The Relationship between Students’ Residence Type and Academic Achievement

Year 2017, Volume: 8 Issue: 2, 9 - 14, 14.07.2017

Sevinc Yerli Usul

Abstract

As in many other countries, university education in Turkey has a special effect on students’ lives. While students generally live with their families for high school education, most of them alter their residence and also living conditions when they start university education. Research studies show that, there is a close relationship between housing conditions and university students’ performance. (Arauja and Murray 2010, Astin: 1973, Clarkson: 2006) Therefore, housing options may have different effects on students’ academic achievement. The present study was an attempt to explore the extent of this relationship. In order to collect data,  two different instruments were used. The first instrument was the adopted form of a survey developed by Helfrich in 2011. In addition to this, students’ final exam results, which were accepted as the determiner of academic achievement, were also used as another source of data. The data were analyzed by using independent samples t-test, and the resuts revealed that there was not a significant difference between the groups in terms of achievement. That’s to say, if the conditions of the residence were arranged well, it did not matter for the students whether it was a dormitory, a flat or any other kind of residence.

Keywords

residence type, prep-students, academic achievement, staying at dormitory

References

• AlKandari, N. (2007). Students' perceptions of the residence hall living environment at Kuwait University. College Student Journal. 41 (2), pp. 327-335. [Google Scholar]
• Araujo, P. and Murray, J. (2010). Estimating the effects of dormitory living on student performance. Center for Applied Economics and Policy Research. Retrieved from http://ssrn.com/abstract=1555892. [Google Scholar] Astin, A. (1973). Impact of dormitory living on students. The Educational Record. Vol. 54, pp. 204-210. [Google Scholar]
• Astin, A. (1993). What matters in college? Four critical years revisited. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. [Google Scholar]
• Astin, A. (1999). Student Involvement: A developmental theory for higher education. Journal of College Student Development. Vol.40. No: 5. pp. 518-529. [Google Scholar]
• Clarkson, S. (2006). An introduction to student development theory. Central Michigan University. Retrieved from: http://www.reslife.cmicc.edu/rama/index.php?section=Experienced_Staff&category=Intro_to_Student_Development_Theory [Google Scholar]
• Dörnyei, Z. (2007). Creating a motivating classroom environment. In International handbook of English language teaching J. Cummins & C. Davison (Eds.),. Vol. 2, pp. 719-731. New York: Springer. [Google Scholar]
• Pascarella, E. T. and Terenzini, P. T. (2005). How college affects students: A third decade of research. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. [Google Scholar]
• Riker. H. C, & DeCoster. D. A. (1971). The educational role in college student housing. Joumal of College and University Student Housing, j(i), pp. 3-7. [Google Scholar]
• Synder, E.M., Kras, J.M., Bressel, E., Reeve, E. and Dilworth, V. (2011). The relationship of residence to academic performance in NCAA Division I freshman athletes. Journal of Issues in Intercollegiate Athletics. Vol. 4. pp. 105-119. [Google Scholar]
• Upcraft, M., Gardner, J., Barefoot, B., & Associates. (2005). Challenging and supporting the first-year student: A handbook for improving the first year of college. San Francisco: Jossey Bass. [Google Scholar]
• Wilson, T. , Damiani, M. and Shelton, N. (2002). Improving the academic performance of college students with brief attributional interventions. In Improving Academic Achievement: Impacts of Psychological Factors on Education. Chapter: 5. Aronson, J. (Ed.) pp. 89-108. [Google Scholar]