Channels For Improved Performance From Living On Campus

Araújo, Pedro de; Murray, James

doi:10.19030/ajbe.v3i12.965

Cited by 14 publications

(19 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Campus residents were also found to have better sleep (characterized by less sleep debts, shorter sleep latency, and fewer sleep disturbances) and better physical and psychological quality of life than their peers living off campus . de Araujo and Murray (2011) proposed that campus residents' better well-being can be explained by their easier access to campus resources, such as the physical facilities, as well as the greater opportunity to participate in after-school activities. Eisenberg and coworkers (2007) added that students living on campus may also have better peer social support, which promotes their adjustment in college.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“Social Jetlag” in Morning-Type College Students Living On Campus: Implications for Physical and Psychological Well-being

Lau

Wong

et al. 2013

Chronobiology International

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Although on-campus residence allows easier access to campus facilities, existing studies showed mixed results regarding the relationship between college residence and students' well-being indicators, such as sleep behaviors and mood. There was also a lack of studies investigating the role of chronotype in the relationship between on-campus residence and well-being. In particular, the temporal relationships among these factors were unclear. Hence, this longitudinal study aims to fill in these gaps by first reporting the well-being (measured in terms of mood, sleep, and quality of life) among students living on and off campus across two academic semesters. We explored factors predicting students' dropout in university residences. Although students living on campus differ in their chronotypes, activities in campus residence (if any) are mostly scheduled in the nighttime. We therefore tested if individual differences in chronotype interact with campus residence in affecting well-being. Our final sample consisted of 215 campus residents and 924 off-campus-living students from 10 different universities or colleges in Hong Kong or Macau. Their mean age was 20.2 years (SD=2.3); 6.5% of the participants are female. Participants completed self-reported questionnaires online on their sleep duration, sleep quality, chronotype, mood, and physical and psychological quality of life. Across two academic semesters, we assessed if students living on and off campus differed in our well-being measures after we partialed out the effects of demographic information (including age, sex, family income, and parents' education) and the well-being measures at baseline (T1). The results showed that, campus residents exhibited longer sleep duration, greater sleep efficiency, better sleep quality, and less feeling of stress than off-campus-living students. From one semester to the next, around 10% of campus residents did not continue to live on campus. Logistic regression showed that a morning type was the strongest factor predicting dropout from campus residence. Chronotype significantly moderated the effects of campus residence on participants' physical and psychological quality of life. Although morning-type off-campus-living students have better well-being than their evening-type peers living off campus, morning-type campus residents had worse well-being than other campus residents and they were more likely to discontinue living on campus after one semester. Our findings bear practical significance to college management that morning-type campus residents are shown to be experiencing deteriorating well-being. The authorities may need to review and revise the room-allocation policy in campus residence in improving the well-being among campus residents.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“Social Jetlag” in Morning-Type College Students Living On Campus: Implications for Physical and Psychological Well-being

Lau

Wong

et al. 2013

Chronobiology International

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Como vantagem, salienta-se que os grupos residentes e não residentes apresentam condições socioeconômicas semelhantes, o que permite uma melhor comparação dos grupos, o que é raro na literatura científica sobre o tema. Na maior parte dos estudos internacionais (Thompson & cols., 1993;LaNasa & cols., 2007;Araujo& Murray, 2011;Turley & Wodtke, 2010) os grupos de residentes e não residentes apresentam condições socioeconômicas distintas, o que pode dificultar a comparação entre os diferentes grupos. Nesse sentido, o presente estudo também pode contribuir com o avanço da literatura da área justamente por meio de evidências de efeitos da moradia com a minimização dos efeitos do nível socioeconômico.…”

Section: Discussionunclassified

“…Os estudos na área apontam para conclusões distintas, uns com efeitos significativos (Araujo& Murray, 2011; Turley & Wodtke, 2010) e outros com efeitos não significativos (Delucchi, 1993;Blimling, 1989) no desempenho dos estudantes. Também indicam variáveis que podem influenciar o desempenho acadêmico, tais como: o envolvimento estudantil, a participação em atividades extracurriculares, a forma de agir diferenciada por diferentes grupos, separados por etnia, gênero ou nível socioeconômico (Araújo, 2003;LaNasa, Olson, & Alleman, 2007;Araujo & Murray, 2011;Turley & Wodtke, 2010).…”

Section: Desempenho Acadêmico Permanência Na Universidade E a Relaçãunclassified

Impacto da Moradia Estudantil no Desempenho Acadêmico e na Permanência na Universidade

Lacerda

Valentini

2018

Psicol. Esc. Educ.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Resumo Esta pesquisa teve como objetivo avaliar o impacto da moradia estudantil sobre a vida acadêmica de universitários e analisar a permanência na universidade. O delineamento da pesquisa foi quase-experimental, com dois grupos: residentes e não-residentes. Participaram 408 estudantes com idades entre 16 e 57 anos (M = 33,5 e DP = 24,75), sendo 262 residentes na moradia estudantil (59,58% mulheres) e 146 não residentes (59,54% mulheres). Os dados foram analisados em quatro situações: residentes pré e pós-processo seletivo e não residentes pré e pós-processo seletivo. Os resultados indicaram que o crescimento do rendimento acadêmico é maior entre os residentes (p ≤ 0,001, r = 0,16). Além disso, os residentes passaram a trancar menos disciplinas, após o ingresso na moradia, se comparados aos não residentes (p ≤ 0,01, r = 0,22). Tais resultados confirmam o impacto positivo da moradia estudantil sobre o rendimento acadêmico e permanência do estudante na universidade.

show abstract

“…A second study was conducted using the same data in an attempt to understand what causes such a difference in academic success of students living on campus versus off campus. Students living on-campus were more likely to study in their residence as well as engage in extra-curricular activities and stay engaged in those activities after moving off campus (Araujo & Murray, 2011). The students who lived on-campus consumed less alcohol on average and spent more time studying with roommates and students in the same classes even after departing the residence halls.…”

Section: Living On Campusmentioning

confidence: 98%

“…Two separate studies using the same data set at Indiana University -Purdue University in 2008 examined the involvement of students living on campus compared to students who lived off campus (Araujo & Murray, 2010;Araujo & Murray, 2011). The school has a small on-campus population (1,107 beds for an enrollment of 19,700 students) which means that only about 15% of students live on campus at any time in their college experience.…”

Section: Living On Campusmentioning

confidence: 99%

Student Involvement and the Impact on Academic Success

Hyer¹

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Your kindness, grace, and support was priceless throughout the process. Thank you to my committee, Lindsey, Keith, Carl, and Hannah for your inquisitive questions, valuable lessons, allowing me to bounce ideas off you, and challenging me to grow as a researcher and a scholar. Thank you to my Mom, Dad, Aunts, and Uncle, brothers, and sister who encouraged me and checked in on me throughout the past few years as I began this journey. Thank you to the Honors College staff, for allowing the flexibility to complete the program, and for endlessly telling me, I might be crazy to try to do it the way I did, but for encouraging my craziness. Thanks to Michael and Kate for providing feedback and editing, and making this readable. vi ABSTRACT Universities have been trying to increase graduation rates for decades. Using Astin's student involvement theory (1984), which posits the more a student is involved at the university, the more likely students will be retained and graduate from the university. Much of the research over the past 20 years has been limited to study the impact of one form of involvement has on retention and graduation, while this study combines different forms of involvement and how they impact retention and graduation rates. This study occurs with a first-year cohort entering fall 2012 at a public four-year university in the Pacific Northwest. While considering students' entering characteristics, this study uses multiple analyses to explore how first semester student involvement (Greek life, Recreation center use, working on campus, etc.) affects first semester GPA, first-semester and first-year retention, and graduation rates. Overall findings show first semester GPA is still the best predictor of six-year graduation rates. The study also showed certain types of student involvement impacts first semester GPA. This impact led to the creation of a weighted Student Involvement Index in an attempt to predict six-year graduation rates. This new Student Involvement Index accurately predicted over 61% of the student outcomes based on student involvement during the first semester at the university.

show abstract

Channels For Improved Performance From Living On Campus

Cited by 14 publications

References 20 publications

“Social Jetlag” in Morning-Type College Students Living On Campus: Implications for Physical and Psychological Well-being

“Social Jetlag” in Morning-Type College Students Living On Campus: Implications for Physical and Psychological Well-being

Impacto da Moradia Estudantil no Desempenho Acadêmico e na Permanência na Universidade

Student Involvement and the Impact on Academic Success

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About