at UCLA. |
| • |
The data shown in Table 11 indicate that students who live in a private home, apartment, or room tend to have a shorter commute to campus than do students who live with their families or relatives. |
|
|
|
| |
B. Expectations About College
|
| |
| |
|
| • |
Comparisons of students' expectations at college entry (Table 12) show a good deal of divergence between transfers and direct-entry students. Only two expectations—to strengthen religious beliefs/convictions and to participate in student protests/demonstrations—were the same for both groups. |
| • |
Transfer students tended to have lower expectations for UCLA than do direct-entry students. The estimates of transfer students behaviors, engagement, and performance at UCLA were significantly higher than those of direct-entry students on only one measure—to earn at least a “B” average (Table 12). |
| • |
Direct-entry students had higher expectations for involvement in every measure of co-curricular involvement (e.g., Greek life, student government, athletics, student clubs/groups) than did transfers (Table 12). In addition, a larger proportion of students who entered directly from high school than transfer students reported a “very good chance” that they would interact with professors, interact with students from a different racial or ethnic background, and participate in a student abroad program while at UCLA (Table 12). |
| • |
Interestingly, transfer students had lower expectations to engage in remedial work and to change their major field while at UCLA than their direct-entry peers, further reflecting their confidence in their academic preparation (Table 12). |
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
C. Educational Aspirations
|
In addition to asking about students' plans for their time at UCLA, both the 2005 Transfer Student Survey and CIRP Freshman Survey inquire about their long-term educational aspirations. Specifically, Table 13 shows the range of responses to the question: “What is the highest academic degree that you intend to obtain at any institution (not just UCLA)?” |
| |
|
| |
| |
|
| • |
Even though it represents a small minority of students overall, a much larger proportion of transfer students (7%) than direct-entry students (0%) anticipate that they will fall short of a Bachelor's degree. |
| • |
Overall, the data in Table 13 indicate that the majority of both transfer and direct-entry students intend to pursue an advanced degree. |
| • |
A higher percentage of direct-entry students than transfers are planning for a terminal Master's degree. However, just over one-quarter of the students in each group intends to pursue a doctorate. |
| • |
When questioned at college entry, a large proportion of both transfer and direct-entry students intend to pursue a professional degree, although they tend have an interest in different fields. Students who matriculate to UCLA directly from high school more often plan to pursue a medical/dental degree than do transfers. However, transfer students are significantly more likely to intend to pursue a law degree than are direct-entry students. |
|
| |
|
| |
Back to Contents |
| |
D. Summary and Implications for Findings on Plans for UCLA and Beyond |
Personal and academic background, financial status, and employment issues are likely to be highly related to transfer students' plans for their time at UCLA and beyond. For example, family demands, financial concerns, and the need to maintain previous employment may help explain the fact that just fewer than 50% of transfer students live in UCLA-sponsored housing, nearly 20% commute between ten and 30 miles, and almost 10% commute over 30 miles to attend classes at UCLA. As such, living off-campus while attending an institution that caters to a primarily residential new-student population can create significant challenges for the majority of the transfer students. When coupled with transfer students' higher academic expectations and lower social and co-curricular expectations about life at UCLA than direct-entry students, these findings indicate a less than optimal situation for transfers to truly integrate into the academic and social communities at UCLA. It is perhaps not surprising then that these data also reveal that there are still greater retention concerns for our incoming transfers than direct-entry students: 7% of survey respondents predicted that they would not earn a Bachelor's degree even after they started attending UCLA.
In response, our efforts to inform and involve transfer students, especially commuting transfers, should begin even prior to their entry to UCLA in the form of informational programs with Community Colleges about utilizing the opportunities at four-year colleges and emphasizing their availability to all students (including transfers) as well as the importance of involvement outside of the classroom to have the most enriching educational experience. Additionally, these data are a valuable reminder to campus staff and faculty to evaluate existing student support programs, co-curricular activities, and out-of-class educational opportunities with the needs and limitations of the commuter student in mind and to potentially change the nature or structure of these programs to accommodate students who live off campus. Since nearly as many transfers as direct-entry students intend to pursue an advanced degree, career services and academic advising are examples of campus units that will especially want to consider the needs of transfers and commuters in their programming. Further, these data suggest that advising and career center programs oriented toward information about doctoral education and law school will be of particular interest to transfer students. |
| |
|
| |
Back to Contents |
| |
|
VIII. Findings from Student Responses to the Open-Ended Question |
A. Key Themes and Student Quotes |
Since the 2005 Transfer Student Survey was a pilot administration of this new instrument, SAIRO included one open-ended item to allow students the opportunity to comment on transfer student experiences that were not otherwise included on the survey. This question read: “What have we not asked about that you would like us to know? We invite your comments about your experience as a UCLA transfer student at any point in your process of application, transition, or attendance.” Not only did this question provide another way for survey respondents to provide personal feedback about their transition to UCLA, but also helped identify content areas that should be considered for inclusion on the instrument for future administrations of the Transfer Student Survey. Table 14 summarizes this feedback under the eight major thematic areas that emerged during coding of transfer students' responses to this question. Also included in Table 14 are the most commonly mentioned topics under each theme and the number of times each of these issues was mentioned in the responses to the open-ended survey question. |
| |
|
|
| |
|
| • |
Overwhelmingly, the singular topic with the most comments was the “Positive Comments” category under the theme of “Overall Impressions of Institutional Environment/Campus Culture.” Some examples of feedback in this area include: |
|
| |
|
“UCLA is an absolutely unbelievable experience, and anyone who is admitted should consider themselves very privileged.” |
|
“I'm very glad I chose to come to UCLA. I am having a lot of fun right now.” |
|
“I'd have to say the transition from my previous University of California campus to UCLA was a surprisingly smooth one. Although I was initially overwhelmed at the prospect of acclimating myself to all the nuances of UCLA, I found that there was always something to help me along. My first impression of being a student at UCLA is an excellent one and I'm confident as well as excited to meet what lies ahead. While I'm sure many students echo the same sentiments I've just discussed, I still felt I should let it be known that I'm grateful for the opportunity and experience that is being a UCLA transfer student.” |
|
“I would just like to say that getting accepted at UCLA was perhaps one of the best, life-changing experiences I have had. The campus is so beautiful, the students and staff are all awesome. I look forward with overwhelming pride and joy to each day I attend classes at UCLA.” |
|
| |
|
| • |
Student feedback included several suggestions to enhance the transition process for transfer students, particularly with respect to Transfer Student Orientation. Following are some of the specific suggestions respondents provided to streamline and improve orientation: |
|
| |
| |
“The orientation for transfer student should last longer than one day. Not enough time to show transfer students what they needed to know about the school.” |
| |
“Orientation should take transfers on a well guided tour and talk more specifically about the resources available to students. (e.g., media library, music library, and computer rental in Powell).” |
| |
“I think it would help transfer students acclimate to the campus and social environment more if the orientation program consisted of more than just signing up for classes and going to a few academic workshops. While the main reason to come to UCLA is academic, I feel some level of a social life is important to academic achievement, and it is harder as a transfer to get to know people socially at first.” |
| |
“There are major scheduling conflicts.” “I felt that it was extremely rushed and was not designed to allow students the time to go to most or all of the workshops given during that day.” |
|
| |
|
| • |
The qualitative feedback provided more evidence of particular areas of challenge for transfer students including: difficulty managing campus bureaucracy, a need for more information during their transition, limited opportunities to meet other students (particularly other transfer students), and financial challenges. While insight into these issues is valuable, it is important to note that the proportion of these types of comments is much smaller than the percent of positive statements from respondents. |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
B. Implications for Findings from Student Responses to the Open-Ended Question
|
There are three primary implications for the data collected via the open-ended survey item on the 2005 TSS. First, student input of this nature provides positive feedback and constructive criticism for specific programs that are often a critical part of transfer students' transition to UCLA (e.g., Orientation, TAP, admissions, etc.), which can often encourage reflection and inform the improvement of these student support structures. Second, answers to open-ended items provide an opportunity to flesh-out the quantitative statistics with personal stories, thereby giving a true “voice” to these data overall. Finally, as the Transfer Student Survey is in its pilot stage, coded responses to the open-ended item help identify areas of common interest among transfer students that should be considered for inclusion in future versions of the instrument, such as additional questions on finances, Orientation, and opportunities for social interaction with peers. |
|
IX. Conclusions |
Overall the data collected via the 2005 Transfer Student Survey met the initial goals of the pilot administration. One such goal was to obtain better understanding of the personal characteristics and transition experiences of transfer students at UCLA, especially in comparison to students who enter UCLA directly from high school. The data featured in this report allow us to consider many aspects of transfer students both personally and in their transition to UCLA. The individual, comparative, and interconnected nature of these data provide a point of reflection for faculty, staff, and administrators who interact with all new students, but particularly transfers. While in many instances these findings support what we already know intuitively and observe daily, it is very powerful to have empirical rather than anecdotal data serve as the foundation of campus decision-making. However, the results of analyses with 2005 TSS and CIRP Freshman Survey data also provide new information and perspectives and therefore have numerous implications for the programs, policies, and pedagogies that are intended to ease the transition to UCLA and enhance the experiences of undergraduates.
A second aim of the 2005 TSS was to collect baseline data on all new UCLA students (not just direct-entry students via the CIRP Freshman Survey) in order to conduct meaningful value-added assessments of their time at UCLA. As such, the data presented in this report represent only part of the potential value of these new TSS data. The full impact will be felt when these same students are again assessed later in their UCLA career, thereby allowing us to evaluate how these students change over time as well as the impact of various UCLA experiences on their personal and cognitive development via longitudinal assessment techniques. |
| |
| |
|
| |
|
X. Appendixes |
|
Content of 2005 UCLA Transfer Student Survey (TSS) |
| 1. |
First Name
Last Name
UCLA ID Number
Date of birth (mm/dd/yyyy) |
|
| 2. |
Sex |
| |
|
|
| 3. |
Are you: (Mark all that apply) |
|
A. White/Caucasian
B. African American/Black
C. American Indian/Alaska Native
D. Asian American/Asian
E. Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander
F. Mexican American/Chicano
G. Puerto Rican
H. Other Latino
I. Other, Please Specify |
| |
|
4. |
Are you currently: (Mark one ) |
| |
| |
• Married
• Unmarried, living with partner
• Separated or divorced
• Single |
|
| |
|
5. |
Do you have dependent children who live with you? |
| |
|
| |
|
| 6. |
Rate yourself on each of the following traits as compared with the average person your age. We want the most accurate estimate of how you see yourself. (Mark one in each row) |
| |
| |
• Highest 10%
• Above Average
• Average
• Below Average
• Lowest 10% |
|
| |
A. Academic ability
B. Artistic ability
C. Computer skills
D. Cooperativeness
E. Creativity
F. Drive to achieve
G. Emotional health
H. Leadership ability
I. Mathematical ability
J. Physical health
K. Public speaking ability
L. Religiousness
M. Self-confidence (intellectual)
N. Self-confidence (social)
O. Self-understanding
P. Spirituality
Q. Understanding of others
R. Writing ability |
| |
|
| 7. |
Had you applied to UCLA before your most recent application and admission? |
| |
| |
• No
• Yes, but I was not admitted to UCLA.
• Yes, I was previously admitted to UCLA but I chose to attend a different 4-year college.
• Yes, I was previously admitted to UCLA but I chose to attend a 2-year college.
• Yes, I was previously admitted to UCLA but I chose not to attend college at that time. |
|
| |
|
| 8. |
At what type of college have you taken the most classes? (Mark one ) |
| |
| |
• California Community College
• California State University (CSU)
• Other University of California (UC)
• Other 2-year college
• Other 4-year college |
|
| |
|
| 9. |
Please indicate the extent to which you agree or disagree with the following statements about the college where you have taken the most classes. (Mark one in each row). |
| |
| |
• Agree Strongly
• Agree Somewhat
• Disagree Somewhat
• Disagree Strongly |
|
| |
A. The courses demanded intensive writing assignments.
B. The courses required extensive reading.
C. The courses developed my critical and analytical thinking.
D. Overall, the courses were intellectually challenging.
E. I feel confident the courses prepared me for the academic standards of UCLA. |
| |
|
| 10. |
What was your grade point average in high school? |
| |
| |
• A+ (4.0 and above)
• A (3.75 to 3.99)
• A- or B+ (3.25 to 3.74)
• B (2.75 to 3.24)
• B- or C+ (2.25 to 2.74)
• C (1.75 to 2.24)
• C- or less (below 1.75) |
|
| |
|
| 11. |
What was your cumulative grade point average from your previous college experience at all institutions? |
| |
| |
• A+ (4.0 and above)
• A (3.75 to 3.99)
• A- or B+ (3.25 to 3.74)
• B (2.75 to 3.24)
• B- or C+ (2.25 to 2.74)
• C (1.75 to 2.24)
• C- or less (below 1.75) |
|
| |
|
| 12. |
Did you participate in the Transfer Alliance Program (TAP) as part of your UCLA Admissions process? |
| |
|
| |
|
| 13. |
Did you participate in a transfer preparation program other than the Transfer Alliance program (TAP) (e.g. Puente, MESA , etc.)? |
| |
| |
• Yes
• No
• If Yes, please indicate which one: |
|
| |
|
| 14. |
For the activities below, indicate which ones you did during the past year . If you engaged in an activity often, mark “Frequently.” If you engaged in an activity one or more times, but not frequently, mark “Occasionally”. Mark “Not at all” if you have not performed the activity during the past year. (Mark one for each item.) |
| |
| |
• Frequently
• Occasionally
• Not at all |
|
| |
A. Attended a religious service
B. Was bored in class
C. Studied with other students
D. Interacted with professors/instructors
E. Smoked cigarettes
F. Drank beer, wine, or liquor
G. Participated in organized demonstrations
H. Felt overwhelmed by all I had to do
I. Felt depressed
J. Asked a professor/instructor for advice after class
K. Socialized with someone of another racial/ethnic group
L. Came late to class
M. Used the Internet for research or homework
N. Performed community service as part of a class
O. Used a personal computer
P. Discussed religion
Q. Discussed politics
R. Missed class due to family responsibilities
S. Missed class due to job responsibilities
T. Needed special tutoring or remedial work in an academic subject
U. Consulted with academic counselors regarding transfer |
| |
|
| 15. |
Have you pursued either of the following treatment options for a mental health condition (e.g., depression, anxiety, etc.) in the past 12 months? |
| |
| |
• Yes
• No
• Decline to state |
|
| |
A. Sought mental health consultation
B. Took prescribed medication |
| |
|
| 16. |
What is the highest level of formal education obtained by either of your parents? (Mark one) |
| |
| |
• Grammar school or less
• Some high school
• High school graduate
• Postsecondary school other than college
• Some college
• College degree
• Some graduate school
• Graduate degree |
|
| |
|
| 17. |
In deciding to go to college, how important to you was each of the following reasons? |
| |
| |
• Very Important
• Somewhat Important
• Not Important |
|
| |
A. My parents wanted me to go
B. I could not find a job
C. Wanted to get away from home
D. To be able to get a better job
E. To gain a general education and appreciation of ideas
F. There was nothing better to do
G. To make me a more cultured person
H. To be able to make more money
I. To learn more about things that would interest me
J. To prepare myself for graduate or professional school
K. A mentor/role model encouraged me to go
L. To get training for a specific career
M. To find purpose in life
N. To prepare myself to give something back to my community |
| |
|
| 18. |
What is the highest academic degree that you intend to obtain at any institution (not just at UCLA)? (Mark one) |
| |
| |
• None
• Vocational certificate
• Associate (A.A. or equivalent)
• Bachelor's degree (B.A., B.S., etc.)
• Master's degree (M.A., M.S., etc.)
• Ph.D. or Ed.D.
• M.D., D.O., D.D.S., or D.V.M.
• J.D. (Law)
• B.D. or M.DIV. (Divinity)
• Other, Please Specify |
|
| |
|
| 19. |
Do you have any concern about your ability to finance your college education? (Mark one) |
| |
| |
• None (I am confident that I will have sufficient funds)
• Some (but I probably will have enough funds)
• Major (not sure I will have enough funds to complete college) |
|
| |
|
| 20. |
Where are you living for the fall term? (Mark one) |
| |
| |
• UCLA residence hall or suites
• Fraternity or sorority house
• Off-campus student housing
• With my family or other relatives less than 10 miles from campus
• With my family or other relatives 11 to 30 miles from campus
• With my family or other relatives more than 30 miles from campus
• Other private home, apartment, or room less than 10 miles from campus
• Other private home, apartment, or room 11 to 30 miles from campus
• Other private home, apartment, or room more than 30 miles from campus |
|
| |
|
| 21. |
During the past academic year, how much time did you spend during a typical week doing the following activities? |
| |
| |
• None
• Less than 1 hour
• 1-2
• 3-5
• 6-10
• 11-15
• 16-20
• 21-30
• Over 30 |
|
| |
A. Attending classes/labs
B. Studying/homework
C. Talking with teachers outside of class
D. Working (for pay) ON campus
E. Working (for pay) OFF campus
F. Student clubs/groups
G. Commuting to your college campus
H. Spending time on your previous college campus outside of classes |
| |
|
| 22. |
During the past academic year, how much time did you spend during a typical week doing the following activities? |
| |
| |
• None
• Less than 1 hour
• 1-2
• 3-5
• 6-10
• 11-15
• 16-20
• 21-30
• Over 30 |
|
| |
A. Socializing with friends
B. Exercise or sports
C. Partying
D. Volunteer work
E. Watching TV
F. Household/childcare duties
G. Other family responsibilities
H. Reading for pleasure
I. Playing video/computer games
J. Prayer/meditation |
| |
|
| 23. |
What is your best guess as to the chances that you will: (Mark one for each item.] |
| |
| |
• Very Good Chance
• Some Chance
• Very Little Chance
• No Chance |
|
| |
A. Change major field?
B. Change career choice?
C. Participate in student government?
D. Get a job to help pay for college expenses?
E. Work full-time while attending college?
F. Join a social fraternity or sorority?
G. Play varsity/intercollegiate athletics?
H. Make at least a "B" average?
I. Participate in student protests or demonstrations?
J. Transfer to another college before graduating?
K. Be satisfied with UCLA?
L. Participate in volunteer or community service work?
M. Seek personal counseling?
N. Communicate regularly with your professors?
O. Socialize with someone of another racial/ethnic group?
P. Participate in student clubs/groups?
Q. Strengthen your religious beliefs/convictions?
R. Participate in a study abroad program?
S. Need special tutoring or remedial work in an academic subject?
T. Find UCLA a welcoming environment for transfer students? |
| |
|
| 24. |
Please indicate the phrase that would describe your PRIMARY purpose for seeking employment or maintaining a job during college. (Mark one ) |
| |
| |
• Not applicable: I do not plan to work during college.
• To help pay for my college education (tuition, books, etc.)
• To take care of personal or family obligations
• To earn “spending” money (clothes, food, gas, etc.)
• To gain general job experience
• To gain job experience related to my anticipated major
• To have something to do |
|
| |
|
| 25. |
What have we not asked about that you would like us to know? We invited your comments about your experiences as a UCLA transfer students at any point in your process of application, transition, or attendance. |
|
| |
|
California Postsecondary Education Commission (CPEC) (2005). Student Transfer in California Postsecondary Education (Report 05-08) . Sacramento , CA : Author. 
