Heterogeneity of the Student Body and Different Perceptions of Traditional and Nontraditional Students in U.S. Higher Education.

Seth A. Agbo, Ph.D.

School of Education

Pacific University, Oregon

U.S.A.

Introduction

The passing of the industrial age and the advent of the information age have created new forms and modes of knowledge and information production, presentation and distribution that directly affect the traditional system of higher education in the United States. The passage of the GI Bill or the Servicemen’s Readjustment Act in 1944 was a major political shift providing a massive influx of veterans into higher education (Millard, 1991). By giving veterans the opportunity to return to higher institutions to attain degrees, the United States Federal Government significantly broadened the range of the age group that would benefit from postsecondary education (Millard, 1991). Adult students have not only continued to flow into postsecondary institutions but their numbers have increased significantly. Since the 1970s demographic changes have been taking place on university and college campuses. This paper addresses one tightly focused theme, namely the heterogeneity of the student body and the meaning of “nontraditional” in U.S. higher education.

The most distinguishing characteristic of the system of higher education in the United States is its rapid and enormous increase in size. At the turn of the Twentieth Century, higher education enrollment was less than one-quarter million students. Enrollment rose to more than 2.5 million in 1950 and by the fall of 1965 there were about 6 million students in institutions of higher education. This enrollment represented about 50 percent of the relevant age cohort in higher education compared to about 15 percent of the age cohort that enrolled in many European countries (Altbach, 1992). Enrollment of traditional students in the 18 to 24 age cohort capped in 1981 and then began to experience a downward trend that continued into the 1990s.

Viewed from a national perspective, trends in enrollments reveal one thing, that is, that the population of the United States student body has not only been changing in numbers, but has also become increasingly heterogeneous since the mid-1970s. There has been an increase of about 10 percent in the proportion of minority students within 20 years, from 15 percent of all students in fall 1976 to 25 percent of all students in fall 1995 (National Center for Education Statistics [NCES] 1998a). The increase in minority students was primarily due to the expansion in the enrollment of Hispanic and Asian/Pacific Islander students whose enrollment as a percentage of all post-secondary students increased about 4 percent between 1976 and 1995. Black students accounted for 10 percent of total enrollment in post-secondary institutions in fall 1995. Hispanics were 8 percent of enrolled students. Asian/Pacific students made up 6 percent of all enrolled students and American Indians/Alaska Natives were 1 percent (NCES, 1998a).

Profile of Students in Higher Education

To cater for the expansive increase in student numbers, the United States now has 3,842 institutions offering post-secondary education and training (The Chronicle of Higher Education, 1999-2000 Almanac Issue, 1999). Out of the 15.4 million students in higher education, about 4.1 million attend 2-year colleges. Of these, about 2.3 million are full time students while 1.8 million are part time students. Four-year institutions enroll 8.3 million, constituting 54 percent of the entire student population in higher education. More than 6.6 million students enrolled in four-year institutions are full time while about 1.7 million are part time students. There are more than 3 million graduate students of whom about 1.3 million are full time and 1.7 million are part time.

Universities and colleges in the United States have, for a very long time, focused almost exclusively on the education of the young and academically qualified (Gilley, 1991; Millard, 1991; Fischer, 1992; Quinnan, 1997). However, in the last two decades, nontraditional age and nontraditional route students have become an important group in higher education institutions. Previously, even in the few institutions having a tradition of academic provision for adult students, participation of adults was always marginal, limited to non-degree studies through short courses administered by extra-mural or external departments designated as continuing education (Millard, 1991). But now adult participation has transgressed the boundaries of extra-mural studies and is moving into the center of the mission of the university or college (Parnell, 1990; Merriam & Caffarella, 1991). Quinnan (1997) contends that within a period of twenty years, from 1971 to 1991, the enrollment of students, aged 25 or older increased by 171 percent. Within the same period, the enrollment of students between age 25-29 increased by 99 percent, 30-34 by 201 percent and those above 35 years increased by 248 percent.

The Concept of Nontraditional Student

There is ongoing controversy among scholars and practitioners over the definition of nontraditional students. A cursory examination of the student body in the United States will reveal a large proportion of students that does not fit the traditional student’s definition. The attempt to understand the concept of nontraditional students splits them into various categories. Horn & Carroll (1996), broadly define the traditional route to postsecondary education as “enrolling in college immediately after high school and attending full time until graduation” (p. 1). Yet still, this characteristic of perceptions of the traditional student should focus upon the extent to which students enroll immediately after graduation from high school and to the extent to which they graduate from postsecondary institutions with regard to attendance status and other criteria. The deficiency is remarkable when one considers that enrollment and graduation status differ with undergraduates. As Horn & Carroll (1996) simply illustrate: “In 1992-93, for instance, although slightly more than half (57 percent) had enrolled in postsecondary education immediately after high school graduation, only about one-third attended full time for the 1992-93 academic year” (p. 1). In accordance with the definition adopted for this paper “nontraditional” students include part-time, as well as students from under-represented groups. Horn & Carroll (1996) identify at least three broad characteristics that elicit differences of perception between traditional and nontraditional students:

(1) Financial and family status

The utilization of financial and family status to determine nontraditional students assumes that they are financially independent from parents, they have family responsibilities and financial constraints such as having dependents other than a spouse, being a single parent, or working full-time while enrolled. The Department of Education considers all students of 24 years or older to be independent students (Horn & Carroll, 1996). Also, students who indicated working 35 or more hours were considered nontraditional. Furthermore, students declaring having dependents such as children, elder parents, siblings or other members of the family other than a marriage partner for whose financial responsibility lies on the student, other than a marriage partner were also specified as nontraditional.

(2) Enrollment patterns

The use of enrollment patterns assumes that traditional students enroll immediately after secondary school and attend full-time. Therefore, students with delayed enrollments in higher education by a year or more after high school and students who attend part-time do not fit into the traditional student category and would be termed nontraditional.

(3) High school graduation status

Finally, students who did not earn a regular high school diploma but who received some type of certification such as General Education Development (GED) or a high school certificate of completion are also considered as non-traditional students.

As many of the attributes used to distinguish nontraditional undergraduates are interdependent, students may have one or several of the characteristics of a nontraditional student (Horn & Carroll, 1996). For example, a delayed entry student may also attend part-time, be a single parent, independent and responsible for dependents, and so on. Consequently, it is likely that a student with any nontraditional characteristic usually has more than one (Horn & Carroll, 1996). A scale used by Horn & Carroll (1996) measures the degree of nontraditional characteristics, from 0 to 7, with zero symbolizing traditional students. They considered students with only one characteristic, such as “older than typical” or “attend part-time” minimally nontraditional, students with two or three nontraditional characteristics were deemed as moderately nontraditional and highly nontraditional students as those that had four or more nontraditional characteristics.

Trends in nontraditional student enrollment

Horn & Carroll (1996) report that a clear majority of undergraduates (about 70 percent in 1992) were at least minimally nontraditional and about 50 percent were either in the moderately or highly nontraditional categories. Between 54 and 59 percent of all undergraduates were older than typical and about 40 percent were enrolled part time while between a quarter and a third worked full time. About 48 percent declared they were financially independent of their parents. Twenty percent had dependents, and about 7 percent were single parents. Between 4 and 7 percent were students without a high school diploma, gaining admission to post-secondary institutions with the General Education Development (GED) exam.

In 1992, almost one-half of the minimally nontraditional students were older than typical and about a third were enrolled as part time students (Horn & Carroll, 1996). While only about 12 percent of these students worked full time in 1986 and 1992 respectively, the proportion of those who worked full time rose to about 30 percent in 1989. In their three survey years, Horn & Carroll (1996) found that about 11 percent of the minimally nontraditional students indicated that they were financially independent of their parents. None of these students either had dependents or was a single parent. The proportion of the minimally nontraditional students enrolled through nontraditional routes was below the average for all undergraduates.

Students with two or three nontraditional characteristics classified as “moderately nontraditional” accounted for about 25 to 30 percent of undergraduates between 1986 and 1992. About 90 percent of the moderately nontraditional students were older than typical. About 73 to 75 percent of those students were independent and between 45 and 56 percent were enrolled as part time students. Between 25 and 30 percent worked full time. Over 70 percent were financially independent of parents and about 12 percent had dependents.

Students with four or more characteristics identified as “highly nontraditional” were almost the same proportion as the moderately nontraditional students. Almost all the students identified as highly nontraditional were older than typical and were financially independent. Two-thirds had dependents and about one-quarter were single parents. In 1986, about one-fifth of the students were enrolled through the nontraditional route, with the proportion declining to about 12 percent in 1992.

Generally, nontraditional students are likely to be women, to belong to racial/ethnic minority group and to have less educated parents than traditional students. Table 1 shows the composition of undergraduates according to gender, race/ethnicity, and parents’ education for traditional and nontraditional students in the fall of 1992. The table indicates that the majority of both traditional and nontraditional students in 1992 were female (53 percent and 56 percent respectively). The proportion of racial/ethnic minority students that was traditional was 18 percent compared to the proportion that was nontraditional (23 percent). Nontraditional students tended to have less educated parents (51 percent) than their traditional counterparts (37 percent).

Table 1

Composition of 1992 fall undergraduates according to gender, race/ethnicity, and parents’ education for traditional and nontraditional students.

Traditional students / Nontraditional students
Percent Female / 53 / 56
Percent racial-ethnic minority / 18 / 23
Percent with a parent who graduated from college / 51 / 37

SOURCE: Adapted from Horn & Carroll (1996) Figure 2 , p. 11.

Type of institutional control and nontraditional student enrollment

Starting from the presumption that certain institutions are more adapted to the needs of nontraditional students, the enrollment of undergraduates by institutional type is interesting.

Trends for Individual Nontraditional Characteristics

In order to determine the pattern of change in the enrollments of nontraditional students between 1986 and 1992 and also to look at the enrollment pattern of students in 1997, it is useful to examine each nontraditional characteristic separately.

Older than typical age enrollment trends: Although much of the discussion on non-traditional students has focused on the “adult students” it might be useful to concentrate instead on students that are older than typical college age. For the “definition of ‘adult’ students is somewhat arbitrary and varies both within and across national systems of higher education” (Richardson and King (1998, p. 65). NCES classifies all students that are 17 years of age and older as “adults”. While this is correct from a legal point of view, it blurs the line between traditional and non-traditional students with regard to age. Therefore, the “older than typical” criterion appears more meaningful than “adult student”. Horn & Carroll (1996) define older than typical students as those undergraduates who are 20 years and older in their first year, 21 or older in their second year, 22 or older in their third year, or any student that is 23 years or older.

The percentage of undergraduate students enrolled in higher education that was older than typical increased by ten percent within 6 years from 54 percent in 1986 to 60 in 1992 (Horn & Carroll, 1996). The bulk of these older students enrolled in non-degree programs, i.e. in 2 year and shorter programs, and in the private for-profit institutions. Substantial increases of older than typical students occurred in private, not-for-profit 4-year institutions where their proportion rose from over one-third (38 percent) to almost one-half (47 percent) between 1986 and 1992. But even in the public 4-year institutions the numbers have increased and stood at 44% in 1992 (Horn & Carroll, 1996).

Financially independent students: Between 1986 and 1992, there was not a substantial increase in the overall percentage of students identified as financially independent of their parents although one could have expected that expansion in the older than typical age group would also mean an increase of financially independent students. This is not the case. This suggests that the increase in older-than typical students may be occurring under the age of 24, the criterion for financial independence.

Part-time enrollments: Part time enrollment is an option for older or returning students, especially those students, 25 years or older, who are more likely than younger ones to have family responsibilities and full time jobs because of time constraints, or for financial reasons. Others may also enroll part-time (NCES, 1998a).