Adjustment Amongst First year Students in an Iranian
Journal of Education Research and Behavioral Sciences Vol. 3(5), pp. 102-105, May, 2014
Available online at http://www.apexjournal.org
ISSN 2315-8735© 2014 Apex Journal International
Full Length Research
Adjustment Amongst First year Students in an Iranian
University
Nasrin Nikfal Azar, and Hamideh Reshadatjoo*
Department of Higher Education Management, College of Management and Economics, Tehran Science and Research
Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran.
Accepted 5 May, 2014
The Purpose of this study was to explore the level and correlates of adjustment problems freshman
students are facing in an Iranian University. From among statistical population of 4585 bachelor first
year students, 357 persons were determined as the sample of study by random selection. Two
questionnaires were used for collection of data for this study, namely the student adaptation to college
questionnaire (Baker and Siryk, 1989) and Academic Self-efficacy (Owen and Forman, 1988). The results
showed the student` overall adjustment and it`s four subscales are in moderate level, suggesting that
they are facing some problems in adjusting to university environment. Findings also indicate that
student academic self-efficacy were related positively to their adjustment. The research concluded
there is a need to develop programs that effectively promote the academic self-efficacy of first year
students to maximize their college adjustment and consequently retention rate.
Key words:
Adjustment, academic self- efficacy, student.INTRODUCTION
University student`s adjustment to the campus
environment is regarded as an important factor in
predicting university outcomes. Student` entries into the
colleges are often met with challenges. The students
often find that learning packages and teaching
methodologies are different are different from what
obtained at the secondary school level. Generally.
College classes are more difficult than high school
classes. In order to survive in new environment, they
must take responsibility for their actions. All these can
results in emotional strain which impact their adjustment
to university. previous Research revealed that the first
two years in college are very critical for student retention.
For example, 25% of college students dropped out of
school after their first year of their study (Mallinckrodr and
Sedlacek, 1987; Tinto, 1993; Tinto, Russo, and Kadel,
1994), and among all dropouts 75% left college in the first
two years (Tinto, 1987, 1988). Research showed that this
failure was caused by adjustment difficulties (Tinto, 1993;
Martin Jr., Swartz, Madson, 1999). On the other hand,
*Corresponding author. Email: hamidehreshadatjoo@gmail.com
the better adjusted students are in academic environment,
the better will be their academic performance (Lent
et al
Baker and Siyrk (1999) viewed college adjustment to
university as multifaceted that involved an array of
demands varying in kind and degree which required a
variety of coping responses or adjustments. They
suggested that there are four aspects of adjustment to
college or university that can be measured SACQ which
are: academic adjustment, social adjustment, personalemotional
adjustment, and institutional attachment
., 2004).LITERATURE REVIEW
Russell and Petrie (1992) added personal factors in his
theory of adjustment to college. The inclusion of personal
factors further the work of previous researchers
(Pascarella and Terenzini, 1991; Astin, 1975, Bean,
1980, 1982) by going beyond social, academic and
institutional factors, to also consider the role of personal/
individual factors in student`s adjustment to college and
ultimately their persistence to graduation. For the
purpose of this study, the conceptualization of college
student adjustment will fit within the Russell and Petrie
(1992) theory.
Previous research shows a relationship between
academic self-efficacy and college adjustment. For
example, Chemers
academic self-efficacy was strongly related, both directly
and indirectly, to academic performance and student
adjustment. .Highly efficacious students entered college
with confidence in their ability to perform well
academically. Students who lacked self-efficacy did not
perform as well academically as those students who had
higher academic expectations. Self-efficacy remained
significant even when controlling for the effect of high
school GPA as measures of academic ability. Solberg
and Vilarea`s (1997) results suggested that academicself
efficacy expectations may be an important factor in
college persistence. Self-efficacy beliefs have been
related to motivation by determining what goals are set,
how much effort is used to accomplish the goals, and the
amount of time and resiliency expended during difficulties
and failure (Bandura, 1993).
According to our interpretation of the adjustment
literature, among other factors, we expected academic
self-efficacy to have notable impact on the adjustment of
first year college students as they navigate the
demanding environment of university life. Academic Selfefficacy
refers to individuals convictions that they can
successfully perform given academic tasks at designated
levels (Schunk, 1991).
Our study adds to the literature on this aspect in Iranian
universities and other higher education institutions. As to
our knowledge, these relationships have never been
tested in this context before.
Given the many implications of transition to university life
for new students, this study has been intended to
investigate student`s characteristics and adjustments
experiences upon entry to a university. Specifically the
objectives of this study include:
1. To find out the level of adjustment amongst first year
undergraduates.
2. To find out the relationship between first-year student
academic-self efficacy and their adjustment to university.
et al. (2001) found that, indeed,Our hypotheses are:
There is a positive and meaningful correlation between
first year student academic self-efficacy and their
adjustment to university on it`s four subscales including:
Academic adjustment, Social adjustment, Personal
/emotional adjustment and Institutional attachment.
Participants
The samples of the study comprised of 300 first year
Azar and Reshadatjoo 103
students from Azad University, located in Tehran, were
selected using random sampling method in academic
year 2012-2013. The response rate of the students was
100%, which included 26.7% males and 73.3% females.
The gender distribution was almost the same as
compared to that in the normal student population of
university under study. The mean age for both males and
females was 20.35. Table 1 presents the means,
standard deviations, and zero-order correlations for the
variables.
Measures
The instruments used in this study were adapted from
well established instruments and the items for each
instrument were validated by experts. The instruments
used include the following:
The College Academic Self-Efficacy Scale:
completed as a measure of academic self efficacy
(CASE; Owen and Froman, 1988) described by
Bandura`s (1977) Foundational theory. The scale
consists of 33 self-report items that are scored on a 5-
poing Likert-type scale ranging from 1=very little to
5=quite a lot. The alpha values for the this variables is
0.889.
This wasStudent adaptation to College Questionnaire:
SACQ (the student adaptation to college questionnaire)
(Baker and Siryk, 1989). The SACQ is a 67-item selfreported
measure yielding 4 scales assessing college
student`s academic adjustment, social adjustment,
personal/emotional adjustment, and their attachment to
the university. Overall adjustment was used in the study
by summing student` scores on all the four subscales.
Students responded to each statement on a 9-point scale
ranging from 1="applies very closely to me" to
9="Doesn`t apply to me at all". High scores indicate
better adjustment. Alpha coefficient for the full scale and
the subscales ranged from 0.81 to 0.95 among first year
university students (Baker and Siryk, 1989. The instrument
reliability levels were tested and findings revealed
that the alpha values for the variables are: Overall
adjustment scale: 0/865, social adjustment scale: 0/816,
academic adjustment scale: 0/602, institutional attachment
scale: 0/780, personal-emotional scale: 0/792
Method of Analyzing Data
The.The software programme SPSS version 15.0 was used
for our basic analysis .After checking for normal
distribution of the data, linearity of relationships between
variables and computing the basic correlations between
the different variables, reliability tests for all the scales
used to measure the different variables were performed.
Multiple regression analysis was planned to determine
104 J. Edu. Res. Behav. Sci.
Table 1.
The Distribution of Respondent`s Level of Adjustment.Variables
High Moderate Low
Score
f % Score f % Score f %OA 455 & above 20 7 261-454 264 88 260& below 16 5
AA 168& above 21 7 96-167 255 85 95 & below 24 8
SA 126& above 25 9 72-125 241 80 71 & below 34 11
PEA 105 & above 49 16 60- 104 217 72 95& below 34 11
IA 105 & above 67 22 60- 104 215 72 59 & below 18 6
OA: Academic Adjustment, SA: Social Adjustment, PEA: Personal-Emotional Adjustment, IA: Institutional Attachment
Table 2.
Mean Scores for the four adjustment dimensions.Variables M SD
Academic Adjustment
Social Adjustment
Personal-Emotional Adjustment
Institutional Attachment
5.35
5.63
5.57
6
1.064
1.251
1.457
1.416
Notes: M=Mean; SD=Standard Deviation; N=300
Table 3.
Correlates1 2 3 4 5
1 Academic self-efficacy 1
2 Academic adjustment .486
3 Social adjustment .367
4 Personal-emotional adjustment .199
** 1** .635** 1** .530** .480** 1 *5 Institutional attachment .345
** .666** .766** .510** 1SD
0.613 1.064 1.251 1.457 1.416M
3.13 5.35 5.63 5.57 6.0**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
*. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).
whether study dependent variables affect independent
variables.
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
To address the first year of this study, student `s overall
adjustment was determined by the Full Scale score. The
Full Scale score were then divided into three categories
(high, average, low) according to the guidelines provided
by the authors in the manual. Table 1 summarized the
level of student`s overall adjustment as well as the four
separate areas of adjustment. Findings in the Table 1
indicated that 88% of the respondent`s overall adjustment
were at the moderate level, while only 7% obtained a
high level of overall adjustment, 5% were found to be in
the low category for their overall adjustment. As for the
subscale score, majority (more than 50%) of the
participants were in the moderate category. This showed
that most of respondents had a moderate level for all the
four areas of adjustment which indicated that many
subjects in this study were exposed to adjustment
problems in adjusting themselves to campus life.
Moderate level of the overall adjustment and the four
dimensions of adjustment amongst first year student in
this study indicated that they experienced some of the
adjustment problems as shown in Table 2.
Data was further analyzed to compare student`s
adjustment of the four subscales. Results in Table 3
revealed that respondents achieved the highest level of
adjustment in institutional attachment (M=6, SD=1.416),
followed by social adjustment (M=5.63, SD=1.251),
Personal-emotional adjustment (M=5.57, SD=1.457), and
Academic adjustment (5.35, SD=1.064).
A further analysis was done to examine the relationship
between the variables under study. The results of
correlation analysis are shown in Table 3. The Table 3
shows the correlation analysis of student academic selfefficacy
and adjustment in four subscales has a positive
and significant correlation.
There is positive and meaningful relationship between
academic self-efficacy and social adjustment (Beta=
0.367, P<0.001).
There is positive and meaningful relationship between
academic self-efficacy and personal-emotional
adjustment (Beta=0.199, p<0.001).
There is positive and meaningful relationship between
academic self-efficacy and attachment to the university
(Beta=0.345, p<0.001).
The study confirms that students in university do face
problem in adjusting themselves at university. Therefore
serious attention needs to be given to students who face
problems in the first years in university. Next outcome of
this research have been academic that self-efficacy
affects first year student overall adjustment to university,
the finding is Consistent with the finding of Lent
(1984) who explored academic self-efficacy as a
predictor of academic adjustment.
As Bandura (1997) asserted , the finding of present
study suggest that individual self-efficacy is likely to play
a large role in the goals people set for themselves and
how they go about accomplishing them. In essence, the
experience of doing this study has fostered a great
interest in pursuing more opportunities to improve first
year student adjustment to university.
et al.ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The authors would like to thanks the anonymous referees
for constructive comments on earlier version of this
paper.
REFERENCES
Astin, A.W. (1975). Preventing students from dropping
out ,San Francisco:Jossey-Bass.
Bandura, A. (1993). Perceived self-efficacy in cognitive
development and functioning.
148.
Educ. Psychol., 28: 117-Bandura, A. (1997).
New York: Freeman
Bean, J.P. (1980). Dropouts and turnover: the synthesis
and test of a causal model for student attrition.
Higher Educ.
Bean, J.P. (1982). Student attrition, intentions, and
confidence: Interaction effects in a path model.
Higher Educ.
Self-efficacy: The exercise of control..Res., 12: 155-187.Res., 17: 291-319.Azar and Reshadatjoo 105
Bollen, K.A. (1989).
Variables
Structural Equations with Latent, Wiley, New YORK, NY.Jantzer, A.M. (2006).
victimization, College adjustment, and the role of
coping
University at Carbodale.
Retrospective reports of bullying. Unpublishied dissertation, Southern IllinoisLopez, S.P., Peon, J.M., Ordas, C.J.V. (2005
resource practices, organizational learning and
business performance". Hum. Resour. Dev. int.,
). "Human8(2):147-164.
Mallinckrodt, B., Sedlacek. W.E. (1987). Student
retention and the use of campus facilities by race.
NASPA J.,
Martin, Jr. W.E., Swartz, J.L, Madson, M. (1999).
Psychosocial factors that predict the college adjustment
of first- year undergraduate students: implications for
college counselors.
16.
Owen, S.V., Forman, R.D. (1988). Development
College Academic Self-Efficacy Scale
at the Annual Meeting of the National Council on
Measurement in Education (New Orleans, LA).
Pascarella, E.T., Terenzini, P.T. (1991). "
affects students
Russell, R.K., Petrie, T.A. (1992).
of college students: Assessment and counseling.
S.D. Brown and R.W. Lent (Eds.), Handbook of
Counseling Psychology (2
York: John Wiley and Sons.
24(3): 28-32.J. Coll. Counsel., 2(2): 121-133.1-of a. Paper presentedHow college". San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Academic adjustmentInnd Ed.) (PP.485-511). NewSchneider, M.E., Ward, D.J. (2003). The role of ethnic
identification and perceived social support in Latino`s
adjustment to college.
554.
Hispanic J. Behav. Sci., 25: 539-Schunk, D.H. (1991). Self-efficacy and academic
motivation.
Tinto, V. (1993). Leaving college: Rethinking the causes
and cures of student attrition (2
Tinto.V. (1987). Leaving college: Rethinking the causes
and cures of student attrition .
(1stEd.)Chicago: university of Chicago Press.
Tinto, V. (1988). Stages of student departure: Reflections
on the longitudinal character of student leaving.
Higher Educ.
Education Psychologist, 26(3&4): 207-231.nd Ed.).J., 59(4): 438-455
تعریف فلسفه، چرا سازمانها وجود دارند؟ چه فعالیت خاصی انجام میدهند؟