Posted: June 26th, 2015
CHAPTER II LITERATURE REVIEW
Introduction
Transition from high school to post-secondary education is exciting in many aspects for young students, since it presupposes making a step towards a new level of education associated with professional skills’ acquisition, a completely new educational environment, and greater independence and responsibility. However, alongside with positive feelings of excitement and expectation of constructive changes accompanying that transition, students may also feel frustration and fear of the unknown before that transition (Levinson, 2004). Such fears are much more often connected with a change of location, if students move to campus and leave the parental home-place for higher education studies. Therefore, more and more research findings emphasize the need to focus on the transition from high school to higher education and a variety of aspects thereof including the academic, emotional, psychological, and psychosocial domains to clarify the nature of that transition and challenges associated with it.
The starting point of educational transitions’ research should be the recognition of fact that the entire educational process is full of transitions, for students of any gender and any educational level. Students constantly undergo transitions ranging from passing from one grade to another one to changing educational courses depending on the changing academic interests. While some students perceive these transitions as constructive challenges, others may be paralyzed by additional emotional and psychological effort that such transitions may involve, which results not only in worsening quality of education but may also end up with a student’s dropout for non-academic reasons. Therefore, recognizing the challenging nature of transitions that may complicate some students’ academic progress and even threaten the continuation of studies should be at the heart of this field of research (Maehr, Karabenick and Urdan, 2012).
While many educational institutions worldwide have realized the importance of initial experiences of students who have just graduated from schools and pursue their higher education, and have provided a variety of welcoming/transition events such as prospective student taster days, open days, summer schools, and interactive workshops, there is still surprisingly little empirical evidence and academic knowledge on the subject of students’ initial transition periods such as, for instance, the freshman year in a higher educational establishment (Brunswick, 2012). Such research is lacking even in developed countries with a well-developed research base related to educational processes and transitions. Therefore, there is nothing surprising in the fact that Saudi Arabian higher education transitions are also a terra incognita for contemporary researchers and policymakers.
Such a lack of scholarly evidence does not presuppose that Saudi students do not experience problems with their transitions; just on the contrary, taking into account that ‘massification’ of higher education has occurred only recently in the KSA, Saudi students’ challenges with transitions to higher education from schools are a highly under-researched sector of educational research in this country. Therefore, there is an urgent need to gain a clearer image of Saudi educational transitions and first-year experiences of students within the higher education system of the KSA to identify the ways in which these transition-related experiences affect further educational choices and students’ decision to continue higher education.
Especially significant group of Saudi students requiring empirical evidence on higher-education-specific experiences is that of female students; with women starting to receive higher education in the KSA only comparatively recently, the Saudi educational system may appear particularly unfit for females, which may provide them with negative psychological experiences during their transition to higher education, and may subsequently cause their decision to drop out from universities. Understanding the nature of female experiences at Saudi higher educational establishments may thus open new avenues for designing smooth transition programs for females and improve their first-year experiences within the higher education system, which may ultimately yield highly positive nationwide trends of increasing literacy and professional education among Saudi women.
First-Year Experience
University entry all over the world provides students with a chance to define and advance their careers, opportunities, and expectations. However, depending on the students’ environment and background, physical and social environment of the university can be new, overwhelming, and intimidating to some of them (Wangeri, Kimani and Mutweleli, 2012). Having high expectations and insufficient skills, students entering university are likely to leave it if they do not feel the benefits of higher education immediately. Therefore, it is generally believed that the quality of first-year student experience is pivotal to the successful completion of the student’s degree and overall satisfaction with studying (Higgins, 2006). The present section investigates the concept of first-year experience both in the global context and in Saudi Arabian educational setting, with a particular focus on women’s experience. The author aims to discuss what challenges students face once entering universities, and what measures institutions establish to eliminate negative emotional, organizational, and educational factors that hinder academic achievement and social adjustment.
Definition and History of the ‘First-Year Experience’ Concept
Quite often, the first-year experience is associated with a program or seminar that is designed to assimilate a student to college life. However, any first-year experience program is larger than a single seminar course, and includes a comprehensive program that consists of different aspects aimed to increase academic performance and motivation, provide a cohesive learning experience, assist in the transition to university, facilitate a sense of community and commitment to the university, and increase personal growth (UMKC First Year Experience Committee, 2006). Greenfield, Keup and Gardner (2013, n.p.) explained the concept of first-year experience as follows,
“The first-year experience is not a single program or initiative, but rather an intentional combination of academic and co-curriculum efforts within and across postsecondary institutions…[that represent] a purposeful set of initiatives designed and implemented to strengthen the quality of student learning during and satisfaction with the first year of college…”
Thus, the phrase “first-year experience” is used to define a multiplicity of efforts made by various universities to enhance the academic and social success of their first-year students. According to Howard (2013), the term ‘first-year experience’ describes the totality of a college or university program and services designed to achieve success and retention of first-year students. Therefore, although definitions of the term may differ depending on the author, university, or country, the major aim of every first-year experience program is to facilitate students’ transition to the educational institution.
One needs to understand that first-year experience is both culture- and time-specific; in other words, it varies among institutions and time periods (Koch and Gardner, 2014). In the past, first-year students were victims of upperclassmen, subject to hazing, forced servitude of older classmates, and generally not well appreciated or respected (Dwyer, 1989). In terms of academic advancement, freshmen were not given opportunities to engage in their coursework and often struggled because of inaccessibility of textbooks and scarcity of available resources (Higgins, 2006). Interestingly, these practices were common not only in the oldest European universities, but also in the 17th-18th-century America.
Notably, Americans were the first to realize the importance of simplifying and smoothing “the young man’s transition from home to college”, so they suggested choosing freshmen advisors that could guide students and help them to accommodate (Dwyer, 1989, p.30). The history of first-year experience began with Henry Dunster, the then-president of Harvard University, who introduced tutors “to counsel and befriend younger lads” (as cited in Dwyer, 1989). However, this idea was actively developed only within the past 25 years with the creation of a seminar course University 101 by the University of South Carolina. This innovative course established in 1972 “launched the national and international movement known as the first-year experience” (Morris and Cutright, 2005, p. 349). This step was one of the first official recognitions of the fact that freshmen do experience problems and challenges with accommodation to the new educational environment, and laid the basis for further effort to improve first-year experiences for inexperienced students undergoing that transition.
Later on, the Harvard University established a series of statements and a board of freshman advisors (FAs) aimed at providing orientation and support to the youngest students. Since that period, first-year students have become the subject of much research and debate. Currently, the National Center for the Study of the Freshman Year Experience categorizes first-year experiences programs and services in the USA into seven classifications, such as Summer Bridge Programs, Preterm Orientation, Academic/Transition Seminars, Learning Communities, Early Warning/Academic Alert Systems, Service Learning, and Undergraduate Research (Barefoot, Griffin, & Koch, 2012). In this way, one can conclude that the history of a planned and conscious approach to improving the first-year experience began in America, and only later spread all over the world.
In the United Kingdom, the student experience during the first year of university studies has been remarkably unexplored, although some of the UK institutions have conducted internal surveys to increase productivity and improve organizational structure. For a long period, this failure to address the problem of challenging first-year experience contrasted with the position in Australia and the USA, where studies concerning student experience had already been conducted for many years (Yorke and Longden, 2008). Nevertheless, today, first-year experience is widely promoted by the program ‘Action on Access’ established in 1999. Initially, this program aimed to “facilitate, develop and promote a nationally-orientated, strategically-driven focus to widening participation in HE”, and in the course of time, it contributed much to the research of challenging aspects of the student experience that decreased their motivation to study (The Higher Education Academy, 2015, n.p.; Yorke and Longden, 2008).
In Australia, first-year experience has long ago attracted attention of the government and educators. For the past 20 years, several broad studies were conducted to form a comprehensive image of the overall character and quality of the first-year experience in this country. The original First Year Experience study in 1994 was commissioned by the Committee for the Advancement of University Teaching (CAUT). It was followed by the second study in 1999 conducted for the Evaluations and Investigations Programme of the Department of Education, Training and Youth Affairs (DETYA). Two more studies were conducted in 2004 and 2009 to explore possible trends in student experience that have implications for policy and practice (James, Krause and Jennings, 2009). Thus, it has been found that first-year students in 2009 were more motivated and organized than their 2004 counterparts, and they also had an easier academic transition to university. Such a significant improvement was explained by efforts of both schools and universities to provide students with supporting first-year experience.
In Saudi Arabia, research on the first-year experience remains scarce as compared to the USA, UK, Australia, and other developed countries. However, since the Saudi government provides intense funding in the education sector, the push to get its citizens educated has grown steadily over the past decades, which subsequently increased scholars’ attention to the university experience (Hanson, 2012). In 2015, the First National Conference for the Preparatory Year in Saudi Universities was held to discuss how administration and organization of the universities can be changed to achieve faster adjustment of first-year students. Among the objectives of this conference, there was the desire to enrich the scientific aspects of the first-year programs, review and evaluate the most important local and international practices, and contribute to the successful transition of Saudi Arabian students from high school to university (University of Dammam, 2015). Thus, there is a hope that the educational sector in Saudi Arabia will continue to develop strategies of enhancing students’ first-year experience. It is important to realize, however, that this development should take into account not only common first-year challenges, but also cultural and religious background of students undergoing that transition.
Saudi Arabia Educational Background
After the discovery of oil in the 1950s, massive, multi-sectorial, and large-scale improvements took place in a variety of Saudi Arabia’s domains including health, education, and transportation. A solid resource-based economy allowed the Saudi government to provide its citizens with free health services as well as free education. Very soon, the Saudi government realised the strategic importance of education and paid great attention to it (Al Garni, 2012). Therefore, over the past couple of decades, the government of this country has repeatedly acknowledged the need to develop its human capital by reorganizing the existing educational system (Yamani, 2006). As Smith and Abouammoh (2013, p.190) explained,
“Saudi Arabia openly acknowledges the need for change in its relatively young higher education system, and the importance of having its major universities and academics acknowledged internationally as world class. It has allocated a generous budget to its university system, and it is moving to provide relevant systemic agencies and systems to support the development of individual universities and their staff.”
More importantly, educational reform in primary and secondary schools became a crucial element of the nation’s economic development policies (Hussain, 2007). Consequently, Saudi Arabia has significantly increased enrollment rates for both males and females in primary and secondary education sectors (Ministry of Education, 2006) and invested purposefully in the school infrastructure (Hussain, 2007).
Saudi Arabia has a centralized education system, with the Ministry of Education having the supreme authority, while schools have only limited autonomy (Al Garni, 2012). Every individual is required to receive education regardless of economic status or gender, but all levels of education including kindergarten, primary, intermediate, and secondary school are segregated by gender (Almotery, 2009). Prior to 2002, the General Presidency of Girls education was responsible for the girls’ schools, while the Ministry of Education governed boy’s education, but in n 2002, however, the government had to unite these two sectors (Abukhalil, 2011). Higher education is Saudi Arabia is growing fast, as the Central Department of Statistics and Information (CDSI) has indicated; in 2013, there were 25 public universities with more than a million students (Clark, 2014). Interestingly, research revealed increasing popularity of higher education, as enrollment at the Bachelor’s and Master’s level has been growing exponentially in recent years. However, this increase leads to certain challenges, as the preparation of students for university study is still insufficient. The school system is struggling to support a rapidly expanding number of students and has to achieve good standards in English, mathematics, and science, as in the higher education system, many programs are taught in English rather than Arabic (Aljubaili, 2014).
It is important to realize that both secondary and higher education in Saudi Arabia is firmly based on religion. The backbone of Saudi Arabia as a country is the Muslim religion (Podikunju, 2008). The word ‘Qur’an’, denoting the central religious text of Islam, itself is derived from the word ‘reading’, and the first verse of the Qur’an is the call to read and write (Saleh, 1986). Therefore, Islam considers it an obligation of every Muslim man and woman to be educated and literate. The major purpose of education in Saudi Arabia, as stated in the general principles of education, is:
“to have the students to understand Islam in a correct and comprehensive way of life, to plan and spread the Islam in a creed, to develop the society economically, socially, and culturally, and to prepare the individual to become a useful member in the building of his community” (as cited in Alhwiti, 2007, p.25).
Therefore, the primary goals of Saudi Arabian education are to guarantee that the acquired knowledge will meet the religious, social, and economic needs of the country.
Traditions were also a reason why relatively few females were pursuing higher education in the past, and even today, the majority of women studying in universities are subject to some restrictions. As stated above, women’s schooling at all levels remained under the auspices and control of the Department of Religious Guidance until 2002, while education of boys was guided by the Ministry of Education (Hamdan, 2005). The primary aim of such division was to ensure that women’s education was directed at raising good wives and mothers, and prepared them for ‘acceptable’ jobs such as nursing and teaching, believed to suit their female nature. Paradoxically, Saudi Arabian educators even placed curricular restrictions on certain academic fields for women, an example being the restriction on women’s enrollment to engineering courses (Hussain, 2007). Even today, women are bound by the Ministry of Education to study subjects deemed acceptable according to traditional customs (Smith and Abouammoh, 2013). Moreover, due to the norm of gender segregation in the KSA, the majority of Saudi women tend to avoid college majors that could lead them to a mixed-gender work environment (Alhujaylan, 2014).
Gradual changes occur, though, which can be proved by the current women’s tendency towards pursuing higher education and professional careers, allowing women to become active members of society (Ministry of Higher Education, 2010). According to Mahdi (2008, p.73),
“The 8th Development Plan (2005-2009) in Saudi Arabia, for the first time since 1970, has devoted a separate chapter discussing the role of women in development. It provides specific objectives targeting their participation rate in the labor force. More specifically, the plan encourages women to enroll to the fields of science at both the secondary and higher education levels.”
King Abdullah has even created a government-funded scholarship program that has allowed thousands of Saudi women to enter foreign universities since 2005 (Sullivan, 2012). However, there are still numerous obstacles to female education and employment in Saudi Arabia because although 60% of graduates in Saudi Arabia are female, only 17% of these women are in the job market (Buchanan, 2013). In general, the described peculiarities of Saudi Arabia education and social system can potentially contribute to the first-year challenges experienced by the students.
First-Year Challenges
As students enter the university environment, they bring experiences, preparation, and motivations that differ across the population. First-year students at any university comprise a diverse mixture of individual traits, backgrounds, and assorted learning styles, and each of these characteristics can either enhance or hinder their successful integration to the social order of campus (Choy, 2001; Pascarella and Terenzini, 1983). In other words, not all students have the same levels of knowledge and emotional preparedness, which means that the adjustment process may take some time and effort (Black, 2013). According to Wangeri, Kimani, and Mutweleli (2012), transition from high school to university inevitably shakes social security, physical comfort, and ability to enjoy gratifying activities for first-year students.
Experts are unanimous that the first year of university experience needs to provide a new impetus for intellectual growth and firm grounding in inquiry-based learning and communication (Lang Ketchum Chambers, 2008). Data further suggests that the majority of students entering college withdraw before graduation, so academic success is strongly influenced by activities that first-year students encounter during their adjustment period, as well as by the level of support provided by university administration (Upcraft, Gardner and Barefoot, 2004). These experiences in and out of the classroom create a foundation on which the rest of students’ college experiences are built.
Experts are unanimous that the first year of college is a critical year for student success. Tinto’s (1987) model of institutional departure, for example, recognizes that during this year, many students face the challenge of transitioning to the adult world and adjusting both socially and academically to college life. The author observed, “the incidence of withdrawal is highest during this early stage of college” (Tinto, 1987, p.163), and noted, “it is surprising that the classroom has not played a more central role in current theories of student persistence” (Tinto, 1997, p.599). The researcher argued that there is a strong need to include more interaction between the social and academic systems of education, as students’ experiences in the classroom shape student learning, persistence, and subsequent academic achievement. Statistics from the Indiana State University (ISU) further developed this idea and suggested that student integration should be considered within four major domains: academic performance, faculty-staff interactions with students, participation in extracurricular activities, and peer interactions (Beers, 1998).
Challenges of the first-year experience are emphasized by the attention given to them in surveys. In the UK, for example, much research work has been recently done to assess the level of student satisfaction with their first-year experience (Yorke and Longden, 2008). Research was conducted among students who had left their institutions before completing their studies. Yorke and Longden (2008) have found that the majority of students were unable to choose the program that would correspond to their expectations, abilities, and financial situation, which subsequently hindered their education. Similarly, studies by Briggs et al. (2012), Knox and Wiper (2008), and Zukas and Malcolm (2007) underlined the importance of better understanding of students’ expectations, as a huge gap between dreams and reality usually makes young people disappointed with their university life. Therefore, recognizing the diverse and contradictory expectations of individuals can potentially reduce the number of dropouts and enhance their first-year experience.
Furthermore, first-year experience challenges have figured prominently in academic conferences. In the USA, such events are organized by the National Recourse Center for the First-Year Experience and Students in Transition at the University of South Carolina. In Europe, similar events are held under the auspices of the European First-Year Experience (Milsom et al., 2014). In Saudi Arabia, the First National Conference for the Preparatory Year is responsible for discussing the pressing issues faced by first-year students. Wilson-Strydom (2015) summed up the discussions of first-year experience, and concluded that the major topics analyzed by researchers include the nature and importance of the first year of studies, responses and measures to enhance that experience, curriculum imperatives, institutional priorities, and student surveys. Consequently, the author emphasized that these areas need particular consideration by educators aiming to eliminate the first-year challenges for students, and that students’ diverse backgrounds and contexts should be taken into consideration. However, by reviewing the literature concerning the first-year experience, one may see that two most serious issues such as psychological unpreparedness and organizational structure pose the most serious threat to students’ academic success.
Psychological Aspect
A recent report from the British Association for Counseling and Psychotherapy stated that stress-induced emotional imbalance has been increasing during the past few decades among the student population (Al-Sowygh, 2013). Stressors and challenges faced by the first-year university students substantially undermine their psychological well-being. Freshmen have to learn a variety of things, including being responsible for one’s decisions about studying, socializing, finances, health, eating, and time management. On the one hand, increased personal freedom can feel unusual and inspiring. On the other hand, however, students may feel lonely, isolated, or extremely anxious, especially those who used to rely on their parents’ authority and decision-making ability (Mudhovozi, 2012). Thus, during the first year, students have to reconstruct their personal relations in a new environment, which often causes both mental and physical distress.
Research identifies several reasons for increased psychological distress experienced by the first-year students. A study by Wong et al. (2006) revealed that many students in Hong Kong were folding under pressure of unfulfilled expectations. Students were found to be particularly vulnerable to mental health issues, with rates of depression measured at 20.9% and anxiety at 41.2%. Expectations and perceived differences also represented a key area of investigation in Johnston and Kochanowska’s (2009) study of Scottish higher education institutions. The study by Orford et al. (2004) from the University of Birmingham indicated that over 20% of participants experienced serious levels of depression resulting from their levels of heavy drinking, identified by them as vital for social functioning. Another study has revealed that first-year students beginning college in 2010 had higher levels of invisible disabilities and greater economic issues than those in previous years, which aggravated their mental health condition (Pryor et al., 2010). Interestingly, Adams et al. (2006) emphasized that supportive, constructive and positive interactions with university staff and other students are the foundations for moral development, psychosocial maturity, and emotional well-being of freshmen.
Saudi Arabian students face the same psychological challenges as students in the rest of the world. Many of them experience failure, frustration, and psychological morbidities like depression, stress, and anxiety because they are not informed about their learning styles or do not possess effective learning skills and habits (Siddiqui, Abdulrahman and Alsultan, 2015). Notably, an abundant body of research focuses on the psychological challenges faced by the medical and dental students in Saudi Arabia. Thus, a study by Almoallim et al. (2010) underlined that stress and anxiety are major causes of cognitive dysfunction and poor academic performance among Saudi Arabian medical students. Another study conducted by Abdulghani et al. (2011) found that levels of stress in Saudi Arabian medical students equaled 63.7%, as compared to the numbers in Thailand (61.4%), Egypt (43.7%), Malaysia (41.9%), and the UK (31.2%). As Aboalshamat, Hou, and Strodl (2014) explained, medical students are at a higher risk of stress because of their desire to satisfy the value of helping others, attain prestigious jobs, and achieve a stable financial future. A study by Al-Daghri et al. (2014), however, showed that Saudi Arabian students studying at the King Saud University (KSU) were less predisposed to cardiometabolic abnormalities and stress than their Western counterparts were. The authors associated these findings with good adaptation among Saudi Arabian pre-college students in their first year of university life. Thus, contradicting data allows concluding that more research is required in the KSA to determine the efficacy of first-year programs in addressing the transition-related stress of students.
It is also important to realize that females entering universities in Saudi Arabia tend to face a greater amount of stress than males. A study by Almoallim et al. (2010) revealed that women reported difficulty in keeping up with the required reading and in remembering information, which subsequently increased their levels of anxiety. In addition, researchers have found that females were reluctant to consult instructors when facing difficulties, which can be explained by their upbringing. Similarly, a study by Al-Sowygh (2013) indicated that females, especially married ones, reported more stress due to the cultural and traditional expectations imposed on them by the community. One can also add that while women are allowed to receive higher education in Saudi Arabia, their campuses remain extremely isolated places with no connection with the outside world, which also contributes to increased stress and anxiety (Batrawy, 2013).
Organizational and Educational Aspects
In 1991, Pascarella and Terenzini (1991) argued that for most students, transition to the university classroom requires adjustment of academic habits and expectations. Today, research proves that organizational and academic aspects remain the primary barriers to successful first-year experience. A UK study conducted in 2006 reported that 56% of those who were having difficulty in coping with academic study had considered withdrawal. In addition, results revealed that 34% of respondents considered their academic work to be harder than they had expected it to be, and 39% confided they had difficulty in balancing academic and other commitments (Anon., 2007). Furthermore, a study conducted by Professor Mantz Yorke of Lancaster University and Professor Bernard Longden of Liverpool Hope University in 2006 revealed that 40% of those who had little or no knowledge of their program had considered withdrawal because organizational patterns seemed too complicated for them (Anon., 2007).
Academic performance and successful transition are possible only if students manage to master some crucial skills and build strong social relationships. Andreatta (2011) noted that it is essential for the first-year students to master time management, critical thinking, as well as writing skills, which are often overseen at school. In addition, studies generally report that interaction with others is important in the learning process and it contributes tremendously to academic adjustment (Awang, Kutty and Ahmad, 2014). Therefore, quality of student experience at the university is positively enhanced through greater participation in social life and academic achievement. Watton (2001) added that academic performance at the university is greatly influenced by high school performance, living arrangements, background, and orientation activities of the students.
In the Saudi Arabian educational settings, first-year academic challenges are determined by the generally adopted educational system. In particular, the school system relies mainly on teacher-based activities, and examinations require good memorization skills. As a result, the majority of students acquire passive learning habits (Almoallim et al., 2010). In addition, in the medical school curriculum, subjects are taught in English, which means that some of the students may have insufficient language skills to understand and analyze new information. Therefore, when students enroll to the university, they are faced with the increased academic workload that is sometimes too difficult to manage. Furthermore, Almoallim et al. (2010) have found that females were particularly challenged by the English language teaching and increased workload as compared to school curriculum. Alhujaylan (2014) added that choosing a major is also a significant barrier to effective transition, since women making the wrong choice tend to struggle with their studies and stop their education altogether.
Facilitating the Adjustment
Worldwide, a strong trend in support of retention in universities has focused on the development of first-year experience programs that foster a learning environment for new students to promote their intellectual, cultural, social, and personal growth (Samson and Granath, 2004). Research indicates that over the past 35 years, thousands of institutions have created first-year programs aiming to increase retention rates and persistence to graduation (Brock, 2014). By providing first-year students with support needed to successfully negotiate students’ transition to college, freshman-year experience programs have positively affected students’ psychological well-being, academic achievement, and retention rates (Finning-Kwoka, 2009). Currently, nearly every large university in the world has a comprehensive first-year experience program, which is presented in a form of instruction classes, tutoring programs, academic advising interventions, orientation, and interactive learning sessions.
A variety of different first-year experience programs exist to support student transition to university. Thus, Cuseo (2014) considered the first-year seminar to be one of the most successful courses offered in the history of higher education. The author argued that several comprehensive studies showed a positive course impact of first-year seminars on student retention and academic success. Interestingly, Cuseo (2014) noted that positive effects were found for all types of students across all institutional types of different sizes situated in different locations. It is important to understand that most first-year seminars fall into one of five categories, such as academic seminars with generally uniform content across sections, academic seminars on different topics across sections, extended orientation seminars, professional or discipline-linked seminars, or various study skills seminars. These seminars are presented in an active classroom environment where, through peer activities and instructor guidance, students learn about academic success, campus resources, and personal development (California Polytechnic State University, 2015).
Learning community is another widely used and effective student success initiative (Greenfield, Keup and Gardner, 2013). Association of American Colleges and Universities has identified learning communities as a high-impact practice, which positively influences retention, academic achievement, and social integration of the first-year students (Kuh, 2008). According to Goldman (2012), learning communities’ programs for first-year undergraduate students allow students to perform better academically and have a higher level of satisfaction with their university experience compared to those students who are not in the program. Learning community programs in the US higher education originated in the 1920s with the Experiential College at the University of Wisconsin, and became particularly widespread in the 1980s and 1990s (Pike, 2008). Today, many universities apply this strategy with first-year students to support their transition. Burton (2013) explained that usually, a learning community is a small group of students meeting weekly while attending class together. This learning team provides a supportive environment for academic exploration and real-world experiences that prepare students to succeed after graduating. In this way, freshmen gain essential skills in project management, collaboration, and conflict resolution.
Service learning is another first-year program, which can be described as a pedagogical approach that ties together voluntary service to the community with various academic activities (Koch and Gardner, 2014). According to the Center for Service Learning, Western Carolina University (2008, p.1), service learning is defined as follows:
“A teaching and learning strategy that integrates community service with academic instruction and structured reflection in such a way that students gain further understanding of course content, meet genuine community needs, develop career-related skills, and become responsible citizens.”
Findings from a number of research studies on service programs indicate that service learning can have a positive effect on a variety of student development aspects including students’ academic, social, civic, personal, and career development (Zlotkowski, 2002). Center for Service Learning (2008) revealed that more than 40% institutions incorporating service learning in their curriculum reported increased persistence to sophomore year as well as improved peer connections. Therefore, service learning has proved to help first-year students integrate into their new communities as well as successfully understand and apply academic content (Koch and Gardner, 2014).
Supplemental instruction (SI) is a learning enhancement program developed by Deanna C. Martin at the University of Missouri in 1973. Since then, educational establishments all over the world have received grants or some kind of financial support to implement their own SI programs. In essence, it is student academic assistance program that increases academic performance and retention using collaborative learning strategies (Burmeister, 1996). This peer-facilitated program involves active problem-solving and collaborative learning techniques to help students develop mastery of course content and a range of effective study strategies in a small-group setting. Stone and Jacobs (2008) found that students participating in supplemental instruction programs are less likely to earn unsatisfactory grades or withdraw from education, and are more likely to receive higher final grades than students who do not participate, which substantially increases overall retention rates.
Early detection is another popular approach to making the first-year experience of students more positive, and constructively addressing the challenges that first-year students commonly come across. Howard (2013) discussed early detection mechanisms to target students with academic weaknesses and limited financial means. In particular, the author argued that first-year programs can become significantly more effective with the involvement of summer bridge programs. Summer bridge programs are designed to expose and guide newly admitted freshmen to college level coursework and campus resources the summer before they begin attending classes (Suzuki, 2009). Summer bridge programs aim at positively influencing the academic preparation and skills of entering freshmen prior to the first day of classes. These programs may involve new students based on various categories, such as test scores, race, ethnicity, or socioeconomic status. In this way, educators are able to solve emerging problems before the beginning of the term, and prepare students to face new challenges. Students may participate in seminars and preparatory classes, complete learning support requirements, or work towards the completion of for-credit courses (Howard, 2013).
Various countries address the problem of the first-year experience differently. In the UK, for example, a range of strategies has been established to introduce new students into the university community. These included a peer mentoring scheme (Lumsden, 2009), a proactive ‘Welcome Week’, and partnerships with the Department of Information Services and the Centre for Academic Practice to develop promote information literacy and study skills (Lumsden, McBryde-Wilding and Rose, 2010). In 2012, Hong Kong universities launched a four-year undergraduate curriculum to focus on a more holistic student-oriented approach to the undergraduate education. Instead of selecting a major on arrival, students were suggested to take a variety of the first-year courses to define their perspectives (Coniam, 2014). In Japan, first-year experience programs began to develop actively in 2000, and very soon, they spread across all major institutions. In 2001, approximately 84% of educational establishments in the country included programs aiming at introducing students to specialized professional education and increasing their study skills (Yamada, 2014).
Saudi Arabian educators employ the most progressive and effective first-year experience programs. College of Medicine at Al-Imam Muhammad Ibn Saud Islamic University located in Riyadh, for example, introduced a learning skills course for medical students. In short, this course is aimed at promoting clinical reasoning and decision-making, teamwork and inter-professional collaboration, professionalism, communication skills, leadership, information technology, and research. A study conducted by Siddiqui, Abdulrahman and Alsultan (2015) revealed that attendance of the described course exceeded 90%, and that first-year students reported they were satisfied with the results. Indeed, the average score in the mid-course exam of students participating in this program was 72.5%, while the average collective score of the course exam was 78% (Siddiqui, Abdulrahman and Alsultan, 2015).
Saudi Arabian universities try to incorporate the best international practices into their curriculum, which often requires foreign professionals. Thus, in 2015, the Northeastern Illinois University education professor Ana Gil-Garcia was invited to the Prince Mohammad bin Fahd University in Khobar. Her primary aim was defined as “teaching undergraduate females on core courses that include leadership, teamwork and learning outcomes” (Northeastern Illinois University, 2015, n.p.). Professor confided that it is extremely important for Saudi Arabian educators to pay attention to teaching females, as they are particularly vulnerable to stress and anxiety during their first year at the university. Ana Gil-Garcia added that in the KSA, women’s lives are subjected to social traditions and cultural limitations, so female students perceive leadership as a predominantly male-related subject because it involves empowerment ad decision-making responsibility. Therefore, the professor acknowledged a strong need to shift that paradigm and teach young female students to be more active and accountable for their choices (Northeastern Illinois University, 2015).
There is a large body of literature indicating that first-year experience courses have a positive impact on students’ academic and social integration. Tsui and Gao (2006), for example, conducted research on the efficacy of first-year experience programs. Results suggested that first-year experience programs provide active learning and critical thinking development. Therefore, researchers concluded, “fostering student success in the freshman year is the most important effort an institution can undertake in its attempt to boost student persistence” (Tsui and Gao, 2006, p.163). In another study, Keup (2006) investigated first-year experience programs in several different institutions. Results indicated that first-year experience programs, service learning, and learning communities facilitated good academic practices both inside and outside the classroom, and increased class attendance, participation in classes, and time spent studying (Keup, 2006). Hence, the overall positive effect of careful planning of students’ first-year experiences has a well-established body of empirical evidence supporting the need of first-year programs’ wider introduction across the Saudi Arabian higher educational establishments.
One should also realize that first-year experience programs have a positive impact on institutions in which they are implemented. Porter and Swing (2006) reported in their research that first-year experience courses benefit educational institutions in many ways, primarily by keeping tuition-paying students enrolled. They were also valuable in helping with recruitment and marketing to prospective students, as well as in showing that an institution is committed to offering high-quality education and student support. Thus, literature suggests that the first-year educational experience is a challenging process for newly admitted students, and that institutions should pay greater attention to supporting their students throughout their first year at the university. It is especially important for Saudi Arabian educational establishments, both because the government aims at delivering world-class education, and because cultural and religious norms dictated to young people often result in increased levels of stress and anxiety.
Transition Concept
First-year experience is usually described as a transitional period, or time that bridges the gap between students’ previous habits and academic skills and a new learning context. The meaning of transition varies with the context in which the term is used. In general, transitions are “periods of change, disequilibrium, and internal conflict about gains and losses that occur between periods of stability, balance, and relative quiescence” (Cowan, 1991, p. 7). If to consider this concept in the educational background, transition can be defined as a process-oriented phenomenon that involves student’s response to change. Briggs, Clark and Hall (2012, p. 2) explained, “transition involves learner creating for themselves a new identity as higher education students.” Therefore, transition as a process is interconnected with a concept of change (Lam & Pollard, 2006), time in which individuals move from one constructed identity to another that causes shifts in routines, identity, culture, role and status, and relationships (Goodman, Schlossberg and Anderson, 2006).
Traditionally, transition from school to college coincides with transition from youth to adulthood, a period currently described as “emerging adulthood” (Ramsay, 2009, p.1). More clearly defined, emerging adulthood is believed to take place between the ages of approximately 18 to 25, and it is typically characterized by the greater independence from parents and the exploration of more challenging life choices concerning education, career, and social interaction (Ramsay, 2009). However, the idea that young adults follow a developmental process that involves linear and sequential movement towards their goals has been critiqued by a number of authors (Livingstone, 2015). Thus, Looker and Dwyer (1996, p.1) contributed to the existing pool of research by challenging the conventional linear model of age transition and recognizing that, “even for those who appear to be ‘on track’ in terms of the conventional mainstream models and patterns, moving into adult life involves multiple transitions and the balancing of a range of actual and intended commitments.” These researchers argued,
“the usual tendency of defining transitions in terms of certain predetermined linear pathways fails to do justice to the actual experience and choices of young people, reducing the significance of the complexity and interplay of factors” (Looker and Dwyer, 1996, p.1).
Therefore, it becomes obvious that besides undergoing certain age transition, young students face challenges connected with the new environment, which doubles the stress and anxiety.
Incorporated Theory
As far as the psychological interpretation of student transition is concerned, various theories and perspectives have been applied. For example, a social learning theory developed by Rotter (1966) holds that personality is formed through the interaction of an individual with the environment. Departing from psychoanalysis and behaviorism popular at that time, Rotter chose the empirical law of effect as the motivating factor. To put it simply, the researcher maintained that people are motivated to seek out positive stimulation, or reinforcement, and avoid unpleasant stimulation (Niemann, 2007). It terms of university transition and process of moving into adulthood, Rotter (1966) did not believe there is a decisive period after which personality is set. Rather, the author emphasized that people are being drawn forward by their goals, seeking to maximize their reinforcement, rather than just avoiding punishment.
A cognitive evaluation theory can also be applied to the process of university transition. Cognition as a process includes receiving relevant information from the environment, analyzing that information, and formulating a plan of action based on that analysis (Walsh, 2003). Developed by Deci and Ryan (1980), the cognitive evaluation theory suggests that the presence of a salient external reward or constraint can induce a change in the perceived locus of causality from internal to external, which results in decreased intrinsic motivation. The absence of a salient reward or constraint and presence of a choice, on the contrary, can increase intrinsic motivation (Ryan, 1982). In addition, the theory underlines that if some event enhances individual’s perception of competence, his or her intrinsic motivation will increase (Deci and Ryan, 1980). In other words, people tend to demonstrate higher levels of cognition and motivation when they do not perceive external changes or events as controlling or too demanding.
Furthermore, it is necessary to discuss the theory of epistemic cognitive development suggested by Perry (1970). In brief, the scholar divided students into four broad groups, such as dualistic, multiplistic, relativistic, and committed. Students with dualistic thinking perceive knowledge as either true or false and actions as either right or wrong (Robinson, 2012). Many dualistic people believe that the only way to get things in this world is by hard work and adherence to authority (Johnson, 1994). Students possessing multiplistic thinking begin to perceive knowledge from different perspectives and begin to develop their own opinion. Multiplicity as a way of thinking suggests that people feel that there are many different choices or answers. People at this stage often feel that not only authority has right answers (Johnson, 1994).
Relativism is the third position in Perry’s theory. The author maintained that relativistic thinking allows students to see different perspectives and question the authority position. Knowledge at this stage becomes qualitative and complex. This also lent itself to the notion that something is not either good or bad, but rather one solution is better or worse than another solution (Johnson, 1994). The final stage of commitment thinking presupposes having personal commitments to values, beliefs, and goals, and it gives students understanding that their perspective is not the only possible (Robinson, 2012). Perry’s theory has wide implications for practice, as it allows realizing that all students have their own ways of thinking that should be taken into consideration when trying to facilitate the transition to university.
Notably, in Saudi Arabia, universities have historically adopted methods of teaching where students play no active role, and much memorizing without creative thinking or discussion is the norm (Al-Mengash, 2006; Ministry of Higher Education, 2009). Students are expected to accept what they hear from their teachers or read from their textbooks and their role is limited to learning the information without questioning it. Women’s education also uses passive methods, and it is believed that lecturers should follow the established, traditional methods of delivery without any variation or innovation (AlMunajjed, 1997). Although some active learning strategies, such as student-centered, active learning using brainstorming, teamwork, and inventive thinking are now being used at some universities, the majority of Saudi Arabian students continue to develop dualistic thinking. This strict adherence to traditional teaching and learning obviously hinder the development of students’ personalities and aggravate their transition to university.
The concept of transition cannot be fully understood without analyzing the theory of multiple intelligences (MI) by Gardner (1993). The scholar suggested that that intelligence is not a single, static IQ number, but rather a dynamic mixture of talents skills that are manifested differently in different people. In this relation, Gardner (1993, preface) used a comprehensive definition of intelligence: “an ability or set of abilities that allows a person to solve a problem or fashion a product that is valued in one or more cultures” that has direct applications to curriculum design, instruction, and career counseling at all age levels. Along with verbal-linguistic, mathematical-logical, musical, visual, and several other types of intelligence, Gardner (1993) highlighted intrapersonal intelligence, which includes a complex set of knowledge and abilities pertaining to one’s self. In its nature, intrapersonal intelligence involves an accurate self-representation (including both strengths and weaknesses) that allows a person to manage effectively his or her life (Shearer, 2009).
Theory of multiple intelligences plays a huge role in the successful transition and academic achievements, as it underlines that supporting students both behaviorally and academically begins with meeting their needs and strengths (Shearer, 2009). MI theory has gained much support in the field of education, especially in the works by Almeida et al. (2010), Koong and Wu (2010), McCoog (2010), Shearer (2009), Shearer and Luzzo (2009), and Small Roseboro (2010). Each of these theorists stressed that it is crucial for educators to draw on a variety of students’ intelligences. Although it is impossible to meet the needs of every individual student, it is still desirable to develop assignments and curriculum that incorporate all intelligence types. By advancing and strengthening individual’s intelligence, educators can potentially reduce the stress connected with transition and accelerate the process of adjustment to the new academic setting.
Blatt’s (1990) theory of interpersonal relatedness and self-definition is also widely applied to the university transition. As explained by Shahar et al. (2003), interpersonal relatedness refers to the need to establish stable, close, nurturing, and protective relationships. The process of self-definition pertains to ‘‘the development of a realistic, essentially positive and increasingly integrated self-definition and self-identity’’ (Blatt, 1991, p.453). Thus, the scholar maintained that an adequate balance between the development of relatedness and self-definition contributes to an evolving personality and self-sufficiency that in turn facilitates the establishment of mature interpersonal relationships (Shahar et al., 2003). Notably, excessive emphasis on one of these dimensions usually causes depression and anxiety. Optimally developing people are able to engage in relations without losing their sense of self, and they strive for achievement and self-definition without overlooking interpersonal relationships.
In the university setting, students often face the challenging dilemma of building peers relationships without losing one’s personality and beliefs. Eventually, those who succeed to find a stable balance gain an opportunity to mature and develop both academically and psychologically. In this relation, one can mention the study by Wiseman (1997), who investigated loneliness during the transition to the university by applying Blatt’s (1990) theory of interpersonal relatedness and self-definition. Researcher has found that in the relationship with an intimate partner, self-criticism negatively predicted openness, sensitivity, and trust, whereas dependency positively predicted affection and trust. Briefly, these findings suggested that self-critical individuals who are preoccupied with self-definition concerns constitute a group especially at high risk for loneliness during the transition to university (Wiseman, 1997).
Self-definition is closely related to the concept of self-determination that “encompasses concepts such as free will, civil and human rights, freedom of choice, independence, personal agency, self-direction, and individual responsibility” (Bremer, Kachgal and Schoeller, 2003, p.1). Experts are unanimous that skills associated with becoming more self-determined (e.g., setting goals, problem-solving, decision-making, self-management) are important for a successful transition from school to adult life (Argan and Wehmeyer, 2000). Thus, self-determination theory suggested by Edward L. Deci and Richard M. Ryan aims to explain aspects of personality and behavioral self-regulation through interactions between intrinsic and environmental determinants within social settings (Ryan and Deci, 2002). This theory suggests that people have inborn tendencies to grow and develop psychologically, to strive to face life challenges, and to integrate experience into self-concept. More importantly, these tendencies are fully expressed only within a supportive social context (Ryan and Deci, 2002). In other words, although individuals have great potential for development, it is also important that peers, family, and university provide a student with a context conducive to self-determination. This idea leads to the discussion of a role that social support plays in the successful transition to university.
Role of Social Support
Social support has received much attention over the past decades because of the role it plays in life transitions, particularly the transition of late adolescence from high school to university (Jay and D’Augelli, 1991; Tao et al., 2000; Zea, Jarama and Bianchi, 1995). According to Mikal et al. (2013, p.A46), “social support is the transfer of advice, information and resources to an individual to help cope with a stressor.” Social support is frequently used in much socio-educational and socio-psychological research that emphasizes the importance of social relationship among community members (Awang, 2012; Demaray et al., 2010; Peters, 2010; Topping and Foggie, 2010; Yaeda, 2010). Jindal-Snape (2010) underlined the importance of social support for promoting wellbeing, especially in transition to university, as varying cultural identities and educational levels may be too challenging for a person to handle on one’s own. Demaray et al. (2005, p.691) highlighted that social support is
“transpiring from multiple sources (family, close friends, teachers, classmates, and administration) and consisting of multiple types (informational, instrumental, emotional, and appraisal,), which may serve to improve a student’s adjustment and outcomes.”
Scholars agree that the process of renegotiating social support networks, redefining existing relationships with family and friends, and establishing new friendships is essential for a successful transition to university, and students who fail to adjust to the new social setting are likely to withdraw (Harley et al., 2007).
According to the social identity theory (Tajfel and Turner, 1979), people’s feelings of esteem are closely connected with their social identities. To maintain the positive distinctiveness of their group, individuals engage into in-group favoritism and outgroup derogation, and they are inclined to compete with, and discriminate against, other groups to gain or maintain advantage for their group (Insko et al., 2001). More importantly, the theory suggests that the stronger the identification of the individual with the group, the more he or she will attempt to achieve intergroup differentiation (Tajfel and Turner, 1979). In this way, social identity theory addresses phenomena such as prejudice, discrimination, stereotyping, intergroup conflict, group cohesiveness, and social comparison. Social identity theory is interrelated with self-categorization theory, which claims that, for example, women tend to speak more cautiously in mixed-sex groups than they do in all female groups, presumably because the presence of men in mixed-sex groups makes women’s gender identity salient (Carli, 1990). Briefly speaking, self-categorization theory claims that the exposure to gender-related environment increases self-stereotyping tendencies.
To some extent, universities and culture in general are responsible for shaping students’ identities, and they are doing so in entirely implicit and unchallenged ways. Students, especially in Saudi Arabia, are frequently given no choice about the kind of identity they want to take on. Instead, they are simply informed that certain disciplinary ways of writing, speaking and thinking are ‘correct’ for their group and must be performed if they want to graduate as a linguist, an engineer, a sociologist, a doctor or other professional identity (Stribbe, 2011). The problem is aggravated by the extremely rigid gender segregation and religious postulates that impose strict rules of both males and females, leaving them with no choice concerning their behavioral patterns. The Arab society, including the new Saudi Arabian society, is traditionally divided by men into two separate worlds: the public world, which is the man’s domain, and the private world that belongs exclusively to women (Alhazmi and Nyland, 2015). Therefore, once female students get into the public world of university, they somehow challenge the most basic rules established in their society and therefore, become subject to discrimination and stereotyping. In this way, female students have a double task of taking on the disciplinary identity that they are being firmly guided into by the university, and also updating and changing that identity so that it better suits the conditions of the world around them.
Because of the central role the concept of social identity plays in intergroup relations, and, subsequently, in students’ transition, scholars suggest certain interventions to reduce intergroup bias and promote fair treatment of members of low-status groups. These interventions focus on altering or degrading the in-group-outgroup distinction psychologically (Miller, 2002). One such approach to reducing intergroup bias that attempts to eliminate the tendency of people to think in terms of social categories is the Common Ingroup Identity Model (Gaertner and Dovidio, 2000, 2012). This model proposes that recategorizing members of different groups into a common group would enhance the quality of intergroup contact and thus improve intergroup social relations. Thus, the Common Ingroup Identity Model highlights the importance of a shared membership of subgroup members in an overarching inclusive social category (Hong et al., 2004). However, despite the obvious positive effect of the approach, it is questionable whether this model can be applied in Saudi Arabian educational setting due to the strict gender segregation.
An abundant body of research exists that examines the relationship between social support and university transition and adjustment. Zea et al. (1995), for example, conducted a study with first-year university students from a Northeast American university. In particular, researchers investigated such areas as adjustment, social support, and psychosocial competence. The results revealed that those students receiving substantial social support tended to have better academic, social, and emotional adjustment as compared to students lacking stable friendship and family relationships (Zea et al., 1995). More importantly, the findings indicated that students failing to build a supportive social network could have serious problems with adjustment to university. Thus, findings of this study provided a confirmation to the belief that socially supported students successfully adjust to the university setting and have positive transition and first-year experience.
The role of successful student integration into the social and academic fabric of the campus was also investigated by Tao et al. (2000). As acknowledged in this study, life transitions, especially university attendance, lead to the reconstruction of relations between the individual and the environment. The aim of the research, therefore, was to investigate how perceptions of social support among Chinese students changed during the first year of university study, and how social support, coping strategies, and adjustment influenced overall students’ well-being and academic achievements. Results showed that social support from family, peers, teachers, and siblings significantly increased adjustment and coping skills of the young students (Tao et al., 2000). Therefore, it is possible to conclude that although individuals receive certain amount of freedom and independence in the university, they still need support from their families, close friends, and administration, which underlines the extreme importance of social integration programs.
Scholars agree that both parental and peer support are necessary to ensure successful university transition. Ritchie (2003) explained that parental support provides individuals with current access to emotional and tangible help and validation, which are essential during the period of drastic life changes. Participants with a higher level of parental support tend to have higher levels of happiness, and were found to be less depressed than freshmen with a lower level of parental support have (Lian and Geok, 2009). In this relation, Wintre and Yaffe (2000) found that students who reported feeling supported by their parents had significantly better adaptations to university than those who did not. Supportive peer relationships have also been found to mediate the effects of the new and unexplored university environment and reduce the negative effects of stressful life events and anxiety. Students who failed to develop friendships with their peers within first year of university study tend to be more distressed and overwhelmed by increased academic demands than students who managed to establish support networks (Ritchie, 2003).
The literature clearly highlights the need for students to participate in social activities along with the importance of building friendship in aiding transition (Bowles et al., 2011). Thus, Kiessling et al. (2004) suggested that students adapt better to their university environment when they feel supported by their peers and when they are part of a social network and overall university culture. The importance of ensuring students assimilate into the university’s social setting was also emphasized by Leach and Zepke (2004), who argued that an institution’s primary objective is to assist students socially and academically in order to foster their success. Similarly, Bejerano (2014) underlined that peer support, family support, and teacher support are all significant predictors of students’ adaptation, and they are usually more important than levels of motivation, self-esteem, and academic skills. Authors stressed the need to provide students with opportunity to build new social relations, as well as preserve old ones (Bejerano, 2014). Bateson and Taylor (2004) believed that a process of building a campus climate that encourages student involvement in their university experience assists in enabling transition. Therefore, it is important for first-year students to feel they belong to a new learning community.
Several studies conducted in the late 1980s and 1990s demonstrated that peer-led social support programs administered during the first weeks of university improve students’ perceptions of social support and overall adjustment and decrease loneliness and anxiety (Lamothe et al., 1995; Oppenheimer, 1984; Pancer et al., 2007; Pratt et al., 2000). Interestingly, Pratt et al. (2000) found that gender may moderate the effects of a social support-based intervention, as women reported greater perceived social support and fewer depressive symptoms after participating in social support programs. More recent studies of social support with young adults have shown that women generally receive greater social support than men do during stressful times of university transition (Luo, 2006; Schneider, Randoll, & Buchner, 2006). Therefore, if to apply these findings to the Saudi Arabian educational setting, it is possible to conclude that women-focused social interventions aimed at facilitating university transition would be particularly useful in this environment. Potentially, relevant social support provided to young women in universities can not only increase their academic and psychological situation, but also empower them to challenge gender inequality and achieve social justice in their community both in education and in all life matters, especially given the complexity of women’s issues in religious patriarchal societies (Rajkhan, 2014).
Taking into account extremely segregated educational setting in Saudi Arabia, it seems logical to suggest that social support through the Internet can be an optimal choice for women students. Before widespread availability of communication technology, socially supportive interactions were likely to be unavailable for those students living in distant or rural areas. Therefore, some individuals living in unfavorable geographic location failed to integrate into the new community and form new friendships before the actual beginning of the classes (Mikal et al., 2013). Thus, the Internet provides at least two advantages for the social support during transition. First, in situations where transition creates physical distance between an individual and his or her networks of support, the Internet can enable a person to keep in touch with old, established social support networks (Mikal et al., 2013). Second, women students receive a chance to interact with their peers without leaving their homes, which is a great advantage for particularly patriarchic families.
Role of institutional culture in student transition
Institutional culture is a term full of ambiguity. Watson (2006) is of the opinion that culture as a concept is something that is cultivated. Culture consists of the practices and climate which institutions come up with so as to handle people, or ensure promotion of beliefs and values of the organization (Schein, 2004). According to Schein (2004) ‘the most important undertaking of leaders is the creation and management of culture; leaders are different from other people due to their ability to work with and understand what culture is ; it is up to the leaders to destroy a culture that they deem not functional ’ . Thus, culture offers an institutional identity and through rituals, norms, values, and legends of the institution, it helps in determining how things are done. The culture of an organization covers what worked best for the institution in the past. As a result the practices and habits that worked in the past are held in high esteem without questioning them hence they become the culture of the institution.
Every higher educational institution has its own way of doing things, and uses a specific language for expressing and celebrating important aspects of its existence through particular events, programs, and ceremonies. Most generally, at the surface, the institutional culture of an educational establishment is expressed in the behaviors, values, and assumptions of groups and individuals involved in work and studies there, who in their totality make up what constitutes an organization. Taking into account such a personally embedded nature of institutional culture, many researchers associated it with the social construction of an institution contained in the stories, policies, practices, and interaction of its members. Other aspects reflecting institutional culture include symbols, artifacts, and organizational mission of such establishments (Scott, 2008).
However, in line with seeing the plurality of definitions of institutional culture, one should take into account the multitude of components constituting what it is, in its complex and dynamic nature. Numerous research studies have brought about a generalized understanding of what elements it comprises, including the organization’s historical roots, curriculum, faculty and staff, its social environment, cultural artifacts, distinctive themes reflecting its core values, and its charismatic leaders and founders (Scott, 2008). Hence, it becomes evident that an institutional culture is not simply the way in which things are done at an educational establishment; it is the complicated set of rules, values, and principles that have formed as a product of the institution’s rules, customs, and context-specific practices. As a result, institutional culture is preserved and enriched by the organization’s members who share assumptions and interpretation of culture’s components mentioned above and use them as guidance for their behavior and decisions (Saunders, 2011).
When students get to college the expectations of their higher education experience depends on the institution they are in (Henry, Wills, & Nixon, 2005).There are different cultures in different institutions, and institutional culture is said to be the collective, physical settings, practices, traditions, and patterns of the history of an institution which together help in issuing guidance for individuals and groups in any institutional setting (Kuh & Whitt, 1988). Therefore, by getting to a specific educational establishment, students unwillingly become adepts of its institutional culture, and the degree to which they accept and internalize it, and use it as guidance of their behavior and decisions, shapes their first-year experiences in that specific institution’s educational system.
Institutional culture can be consistent, inconsistent, strong, or weak; it can facilitate in addition to inhibit effectiveness and development within the institution that it is being used. Loyalty and sense of community is normally developed from stories, legends and symbols developed over a given time period hence why people when talking about institutional culture normally say from “our history” (Birnbaum, 1988). New students get attuned with institutional culture through learning and interacting with other students that have been in the institution for a while. When new students get to college they have an idea of the norms and based on the new experience they get in college they are able to make sense of the norms in question. According to a model by (Weidman, 1989) on the socialization of undergraduate’s which states that the background of the students as being important when one is out tom understand how undergraduates tend to socialize ,his focus was on the background of the students focusing mainly on the goals ,socioeconomic status ,skills and abilities .According to Weidman (1989) socialization in college influence the outcomes after college this includes the aspirations ,choices of career and lifestyle .
The culture of any institution influences how the student engages with others, how they behave and develop in addition to the way they learn. Engagement by students is key in facilitating personal development and learning by the students and it is said to be the effort of students to focus their time on activities that are educational in nature which lead to better outcomes (Astin, 1993). How students interact with their peers and members of faculty helps in ensuring the engagement of the students (Pascarella & Terenzini, 1991). For example, considering students studying in private universities, they tend to be more engaged in the higher education experience and will most likely be taking part in activities like student organizations activities. Looking at bigger public institutions, students tend to be not noticed and hardly engage due to high number of students in those universities (Henry, Wills, & Nixon, 2005).
According to (Kuh, Hu, & Vesper, 2000), a number of characteristics of background of the students, the level of education of their parents, number of years they have spent in college, the course they are taking and how they view the college environment all work in influencing the engagement of the student. When students get to college regardless of the institution or type, they normally have some expectations of all the spheres of the life in college (Howard, 2005). These held expectations of the new students are informed on how the students understand what they have experienced in the past .A lot of students typically have an idea how the life in the university will be like (Moneta & Kuh, 2005). However, expectations and reality often differ from each other, and the larger the gap between expectations and reality is, the harder it is for students to adjust to a new educational environment. This is where the institutional culture of an educational establishment may be of certain help; in case the culture of an institution is explicitly oriented at simplifying the transition of its freshmen to the higher educational context, students may find it much easier to reconcile their expectations to the environment in which they start their education, and they tend to embrace and internalize such a conducive, positive institutional culture much quicker.
Looking at how institutional culture of the university affects new students, two main features come to play; that is (a)The physical aspects of the university that is including the university ground ,buildings ,halls and the feeling of community being in a university evokes , the demography of people enrolled ,its setting. Regarding the setting questions that may be asked are its size, this is then answered based on the student body and the physical characteristics such as the surrounding of the college, the college has commuter or residential based students? This is answered based on the body of the students which can be composed of students that are defined based on race ,economic status ,gender and demography .Determination of the attitudes ,makeup and values of students helps in knowing exactly the strengths and weaknesses of an institution in comparison to the outside world.
Another category (b) is the cultural or psychological feel of the campus . The overall feel of the institution is key in determining how students relate to the university environment .This consists of the climate of the campus here questions that come up include is the campus open to students? This includes accessing the officials, faculty and resources like the library, career advice and counselling among other services. Does a community sense exist in the university? And how safe and secure are the different cultures in the university? Through these questions one gets the information which helps in giving a picture of how students relate with the university. And based on the concept of an institution being a single concept it is of importance for one to know how its formal characteristics links with the environment. Through this linkage one is able to know how the university culture will affect new students.
Campus climate has overall been assessed by academic research as a vital component facilitating academic and social integration of students into the higher education system, and it is even associated with attrition and retention of students (Engstrom, 2008). The present evidence suggests that students who like the campus climate and consider it conducive to their needs and expectations are much more likely to remain in that establishment and study until graduation. The concept of campus climate has been repeatedly studied in relation to more vulnerable categories of students; those whose racial or gender identity is beyond the norm of the majority of students studying in that educational establishment may experience additional hospitality or non-acceptance in the campus, which may result in a highly negative higher education transition experience. The present aspect of research is highly relevant for the present study’s focus, since Saudi Arabian females may experience gender-specific problems with integration into the campus because of higher education being a traditionally male field of education.
Moos (1979) stated that the setting of the university had three different phases that worked harmoniously that is (i) the physical buildings and their arrangement (ii) the size of the institution including officials and resources and lastly (c) the student body. Davis and Murrell (1993) refer to the student body as the being a human aggregate and see it as a collection of institutional norms. Among the questions asked based on the above can be concerning the participation of students in organizations within the university? How open the faculty are to students or the students need to make an appointment beforehand? Through such questions the normative aspects of the university environment is determined and this is reinforced by the physical makeup of the university and the institutional structure. All these come together creating a social climate which is felt by students going through transition. As demonstrated by Davis and Murrell, “the climate of the campus, is influenced by the structural makeup of the university environment” Davis and Murrell (1993, p 86)
Pace (as cited in (Moos, 1979) stated that there exists a connection between the ability of the university environment to act as a shaping agent with success or unsuccessful facilitate the transition of students. Pace observes that student are charged with their own learning but in addition the characteristics of the environment he noted add on the scope ,institutional context and quality of the efforts made by the students to facilitate learning (Moos, 1979). Since an educational establishment is not only about learning but also about social interactions of students with peers, educators, and administrative staff, it is vital for the students to feel that their challenges and needs are adequately addressed throughout their educational process. Such responsiveness should also be a part of the institutional culture of an educational setting, and provision of adequate resources and staff for freshmen to get smoothly involved in their educational process, to have their problems solved in a timely manner, and to address their inquiries with informative, constructive responses is one of the visual artifacts of an institutional culture focused on, and directed towards, boosting an effective and positive transition of students into the higher educational system of their particular establishment.
An ability of the institution to provide freshmen with sufficient social resources is also among the most vital and basic aspects of assistance with first-year transitions at the institutional level. Austin (1968) postulated that self-esteem, homesickness, and individual achievement results from students and the environment not matching. This idea was further developed by (Tinto, 1975) where he proposed on the need of compatibility between the institution and the individual for there to be a supportive and successful relationship. Through the above integration an individual will be structurally integrated into the social and academic system of the institution as a result leading to the student succeeding in their post-High school endeavours.
Based on the above foundations (Pascarella, 1985) asserts the need of the formal characteristics of the institution that is things to do with its curriculum, size and location together with its environment help give the student’s ability to either with or without success transition into university. The interaction existing between the environment of the university and the formal characteristics produces a climate which is the foundation of peer-to-peer relationships and influences how faculty and students interact all these calls for high level of student involvement.
From the above literature written about the effect the university environment has on the development of students two components come to life that is (a)the institutional culture and the characteristics of the formal organizational which includes aspects such as faculty ,size in addition to the university administration all this contributes to the development of the environment of the institution which then influences how students behave in addition to how the institution climate feels like (Davis & Murrell, 1993).
Institutional Culture and Academic Literacy
Academic literacy has a number of definitions it can be said to be the capacity to one has to research and study, and after that communicate the findings and the knowledge that they have acquired from the research and study in a way that is specific to a given program or set standards. In more detail, one should note that academic literacy is a complex set of generic but transferrable skills directed towards acquiring and presenting knowledge of various aspects of academic discourse, such as developing and presenting scholarly argumentation, incorporation of ideas from course readings into personal research, and gradual acquisition of a sound written and oral academic style. Furthermore, academic literacy encompasses skills of academic discourse production, including thoughtful elaboration of research in academic assignments, and expression of a strong and flexible ability for concise and persuasive communication. Experts of the University of Essex (2015) also associated academic literacy with an ability to think critically and creatively, and to test ideas and arguments that students come across in the process of their studies. Finally, academic literacy is about independent learning and respect towards research and scholarly effort of other members of academia.
In higher education, there are a number of ways to look at academic literacy (Boughey, 2002).Among the ways that academic literacy can be analysed we have study skills which consist of skills that are taught at the university. In this definition academic literacy is separated from language problem .Another view of academic literacy is “academic socialization” which focuses on helping ensure smooth transition of students into the education system. The other view is “academic literacies” which is a perspective that views literacies as consisting of social practices of a given disciplinary communities and not just based on socialisation or skills (Lea & Street, 1998).
Based on the above learning is about being able to access a disciplinary discourse in addition to being able to maintain a given critical stance towards the discourse this is almost the same as the notion of discourse as promoted by (Gee, 2005).In Gee (2005), who happens to be among the main people in the contemporary literacy studies scholars there is a clear separation between the “little d” discourse which according to Gee is composed of writing ,reading and language on the other hand the “big D” discourse concerns itself with views that are more broad in nature such as worldviews. Gee, opinionates that discourse consists of the given ways people interact , think ,behave ,write ,read ,speak and value things and situations (Gee, 1996) through this a given community gets its characteristics that others will know it for .
In using capital D for Discourse Gee places an emphasis that discourse transcends the ability to read and write. Using the context of Chemistry as an example the Discourse of chemistry has its attitudes ,habits of mind ,values ,ways of interaction and beliefs which are particular to individuals studying education in addition to how these people will read research texts ,solve problems make use of various graphs among others will be different from other discourses.
Transition and Student Social Identity
The transformation that students undergo when getting to a higher educational establishment is a part of constructing a social identity of a college/university student. It includes an evolution of students’ identity in relation to the social context of the university, and reflects the extent of students’ involvement in the social life of that educational establishment. Moreover, the social identity of a student ultimately serves as an indicator of success that a student achieves in transition to the higher educational context. At the core of this process of students’ social identity formation, one may find Kurt Lewin’s (1939) theory about the dynamic relationship between an individual and social groups to which he or she belongs. Dynamics of this process is reflected in the changing social status and sense of security within the educational group, and is influenced by the degree of acceptance or rejection of the institution’s values (Heer, 2008).
Easterly (2008) also claimed that freshmen usually face challenging transitions during their first year at the university because they interact with a large quantity of new broad social networks both on campus and off campus, and they establish new community memberships together with memberships that they used to have before enrolment to higher education. The majority of students form new partnerships on the basis of their existing social identity such as racial identity, gender, interests, etc. However, the process of integration into higher education seems to be a much more complex and multimodal social identity formation process that presupposes students’ activities in a variety of social contexts, and serves as mediator of students’ actions in that new institutional context (Easterly, 2008).
Student transition is thus the process that represents change or movement of students from one stage to another. Transition involves the students moving between two interconnected states during this time there is disturbance taking place in the life of the student as the transition involves getting attuned to new cultural behaviours, values, understanding and attitudes the main aspects that come to light during student transition are; (a) it is a process of continuous change that encompasses the entire life cycle of the student (b) transitions that student go through are many ,transitioning into the university is just one of the many that exist (c) in aiding with the transition the social and academic capacity of the students is developed in the process benefiting both the student and university in addition to the entire society in the long run (d) the transition process is undertaken by many if not all the students (e) all the above fits into the business of the university which concerns retention ,teaching and making the students ready for employment (f) understanding student transition is key in ensuring access to university and helping develop better experience of the students in the university and lastly (g) there is need for the university to recognise the importance of student transition and supporting it is important and part of their job description.
Category of Transition
Academic Cycle – this is the transition informed by events in the academic year .An example includes when one joins the university there is the process of induction and orientation into the university ,after which they start to study ,do initial exams and continuous assessment tests ,travel to other places and do a research after which they then graduate.
Personal, Emotional and Developmental – The Psychological and social transitions most of which is influenced by life at the university comprises the process of normal growth and development. This calls for agreeing that students are going through a disruptive phase in their lives and they are developing into becoming independent adults in the process looking at how they will fit with in the society, in this transition students are faced with the burden of how to deal with success and failures.
Intellectual/Academic Transition- this process facilitates the development of the learner where a student learns to learn. A student in this transition graduates from guided study to studying independently, required to meet high intellectual expectations and going from undergraduate to postgraduate levels.
Sense of Belonging Transition- this relates to the process where the students develops into a part of or detached from the community .A student goes from a social network that is well established in terms of their families ,friends and come to the university this is a challenge on the part of the student during this time there is need for the student to see connection and feel like they deserve to be at the university and they will actually like the new environment though it differs from the one they were previously used to. The students need to bed in with new institution and have a new sense of belonging during the course of their study.
Research shows that the transition of students into the university life is influenced by their experience in the initial year at the university this is normally a disruptive year in the life of the students as they make a radical change into a new environment and culture unlike that which they were used to previously in the event they make a good landing they are bound to enjoy the time in the university and thus influence how university retains students (Kantanis, 2000). In addition, the experience of students during first year helps give a wider picture into how those students will develop ,engage and the chance of their retention ,there exists other enablers that facilitate smooth transition this includes orientation ,study skills ,getting the students to participate and making use of support services such as guidance and counselling .
How students develop their study skills in addition influences how students perform academically as shown by (McKenzie & Schweitzer, 2001) who argued that those students exhibiting poor habits of study are most likely to drop out of the university or not be able to adjust easily during the transition period. For this reason, orientation is normally proposed as the best way of ensuring that students transition smoothly into the university this is a view held by researchers such as (Hillman, 2005) and (McInnis, James, & Hartley, 2000). University should seek to get the ways of making effective use of resources through making use of extended and sustainable means with support from the students themselves throughput the period they are in school. A number of universities have responded to the issue of student transition by integrating orientation and other programmes which helps in the support of transition and student retention.
There is need for tertiary institutions to solve the existing paradox that exists where they offer students support while at the same time helping ensure their independence ,institutions need to focus solely on the independence of the students and looking at how to develop such (Krause, Hartley, James, & McInnis, 2005).This paradox can be tackled through ensuring that a coordinated network of services that will aid in support of the students alongside activities that will help develop the self-management capacity of the students over the long term period (McInnis, James, & Hartley, 2000) .There is need for students to actively take part in values and knowledge exchange so as to help make better their experience at the university (Evans, 2000).
There is need for students to actively take part in social activities in the university so as to develop friendship with other students as this will facilitate better experience of the students and an easy transition into the university (Hillman, 2005). Social networks are developed in the university when the students interact with other students during classes or during social events in the university like sports and cultural events. The student’s academic performance and their social integration are among the main the main predictors of successful transition into the university during the first year of the life of students at the university (McKenzie & Schweitzer, 2001).
Students need to integrate into the university life in not only academic domain but also things to do with social activities this is because the university not only helps in education but also facilitated socialization of the students to make them better social beings ,when a student find it difficult to adjust in one of the above the other one also stands to be affected (Hillman, 2005). A student during their first year in addition develops new relationship this is more pronounced in the event that the students goes to study in an school that is not in their hometown as a result students will also be forced to modify the current relationships that they have with friends and families (Parker, Summerfeldt, Hogan, & Majeski, 2004).
Students’ transition into first year can be one that is stressful or not this will depend on the social support and the personal resources existing during this time (Kiessling, Schubert, Scheffner, & Burger, 2004) observes that students tend to adapt well with the tertiary institution if there is support from not only their friends and colleagues but the social network that they are in. Paulsen (2013) found social support to be exceptionally valuable for women transitioning to higher education, since presence or absence of social support was found to have a profound impact on the firs-year experience of women. These findings served as substantial evidence for the creation of counseling services for transitioning students, which proved to be of very much assistance to those experiencing challenges during their initial period in the higher education system. Chen (2006) also stipulated that it is essential to consider perceived social support, not social support as such, as a vital determinant of successful transition to university life, mainly because it affects students’ sense of connectedness and belonging to the new institution.
It is important for students to integrate into the institutional culture of the tertiary institution that they attend this as argued by (Leach & Zepke, 2004) who acknowledges the role of the tertiary institution to aide students become better people in the society through social interaction and also perform well academically . This is the same view held by (Bateson & Taylor, 2004) who are of the opinion of the need to ensure that there exists a campus climate which ensures that the students are nurtured well in their first year of university to make their transition smooth, the new students need to feel a sense of belonging to the institution of higher learning so as to transition well into the university life.
Peer Interactions
The interactions between peers help in ensuring success of new students in college. The impact that peer-to-peer has on a student multiplies in terms of the roles that students play during their interaction at the university. Among the roles that come to play we have that of classmate, roommate, study partner, boyfriend/girlfriend and competitor among others as shown in (Astin, 1968) . Due to the small size of universities and the community created as a result peer interactions greatly influence students while they are in the institutional environment. The wide variety that exists in terms of the types of students and the contact that the students have in various events, class, along the halls of residents helps in stimulating an interaction that cannot be seen in any other place. This interaction helps in making the transition of the new students smooth.
Generally, as a first year student one is normally surrounded by an unfamiliar environment. The university promises them of the best years of their lives though this is not all that they should live for there is need for them to realise that the new world they are in has values, attitudes, norms and roles that are unique and they need to relearn most of this in the shortest time possible to become well attuned with the school system. Students in the process of being new students they need to orient to the new culture and suppress that they had previously, this new culture is developed in the peer-to-peer interaction that they will develop in classes, halls of residence and social activities that they will take part in (Fleming, Howard, Perkins, & Pesta, 2005 ).
The new environment calls for the students to re-establish themselves in a bigger and foreign community .During this time students normally feel lonely and anonymous especially if the class that they get into is large like it is typical of many first year classes. In the event that the students feel at home in the new environment they need to negotiate the challenges that comes alive in terms of intellectual ,social and academic nature. As a result peer environment is among the most challenging if not demanding aspect when it comes to transition into the university (Fleming, Howard, Perkins, & Pesta, 2005 ).
Classroom Environment
Peer environment the classroom also provide an avenue for development of students at the university ,after peer environment the classroom ranks second in terms of the effect it has on new students .Many fulltime students spend around 24 hours a week in the classroom ,during this time they interact greatly with their peers and also with the faculty during this time students are introduced into the college life and also in the process get to learn new things and develop new ideas of their own through reading and research and interaction with other members of the class (Fleming, Howard, Perkins, & Pesta, 2005).
The classroom gives students a structured learning opportunity. Through the exchange of ideas and beliefs systems students are able to investigate and come to logical conclusion about what is good for them. As they interact with other students and members of the faculty the thought process of the students is altered and their mind-set changed from the previous one that they had when they joined the university (Fleming, Howard, Perkins, & Pesta, 2005). Many students will actually spend less time in class than when they take part on other peer related activities, though the influence of the class tend to last a life time same as the relationships created during peer interaction (Astin, 1968). The classroom is an avenue through which new relationships will be created and harnessed this will work in helping with the creation of what finally constitute the college or university community .A student will successfully transition into the university by making use of the relationship they create from the paper and classroom environment in addition to the physical aspects of the university.
Physical Environment
The type, location and size of the institution is a key determinant of the campus environment in ways like the residence of the students, location of the administration building and the entire climate of the university. The physical environment is a concern of most administrators of the university (Fleming, Howard, Perkins, & Pesta, 2005 ). Physical environment consist of the playing fields, laboratories, classrooms and libraries among other facilities which connects to the lives of the students during their stay at the university (Astin, 1968). The university environment consists of the physical infrastructure like classrooms and halls of residence in addition to the surrounding community and the location geographically of the institution .This can be categorised in terms of the (a) climate (b) type of college town (c) student residence and lastly (d) the geography of the campus and the town.
Role of physical environment in the student transition is recognized as crucial in terms of academic achievement and social relations (Khan and Iqbal, 2012). Fischer (2007) acknowledged that the college environment is an important part of the transition process, as it is the milieu that affords students to gain opportunities for interaction and involvement in the campus life. The new learning environment may arouse conflicting feelings, varying from excitement and apprehension to confusion and loneliness. While some students feel enthusiastic about the opportunity to meet new people and face new challenges, others feel distressed to orient themselves to the campus, adjust to their courses, and cope with the increased academic work (University of Toronto Scarborough, 2015).
Unfortunately, new academic and physical environment allows for permissiveness and a total lack of authority as compared to the life with one’s family. After leaving protective and controlling home environment, some students may feel free to accept new behavioral patterns and engage in activities that had previously been forbidden. A study by Quinn and Fromme (2011), for example, revealed that in the transition to college, high sensation seekers brought up in protective parental environments increased their alcohol use more than did other students. In addition, it has been found that impulsive or subservient individuals were also at a higher risk of having alcohol problems (Quinn and Fromme, 2011). Researchers concluded that developing high school-perceived awareness and social support networks helps in avoiding serious alcohol and drug abuse.
A similar study by White et al. (2006) revealed that leaving home and moving to college significantly increase the frequency and degree of alcohol use and heavy drinking. Interestingly, researchers found that students with firm religious views were secured against increases in alcohol-and marijuana-use incidence. These findings allow deducing that strict Saudi Arabian traditions and religious postulates may prevent first-year students from excessive drinking and drug abuse. Moreover, it has been proved that constant parental watch protected against increases in heavy episodic drinking and marijuana use (White et al., 2006). This also leads to an idea that restrictive and patriarchic family environment can secure Saudi Arabian females from developing bad habits.
Concerning Saudi Arabian women students, new and relatively permissive university environment allows them to experiment with appearance, break the socially- and culturally-imposed rules, and yield to modern trends (Batrawy, 2013). The only gender-mixed university in the country, the King Abdullah University of Science and Technology, even permits men and women attend lectures together. However, gender segregation, early marriage, family honor, and veiling as prevailing traditions of Saudi society still impact women of all ages irrespectively of location and university (Al Alhareth, 2013). Gender segregation is required in almost all situations, including Internet environments, not to speak about women’s education (Baki, 2004). Princess Nora University represents this focus on the separate women’s schooling, and it provides the most striking contrast between campus and street life. Brand new campus and facilities impress with solidity and modern technologies, but women students remain controlled and can choose among the very limited list of courses (Batrawy, 2013). Unfortunately, these restrictions of the physical environment do not encourage neither academic, nor social development of women students, and significantly narrow their future prospects.
References
Abdulghani, H.M., Abdulaziz, A.A., Mahmoud, E.S., Ponnamperuma, G.G. and Alfaris, E.A., 2011. Stress and its effects on medical students: A cross-sectional study at a College of Medicine in Saudi Arabia. Journal of Health, Population and Nutrition, 29(5): 516–522.
Aboalshamat, K., Hou, X-Y. and Strodl, E., 2014. Psychological health of medical and dental students in Saudi Arabia: A longitudinal study. International Journal of Community Medicine and Public Health, 1, 001. [online] Available at: <http://heraldopenaccess.us/fulltext/Community-Medicine-Public-Health-Care/HCMPH-14-001.pdf> [Accessed 8 June 2015].
Abukhalil, 2011. The battle for Saudi Arabia: Royalty, fundamentalism, and global power. New York, NY: Seven Stories Press.
Adams, G.R., Berzonsky, M.D. and Keating, L., 2006. Psychosocial resources in first year university students: The role of identity processes and social relationships. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 35(1), pp.81-91.
Al Alhareth, Y., 2013. E-Learning contribution to the enhancement of higher education opportunities for women in Saudi Arabia (Pilot Study). US-China Education Review A& B, USA, 3 (9), pp.637-648.
Al-Daghri, N.M, Al-Othman, A., Albanyan, A., Al-Attas, O.S, Alokail, M.S, Sabico, S. and Chrousos, G.P., 2014. Perceived stress scores among Saudi students entering universities: a prospective study during the first year of university life. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 11(4), pp.3972-3981.
Al Garni, Ayidh Abdullah, 2012. Attitudes of future special education teachers towards gifted students and their education. Ph. D, Queensland University of Technology. [online] Available at: <http://eprints.qut.edu.au/61859/1/Ayidh_AL_Garni_Thesis.pdf> [Accessed 6 June 2015].
Alhazmi, A.A. and Nyland, B., 2015. Contextualization of Saudi international students’ experience in facing the challenge of moving to mixed gender environments. American International Journal of Contemporary Research, 5(2), pp.87-97.
Alhujaylan, H., 2014. The higher education of women in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia: Relationship of gender and academic performance in high school to the selection of college major among undergraduate students. The University of Akron. [online] Available at: <https://etd.ohiolink.edu/!etd.send_file?accession=akron1399523302&disposition=inline> [Accessed 8 June 2015].
Alhwiti, A. H., 2007. Teacher perceptions of the effectiveness of the social studies teacher training program at Tabouk Teachers’ College in Saudi Arabia. Ann Arbor, MI: ProQuest.
Aljubaili, A., 2014. Saudi Arabia—dramatic developments in higher education. [online] Available at: <http://qsshowcase.com/main/saudi-arabia-dramatic-developments-in-higher-education/> [Accessed 11 June 2015].
Al-Mengash, S.A., 2006. Analysis study of the Saudi education policy and recommendation for its development. King Saud University Journal of Islamic Studies and Educational Science, 19(1), pp.381-440.
Almeida, L.S., Prieto, M.D., Ferreira, A.I., Bermejo, M.R., Ferrando, M., and Ferrandiz, C., 2010. Intelligence assessment: Gardner multiple intelligence theory as an alternative. Learning and Individual Differences, 20(3), pp.225-230.
Almoallim, H., Aldahlawi, S., Alqahtani, E., Alqurashi, S. and Munshi, A., 2010. Difficulties facing first-year medical students at Umm Alqura University in Saudi Arabia. Eastern MediterraneanHealth Journal, 16(12), pp.1272-1277.
AlMunajjed, M., 1997. Women in Saudi Arabia today. London, UK: Macmillan.
Al-Sowygh, Z. H., 2013. Academic distress, perceived stress and coping strategies among dental students in Saudi Arabia. The Saudi Dental Journal. [online] Available at: <http://www.researchgate.net/publication/258216001_Academic_distress_perceived_stress_and_coping_strategies_among_dental_students_in_Saudi_Arabia> [Accessed 8 June 2015].
Andreatta, B., 2011. Navigating the research university: A guide for first-year students. Boston, MA: Cengage Learning.
Anonymous, 2007. First-year student experience: HE Academy/Lancaster University/Liverpool Hope University, UK. Education + Training, 49(4). [online] Available at: <http://www.emeraldinsight.com.contentproxy.phoenix.edu/doi/full/10.1108/et.2007.00449dab.004> [Accessed 6 June 2015].
Argan, M. and Wehmeyer, M.L., 2000. Promoting transition goals and self-determination through student self-directed learning: The self-determined learning model of instruction. Education and Training in Mental Retardation and Developmental Disabilities, 35(4), pp.351-364.
Astin, A., 1968. The college environment. . Washington, DC: American Council on Education.
Astin, A., 1993. What matters in college: Four critical years revisited. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Awang, M.M.,2012. An exploration of strategies used by Malaysian secondary teachers for promoting positive behaviour: Professionals and pupils’ perspectives (Unpublished PhD. thesis). United Kingdom: University of Dundee.
Baki, R., 2004. Gender-segregated education in Saudi Arabia: Its impact on social norms and the Saudi labor market. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 12 (28), pp.1-12.
Batrawy, A., 2013. Saudi Arabia: Women experience freedom on campus, but few changes outside. The Christian Science Monitor, 16 Dec. [online] Available at: <http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Latest-News-Wires/2013/1216/Saudi-Arabia-Women-experience-freedom-on-campus-but-few-changes-outside> [Accessed 8 June 2015].
Barefoot, B.O., Griffin, B.Q. and Koch, A.K., 2012. Enhancing student success and retention throughout undergraduate education: A national survey. Brevard, NC: John N. Gardner Institute for Excellence in Undergraduate Education. [online] Available at: <http://www.jngi.org/wordpress/wpcontent/uploads/2012/04/JNGInational_survey_web.pdf> [Accessed 5 June 2015].
Bateson, R. and Taylor, J., 2004. Student involvement in university life – Beyond political activism and university governance: a view from Central and Eastern Europe. European Journal of Education,, 39(4), pp.471-483.
Beers, R. E. 1998, The first-year university experience: An international student perspective, United States International University.
Bejerano, A., 2014. An examination of the role of social support, coping strategies, and individual characteristics in students’ adaptation to college. Communication Studies Theses, Dissertations, and Student Research. Paper 28. [online] Available at: <http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1028&context=commstuddiss> [Accessed 11 June 2015].
Birnbaum, R., 1988. How colleges work: The cybernetics of academic organization and leadership. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Black, J.D., 2013. Student perceptions of first-year experience: A comparison of participants and non-participants in a learning community program and their first-year experiences. Educational Administration: Theses, Dissertations, and Student Research. Paper 149.
Blatt, S.J., 1991. A cognitive morphology of psychopathology. Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 179, pp.449–458.
Boughey, C., 2002. Naming students’ “problems”: an analysis of language-related discourses at a South African University. Teaching in Higher Education, 7(3), pp.295-307.
Bowles, A., Dobson, A., Fisher, R. and McPhail, R., 2011. An exploratory investigation into first-year student transition to University. In: K. Krause et al., eds. Research and development in higher education: Reshaping higher education, 34 (pp.61-71). Gold Coast, Australia, 4 – 7 July 2011.
Bremer, C.D., Kachgal, M. and Schoeller, K., 2003. Self-determination: Supporting successful transition. Improving Secondary Education and Transition Services through Research, 2(1), pp.1-6. [online] Available at: <http://www.ncset.org/publications/researchtopractice/NCSETResearchBrief_2.1.pdf> [Accessed 10 June 2015].
Briggs, A.R.J., Clark, J. and Hall, I., 2012. Building bridges: Understanding student Transition to University. Quality in Higher Education, iFirst, pp.1-19.
Brock, B.R., 2014. Retaining students through first-year experience courses: Exploring relationships between course content and graduation of students enrolled in a first-year experience course. Electronic Theses, Treatises and Dissertations. Paper 9151. [online] Available at: <http://diginole.lib.fsu.edu/etd/9151> [Accessed 8 June 2015].
Brunswick, N., 2012. Supporting dyslexic adults in higher education and the workforce. Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons.
Buchanan, R.T., 2013. A small step for female education in Saudi Arabia. The Independent, 5 July. [online] Available at: <http://www.independent.co.uk/student/study-abroad/a-small-step-for-female-education-in-saudi-arabia-8681659.html> [Accessed 8 June 2015].
Burmeister, S.L., 1996. Supplemental instruction: An interview with Deanna Martin. Journal of Developmental Education, 20(1), pp.22-24.
Burton, M., 2013. Learning communities. Real world experiences enhancing educational outcomes. [online] Available at: <http://www.warnerpacific.edu/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/EXPERIENCE-2013-Learning-Communities-Article.pdf> [Accessed 9 June 2015].
California Polytechnic State University, 2015. Student academic services. [online] Available at: <http://sas.calpoly.edu/fys/> [Accessed 9 June 2015].
Carli, L., 1990. Gender, language, and influence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59, pp.941–951.
Center for Service Learning, 2008. Service learning in the first-year seminar. [online] Available at: <http://www.wcu.edu/WebFiles/PDFs/SL_in_First-Year_Seminar(1).pdf> [Accessed 9 June 2015].
Chen, C. P., 2006. Career development: Pursuing a cross-cultural life transition. Burlington: Ashgate Publishing Ltd.
Choy, S.P., 2001. Students whose parents did not go to college: Postsecondary access, persistence, and attainment. Washington, DC: Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics.
Clark, N., 2014. Higher education in Saudi Arabia. World Education News and Reviews. [online] Available at: <http://wenr.wes.org/2014/11/higher-education-in-saudi-arabia/> [Accessed 6 June 2015].
Coniam, D., 2014. English language education and assessment: Recent developments in Hong Kong and the Chinese Mainland. Berlin, Germany: Springer Science & Business Media.
Cowan, P.A., 1991. Individual and family life transitions: A proposal for a new definition. In: P.A. Cowan and M. Hetherington, eds, 1991. Family transitions. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. pp.1-33.
Davis, T.M. and Murrell, P.H., 1993. Turning teaching into learning: The role of student responsibility in the collegiate experience. ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Report (8).
Demaray, M.K., Malecki, C.K., Davidson, L.M., Hodgson, K.K. and Rebus, P.J., 2005. The relationship between social support and student adjustment: A longitudinal analysis. Psychology in the Schools, 42(7), pp.691-706.
Dwyer, J.O., 1989. A historical look at the freshman year experience. In: M.L. Upcraft, J.N. Gardner and Associates, eds. 1989. The freshman year experience: Helping students survive and succeed in college. San Francisco, CA: Jossey Bass. pp. 25-39.
Easterly, D.P., 2008. The new transfer student portal: Understanding new transfer students’ transitions to the research university. Ann Arbor: ProQuest.
Engstrom, Z.B., 2008. The impact of learning community involvement and campus climate on student satisfaction and the retention of Latino students at a highly selective private institution. Ann Arbor: ProQuest.
Evans, M., 2000. Planning for the transition to tertiary study: A literature review. Research Paper. Department of Econometrics and Business Statistics, Monash University.
Finning-Kwoka, S.M., 2009. The effect of a sophomore year experience on-campus living-learning community: Participants’ sense of meaning in life, academic self-efficacy, and satisfaction. Ann Arbor, MI: ProQuest.
Fischer, M.J., 2007. Settling into campus life: Differences by race/ethnicity in college involvement and outcomes. The Journal of Higher Education, 78(2). [online] Available at: <http://www.alabamafirst.ua.edu/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/fischer.pdf> [Accessed 11 June 2015].
Fleming, W. J., Howard, K., Perkins, E. and Pesta, M., 2005. The college environment: Factors influencing student transition and their impact on academic advising. The Mentor. [online] Available at: <dus.psu.edu/mentor> [Accessed 10 June 2015].
Gardner, H., 1993. Frames of mind: The theory of multiple intelligences. New York, NY: Basic Books.
Gaertner, S.L. and Dovidio, J.F., 2000. Reducing intergroup bias: The Common Ingroup Identity Model. Philadelphia, PA: The Psychology Press.
Gaertner, S.L. and Dovidio, J.F., 2012. Reducing intergroup bias: The Common Ingroup Identity Model. In: P.A.M. Van Lange, A.W. Kruglanski and E.T. Higgins, eds. Handbook of theories of social psychology (Vol. 2, pp. 439–457). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Gee, J.P., 1996. Social linguistics and literacies: Ideology in discourses. (2 ed.). London: Taylor & Francis.
Gee, J.P., 2005. An introduction to discourse analysis: Theory and method. (2 ed.). London: Routledge.
Goldman, C.A, 2012. A cohort-based learning community enhances academic success and satisfaction with university experience for first-year students. Canadian Journal For The Scholarship Of Teaching & Learning, 3(2), pp.1-19.
Goodman, J., Schlossberg, N.K. and Anderson, M.L., 2006. Counselling adults in transition (3rd ed.). New York, NY: Springer.
Greenfield, G.M., Keup, J.R. and Gardner, J.N., 2013. Developing and sustaining successful first-year programs: A guide for practitioners. Hoboken, NJ: Jossey-Bass.
Hamdan, A., 2005. Women and education in Saudi Arabia: Challenges and achievements. International Education Journal, 6(1), pp.42-64.
Hanson, M.J., 2012. A quantitative study investigating the experiences of Saudi Arabian students at the University of Wisconsin-Stout. [online] Available at: <http://www2.uwstout.edu/content/lib/thesis/2012/2012hansonm.pdf> [Accessed 6 June 2015].
Heer, R., 2008. Exploring the congruence of ethnic minority millennial students’ transition to college, social identity and community, and online social network services. Ann Arbor: ProQuest.
Henry, W.J., Wills, P.H. and Nixon, H.L., 2005. Institutional type and students’ expectations. . In: T.E. Miller, B.E. Bender and J.H. Schuh, Promoting reasonable expectations: Aligning student and institutional views of the college experience. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Harley, D., Winn, S., Pemberton, S. and Wilcox, P., 2007. Using texting to support students’ transition to university. Innovation in Education and Teaching International, 44(3), pp.229-241.
Higgins, M., 2006. The first year experience. MS, Kansas State University.
Hillman, K., 2005. The first year experience: The transition from secondary school to university and TAFE in Australia. In: V. Camberwell, Longitudinal Studies in Australian Youth, Research Report No 40. Australian Council for Educational Research.
Hong, Y-Y., Coleman, J., Chan, G., Wong, R.Y.M., Chiu, C., Hansen, I.G.,… and Fu, H-Y., 2004. Predicting intergroup bias: The interactive effects of implicit theory and social identity. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 30(8), pp.1035.
Howard, J.A., 2005. Why should we care about student expectations. In: T.E. Miller, B.E. Bender and J.H. Schuh, Promoting reasonable expectations: Aligning student and institutional views of the college experience. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Howard, J.S., 2013. Student retention and first-year programs: A comparison of students in liberal art colleges in the Mountain South. Electronic Theses and Dissertations. Paper 2270.
Hussain, T., 2007. Student achievement in Saudi Arabia: The importance of teacher factors. Thesis, Georgetown Public Policy Institute.
Insko, C.A., Schopler, J., Gaertner, L., Wildschut, T., Kozar, R., Pinter, B., … and Montoya, M.R., 2001. Interindividual-intergroup discontinuity reduction through the anticipation of future interaction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 80, pp.95–111.
James, R., Krause, K-L. and Jennings, C., 2009. The first year experience in Australian universities: Findings from 1994 to 2009. [online] Available at: <http://www.cshe.unimelb.edu.au/research/experience/docs/FYE_Report_1994_to_2009.pdf> [Accessed 6 June 2015].
Jay, G.M. and D’Augelli, A.R., 1991. Social support and adjustment to university life: A comparison of African American and White freshmen. Journal of Community Psychology, 19, pp.95-108.
Jindal-Snape, D., ed., 2010. Educational transition–Moving stories from around the world. New York: Routledge.
Johnson, D.D., 1994. Dualistic, multiplistic, and relativistic thinking as it relates to a psychology major. Honors Theses. Paper 202.
Johnston, W. and Kochanowska, R., 2009. Quality enhancement themes: The first year experience – student expectations, experiences and reflections on the first year. Glasgow: Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education.
Kantanis, T., 2000. The role of social transition in students’ adjustment to the first-year of university. Journal of Institutional Research, 9(1), pp.100-110.
Keup, R.J., 2005. The impact of curricular interventions on intended second year re-enrollment. Journal of College Student Retention, 7(1-2), pp.61-89.
Khan, P. and Iqbal, M., 2012. Role of physical facilities in teaching and learning process. Interdiciplinary Journal of Contemporary Research in Business, 4(3), pp.210-217.
Kiessling, C., Schubert, B., Scheffner, D. and Burger, W., 2004. First year medical students’ perceptions of stress and support: A comparison between reformed and traditional track curricula. Medical Education, 38(5), pp.504-509.
Knox, H. and Wiper, J., 2008. Quality enhancement themes: The first-year experience. The Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education. [online] Available at: <http://www.enhancementthemes.ac.uk/docs/publications/the-first-year-experience-personalisation-of-the-first-year.pdf?sfvrsn=12> [Accessed 8 June 2015].
Koch, A.K. and Gardner, J.N., 2014. A history of the first-year experience in the United States during the twentieth and twenty-first centuries: Past practices, current approaches, and future directions. The Saudi Journal of Higher Education, 11, pp.1-86.
Koong, C., and Wu, C., 2010. An interactive item-sharing website for creating and conducting on-line testing. Computers & Education, 55(1), pp.135-144.
Krause, K., Hartley, R., James, R. and McInnis, C., 2005. The first year experience in Australian universities: Findings from a decade of national studies. Canberra: Australian Department of Education, Science and Training.
Kuh, G. D., 2008. High-impact educational practices: What they are, who has access to them, and why they matter. [online] Available at: <https://www.aacu.org/leap/hips> [Accessed 9 June 2015].
Kuh, G.D., Hu, S. and Vesper, N., 2000. They shall be known by what they do: An activitiesbased typology of college students. Journal of College Student Development, 41, pp.228-244.
Kuh, G.D. and Whitt, E.J., 1988. The invisible tapestry: Culture in American colleges and universities. AAHE-ERIC/Higher Education Report 1. Washington DC: American Association for Higher Education.
Lam, M.S. and Pollard, A., 2006. A conceptual framework for understanding children as agents in the transition from home to kindergarten. Early Years, 26(2), pp.123-141. [online] Available at: <http://dx.doi.org.contentproxy.phoenix.edu/10.1080/09575140600759906> [Accessed 10 June 2015].
Lamothe, D, Currie, F., Alisat, S., Sullivan, T., Pratt, M. and Pancer, S., 1995. Impact of a social support intervention on the transition to university. Canadian Journal of Community Mental Health, 14, pp.167-180.
Lang Ketchum Chambers, S., 2008. Improving student performance in an introductory biology majors course: A social action project in the scholarship of teaching. Ann Abror, MI: ProQuest.
Lea, M. and Street, B., 1998. Student writing in higher education: An academic literacies approach. Studies in Higher Education, 23(2), pp.157-172.
Leach, L. and Zepke, N., 2004. Engaging first year students: A conceptual organiser for student engagement. Proceedings of the inaugural Pacific Rim FYHE Conference. Melbourne.
Levinson, E.M., 2004. Transition from school to post-school life for individuals with disabilities: Assessment from an educational and school psychological perspective. Springfield: Charles C Thomas Publisher.
Lian, C.T. and Geok, S.J., 2009. Perceived social support, coping capability and gender differences among young adults. Sunway University College, 6, pp.75-88.
Livingstone, D.W., 2015. Lifelong learning in paid and unpaid work: Survey and case study findings. London, UK: Routledge.
Looker, E.D. and Dwyer, P., 1998. Education and negotiated reality: Complexities facing rural youth in the 1990s. Journal of Youth Studies, 1(5), p.22.
Lumsden, E., 2009. The role of student mentoring. In: Transitions: Teaching and Learning 2nd Conference. Northampton, May 2009.
Lumsden, E., McBryde-Wilding, H. and Rose, H. 2010. Collaborative practice in enhancing the first year student experience in Higher Education. Enhancing the Learner Experience in Higher Education, 2(1), pp. 12-24.
Luo, L., 2006. The transition to parenthood: Stress, resources, and gender differences in a Chinese society. Journal of Community Psychology, 34, pp.471-488.
Maehr, M. L., Karabenick, S. and Urdan, T. C., 2012. Transitions across schools and cultures. Bingley: Emerald Group Publishing.
Mahdi, S., 2008. Where do females stand in the Saudi labour market? Ahfad Journal, 25(2), pp.57-84.
Mahzan Awang, M., Mydin Kutty, F. and Razaq Ahmad, A., 2014. Perceived social support and well-being: First-year student experience in university. International Education Studies, 7(13), pp.261-270.
McCoog, I.U., 2010. The existential learner. Clearing House: A Journal of Educational Strategies, Issues and Ideas, 83(4), pp.126-128.
McInnis, C., James, R. and Hartley, R., 2000. Trends in the first year experience: In Australian universities,. Melbourne: Centre for the Study of Higher Education, University of Melbourne.
McKenzie, K. and Schweitzer, R., 2001. Who succeeds atuniversity? Factors predicting academic performance in the first year Australian university studies. Journal of Higher Education Research and Development, 20, 21-33.
Mikal, J.P., Rice, R.E., Abeyta, A., and DeVilbiss, J., 2013. Transition, stress and computer mediated social support. Computers in Human Behavior, 29(2013), pp.A40-A53.
Milsom, C., Stewart, M., Yorke, M. and Zaitseva, E., 2014. Stepping up to the second year at university: Academic, psychological and social dimensions. London, UK: Routledge.
Miller, N., 2002. Personalization and the promise of contact theory. Journal of Social Issues, 58, pp.29–44.
Ministry of Education, 2006. The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. [online] Available at: <http://www.moe.gov.sa/> [Accessed 6 June 2015].
Ministry of Higher Education, 2009. The National Report June 2009. Saudi Arabia, Office of the Deputy Minister for Educational Affairs.
Ministry of Higher Education, 2010. Women in higher education. Saudi initiatives and achievements. [online] Available at: <http://he.moe.gov.sa/en/docs/Doc1/VDMPI030.pdf> [Accessed 8 June 2015].
Moneta, L. and Kuh, G.D., 2005. When expectations and realities collide: Environmental influences on student expectations and student experiences. In: T.E. Miller, B.E. Bender and J.H. Schuh, Promoting reasonable expectations: Aligning student and institutional views of the college experience. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Moos, R., 1979. Evaluating educational environments: Procedures, measures, findings, and policy implications. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Morris, L. and Cutright, M., 2005. University of South Carolina: Creator and standard-bearer for the first-year experience. In: B. Barefoot et al., eds. Achieving and Sustaining Institutional Excellence for the First-Year of College. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. pp. 349 – 376.
Mudhovozi, P., 2012. Social and academic adjustment of first-year university students. The Social Science Journal, 33(2), pp.251-259.
Niemann, Y.A.K., 2007. The effects of transition intervention on students with mild disabilities. Ann Arbor, MI: ProQuest.
Northeastern Illinois University, 2015. Northeastern professor Ana Gil-Garcia on a mission to Saudi Arabia. [online] Available at: <http://www.neiu.edu/academics/graduate-college/northeastern-voices/northeastern-professor-ana-gil-garcia-mission-saudi-arabia> [Accessed 9 June 2015].
Oppenheimer, B., 1984. Short-term small group intervention for college freshmen. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 31, pp.45-53.
Orford, J., Krishnan, M.B., Everitt, M. and Van Der Graaf, K., 2004. University student drinking. Drugs: Education, Prevention & Policy, 11 (5), pp.407-421.
Pancer, M., Pratt, M., Hunsberger, B., Alisat, S. and Berkeley, N., 2007. Long-term impacts of a support group intervention for the transition to university. Unpublished manuscript.
Parker, J., Summerfeldt, L., Hogan, M. and Majeski, S., 2004. Emotional intelligence and academic success: Examining the transition from high school to university. Personality and Individual Differences, 36, pp.163-172.
Pascarella, E.T., 1985. Students’ affective development within the college environment. Journal of Higher Education, 56(6), pp.641–663.
Pascarella, E.T. and Terenzini, P.T., 1983. Predicting voluntary freshman year retention/withdrawal behavior in a residential university: A path analytic validation of Tinto’s model. Journal of Educational Psychology, 75(2), pp. 215-226.
Pascarella, E.T. and Terenzini, P.T., 1991. How college affects students. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Paulsen, M. B., 2013. Higher education: Handbook of theory and research. New York: Springer Science and Business Media.
Perry, W.G., Jr., 1970. Intellectual and ethical development in college years. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
Peters, S., 2010. Shifting to the lense: Re-Framing the View of Learners during the Transition from Early Childhood. In: D. Jindal-Snape, ed. Educational Transition. New York: Routledge. pp. 68-84.
Pike, G.R., 2008. Learning about learning communities: Consider the variables. About Campus, 13(5), pp.30−32.
Podikunju, S., 2008. Extent of acculturation experiences among high school Muslim students in America. [online] Available at: <http://ufdcimages.uflib.ufl.edu/UF/E0/02/25/79/00001/podikunju_s.pdf> [Accessed 8 June 2015].
Porter, S.R. and Swing, R.L., 2006. Understanding how first-year seminars affect persistence. Research in Higher Education, 47(1), pp.89–109.
Pratt, M., Hunsberger, B., Pancer, S., Alisat, S., Bowers, C. and Mackey, K., 2000. Facilitating the transition to university: Evaluation of a social support discussion intervention program. Journal of College Student Development, 41, pp.427-441.
Pryor, J. H., Hurtado, S., DeAngelo, L., Palucki Blake, L. and Tran, S., 2010. The American freshman: National norms fall 2010. Los Angeles: Higher Education Research Institute, UCLA.
Rajkhan, S.F., 2014. Women in Saudi Arabia: Status, rights, and limitations. MS, University of Washington Bothell. [online] Available at: <https://dlib.lib.washington.edu/researchworks/bitstream/handle/1773/25576/Rajkhan%20-%20Capstone.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y> [Accessed 11 June 2015].
Ramsay, K. 2010. The transition to university: Examining predictors of positive adjustment and the role of the university environment, Carleton University (Canada). ProQuest, UMI Dissertations Publishing.
Ritchie, K., 2003. Factors affecting the transition to university. PhD thesis, University of New Brunswick.
Robinson, O., 2012. Development through adulthood: An integrative sourcebook. London, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.
Rotter, J.B., 1966. Generalized expectancies of internal versus external control of reinforcements. Psychological Monographs, 80(1), pp.1-28.
Ryan, R.M., 1982. Control and information in the intrapersonal sphere: An extension of cognitive evaluation theory. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 43(3), pp.450-461.
Ryan, R.M and Deci, E.L., 2002. An overview of self-determination theory: An organismic-dialectical perspective. In: E.L. Deci and R.N. Ryan, eds. Handbook of self-determination research. Rochester, NY: University of Rochester press. pp.3-36.
Saleh, M.A., 1986. Development of higher education in Saudi Arabia. Higher Education, 15(1-2), pp. 17-23.
Samson, S. and Granath, K., 2004. Reading, writing, and research: added value to university first‐year experience programs. Reference Services Review, 32(2), pp.149-156.
Saunders, L., 2011. Information literacy as a student learning outcome: The perspective of institutional accreditation. Santa Barbara: ABC-CLIO.
Schein, E., 2004. Organizational culture and leadership (3 ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Schneider, S., Randoll, D. and Buchner, M., 2006. Why do women have back pain more than men: A representative prevalence study in the federal republic of Germany. Clinical Journal of Pain, 22, pp.738-747.
Scott, J. H., 2008. Exploring institutional culture and student civic engagement: A constructivist inquiry. Ann Arbor: ProQuest.
Shahar, G., Blatt, S.J., Henrich, C.C. and Ryan, R., 2003. Interpersonal relatedness, self-definition, and their motivational orientation during adolescence: A theoretical and empirical integration. Developmental Psychology, 39(3), pp.470-483.
Shearer, B. ed., 2009. MI at 25: Assessing the impact and future of multiple intelligences for teaching and learning. New York: Teachers College Press.
Shearer, C.B., and Luzzo, D.A., 2009. Exploring the application of multiple intelligences theory to career counseling. Career Development Quarterly, 58(1), pp.3-13.
Shearer, C.B., 2009. Exploring the relationship between intrapersonal intelligence and university students’ career confusion: Implications for counseling, academic success, and school-to-career transition. Journal of Employment Counseling, 46, pp. 52-62.
Siddiqui, I.A., Abdulrahman, K.A. and Alsultan, M.A., 2015. A learning skills course for the 1st year medical students: an experience at a Saudi medical school. Dove Press Ltd. [online] Available at: <http://www.dovepress.com/a-learning-skills-course-for-the-1st-year-medical-students-an-experien-peer-reviewed-article-AMEP> [Accessed 8 June 2015].
Small Roseboro, A.J., 2010. Teaching middle school language arts: Incorporating twenty-first century literacies. Blue Ridge Summit, PA: Rowman & Littlefield Education.
Smith. L. and Abouammoh, A., 2013. Higher education in Saudi Arabia: Achievements, challenges and opportunities. Berlin, Germany: Springer Science & Business Media.
Stone, M.E. and Jacobs, G., eds., 2008. Supplemental instruction: Improving first-year student success in high risk courses (Monograph No. 7, 3rd ed., pp. 1-16, 95). Columbia, SC: University of South Carolina, National Resource Center for the First-Year Experience and Students in Transition.
Stribbe, A., 2010. Identity reflection: Students and societies in transition. Learning and Teaching in Higher Education, 5, pp.86-95.
Sullivan, K., 2012. Saudi Arabia struggles to employ its most-educated women. The Washington Post, 18 Nov. [online] Available at: <http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/middle_east/saudi-arabia-struggles-to-employ-its-most-educated-women/2012/11/12/b8f30c34-2a87-11e2-96b6-8e6a7524553f_story.html> [Accessed 8 June 2015].
Suzuki, A., 2009. No freshmen left behind: An evaluation of the pathways summer bridge program. Ann arbor, MI: ProQuest.
Tajfel, H. and Turner, J. C., 1979. An integrative theory of intergroup conflict. In: W.G. Austin and S. Worchel, eds. The social psychology of intergroup relations. Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole. pp.33-48.
Tao, S., Dong, Q., Pratt, M.W., Hunsberger, B. and Pancer, S.M., 2000. Social support: Relations to coping and adjustment during the transition to university in the People’s Republic of China. Journal of Adolescent Research, 15, pp.123-144.
Tinto, V. (1975). Dropout from higher education: A theoretical synthesis of recent research. Review of Education Research, 45, 89–125.
The Higher Education Academy, 2015. Action on Access. [online] Available at: <https://www.heacademy.ac.uk/workstreams-research/themes/retention-and-success/widening-access-programmes-archive/action-access> [Accessed 6 June 2015].
Tinto, V., 1987. Leaving college: Rethinking the causes and cures of student attrition. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.
Tinto, V., 1997. Classrooms as communities: Exploring the educational character of student persistence. Journal of Higher Education, 68, pp.599–623.
Topping, K. J. and Foggie, J., 2010. Interactive behaviors for building independence in exceptional youth. In: D. Jindal-Snape, ed. Educational Transition. New York, NY: Routledge. pp.161-169.
Tsui, L. and Gao, E., 2006. The efficacy of seminar courses. Journal of College Student Retention, 8(2), pp.149-170.
Upcraft, M.L., Gardner, J.N. and Barefoot, B.O., 2004. Challenging & supporting the first-year student: A Handbook for improving the first year of college. San Francisco, FL: Jossey-Bass.
UMKC First Year Experience Committee, 2006. Final draft report. [online] Available at: <http://www.umkc.edu/provost/strategic-planning-process/student-success/first-year-experience-report.pdf> [Accessed 5 June 2015].
University of Dammam, 2015. The First National Conference for the Preparatory Year in Saudi Universities. [online] Available at: <http://www.uod.edu.sa/en/events/the-first-national-conference-for-the-preparatory-year-in-saudi-universities> [Accessed 6 June 2015].
University of Essex, 2015. What is academic literacy? [online] Available at: <http://www.essex.ac.uk/skillscentre/academic_literacy/> [Accessed 10 June 2015].
University of Toronto Scarborough, 2015. Student transition issues. [online] Available at: <http://www.utsc.utoronto.ca/~stuaff/parents/transition_issues.html> [Accessed 11 June 2015].
Walsh, J., 2003. The psychological person: Cognition, emotion, and self. In: L. Hutchinson, ed. Dimensions of human behavior. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. pp. 151-182.
Wangeri, T., Kimani, E. and Mutweleli, S.M., 2012. Transitional challenges facing university first year students in Kenyan public universities: A case of Kenyatta University. Interdisciplinary Review of Economics and Management 2(1), pp. 41-50.
Watson, T., 2006. Organising and managing work. London, UK: Pearson Education Limited.
Weidman, J., 1989. Undergraduate socialization: A conceptual approach. In: J. Smart, Higher education: Handbook of theory and research. New York: Agathon.
White, H.R., McMorris, B.J., Catalano, R.F., Fleming, C.B., Haggerty, K.P. and Abbott, R.D., 2006. Increases in alcohol and marijuana use during the transition out of high school into emerging adulthood: The effects of leaving home, going to college, and high school protective factors. Journal of Studies on Alcohol and Drugs, 67(6), pp.810–822.
Wilson-Strydom, M., 2015. University access and success: Capabilities, diversity and social justice. London, UK: Routledge.
Wintre, M.G. and Yaffe, M., 2000. First-year students’ adjustment to university life as a function of relationships with parents. Journal of Adolescence Research, 15, pp.9-37.
Wiseman, H., 1997. Interpersonal relatedness and self-definition in the experience of loneliness during the transition to university. Personal Relationships, 4(3), pp.285-299.
Wong, J.G., Cheung, E.P., Chan K.K., Ma, K.M. and Tang, S.W., 2006. Web based survey of depression, anxiety and stress in first year tertiary education students in Hong Kong. Australian & New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry, 40, pp.777-782.
Yamada, R., 2014. Measuring quality of undergraduate education in Japan: Comparative perspective in a knowledge based society. Berlin, Germany: Springer Science & Business Media.
Yamani, S., 2006. Toward a national education development paradigm in the Arab world: A comparative study of Saudi Arabia and Qatar. The Fletcher School ñ Al Nakhlah ñ Tufts University.
Yaeda, J., 2010. Transition from secondary school to employment in Japan for students with disabilities. In: D. Jindal-Snape, ed. Educational Transition. New York, NY: Routledge. pp.205-222.
Yorke, M. and Longden, B., 2008. The first-year experience of higher education in the UK. The Higher Education Academy. [online] Available at: <http://jisctechdis.ac.uk/assets/documents/archive/FYEFinalReport.pdf> [Accessed 6 June 2015].
Zea, M.C., Jarama, S.L. and Bianchi, F.T., 1995. Social support and psychological competence: Explaining the adaptation to college of ethnically diverse students. American Journal of Community Psychology, 23, pp.509-531.
Zlotkowski, E., ed., 2002. Service-learning and the first-year experience: Preparing students for personal success and civic responsibility (Monograph No. 34). Columbia, SC: University of South Carolina, National Resource Center for The First-Year Experience and Students in Transition. [online] Available at: <http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED471259.pdf> [Accessed 9 June 2015].
Zukas, M. and Malcolm, J., 2007. Learning from adult education. Academy Exchange, 6, pp.20-22.
Expert paper writers are just a few clicks away
Place an order in 3 easy steps. Takes less than 5 mins.