Motives for and Barriers to Participation in

Postsecondary Educational Attainment

in Northern Wisconsin

by

Paula M. Collins

A Research Paper Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the

Requirements for the Master of Science Degree

In

Career and Technical Education

Approved: 2 Semester Credits

/

'7i1i/£'-01i2 4{-/ Dr. Howard D. Lee

Investigation Adviser

The Graduate School

University of Wisconsin-Stout

May, 2011

1

2

The Graduate School

University of Wisconsin-Stout

Menomonie, WI

Author: Collins, Paula M.

Title: Motives for and Barriers to Participation in Postsecondary Educational

Attainment in Northern Wisconsin

Graduate Degree/ Major: MS Career and Technical Education

Research Adviser: Howard D. Lee, Ph.D.

Month/Year: May, 2011

Number of Pages: 75

Style Manual Used: American Psychological Association, 6th

edition

Abstract

Current educational disparities of the number of college graduates in northern Wisconsin

exist as compared to the rest of the state. The primary purpose of this study was to identify

barriers to higher education impacting adults in Northern Wisconsin and identify motivations

that exist in overcoming these barriers. This study sought to provide insight as to the type of

post-secondary planning or assistance northern Wisconsin adults need in continuing their

education beyond high school.

Data for this study was collected from adults served by the Educational Opportunity

Centers in Rusk, Sawyer, and Washburn Counties. The survey was designed to collect data on

situational, institutional, and dispositional barriers and internal and external motivating factors.

Analysis of the data showed the primary barriers were distance between home and school, cost of

courses, and not knowing what to study or where to start. Career advancement and major life

3

events were found to play a key role in motivating adults to pursue postsecondary education. By

determining these factors, the Educational Opportunity Centers (EOC) program and educational

institutions in general, will be able to take appropriate action to provide services that widen

participation in postsecondary education in Northern Wisconsin.

4

The Graduate School

University of Wisconsin Stout

Menomonie, WI

Acknowledgments

There are many people I would like to thank for their encouragement and support during

the writing of this paper. Of special mention is Dr. Howard Lee, my thesis advisor. He could

always be counted on for honest feedback and was generous in sharing his knowledge about the

importance of each part of the thesis. He gave me the freedom to explore my own interests and

kept me motivated at key points along the way. There were many times his words of advice

would come to mind “narrow the topic” and “keep going!”

I would also like to acknowledge Dr. Joan Sosalla, Director of the Educational

Opportunity Centers (EOC). She was tremendously helpful as a mentor and provided a focus for

a population to study. Dr. Sosalla was always willing to read the latest version of the paper and

offer advice.

Lastly, I would like to thank my children, Sarah, Mimi, Elizabeth and my husband, Dan.

They took a special interest in the topic and never seemed to tire of hearing about the progress of

the paper.

5

Table of Contents

………………………………………………………………………………………………...Page

Abstract…………………………………………………………………………………………...2

List of Tables………………………………………………………………………………..........7

Chapter I: Introduction...…………………………………………………………………………9

Statement of the Problem.…………………………………………………………….....13

Purpose of the Study……………………………………………………………………..13

Research Objectives…………………………………………………………………......13

Importance of Topic…………………………………………………………………......14

Limitations of Study..……………………………………………………………………14

Definition of Terms………………………………………………………………………15

Chapter II: Literature Review……………………………………………………………………17

Models and Theory of Adult Participative Behavior…………………………………….17

Adult Learners…………………………………………………………………………...19

Barriers and Deterrents to Postsecondary Education…………………………………....19

Motivation to Overcome Barriers………………………………………………………..20

Postsecondary Educational Attainment…………………………………………….........22

Regional Disparity of Educational Attainment…………………………………………..24

Adults with Some Credit Past High School……………………………………………...26

Perspectives of Stakeholders and Importance of Collaboration and Partnerships……….27

Knowledge-Based Jobs…………………………………………………………………..28

Summary………………………………………………………………………………....29

Chapter III: Methodology………………………………………………………………………..30

6

Subject Selection and Description…………………………………………………........30

Instrumentation…………………………………………………………………………..30

Data Collection Procedures……………………………………………………………...33

Data Analysis………………………………………………………………………….....33

Limitations…………………………………………………………………………….....33

Chapter IV: Results……………………………………………………………………………....35

Participants……………………………………………………………………………....35

Research Questions……………………………………………………………………...35

Chapter V: Summary……………………………………………………………………….........56

Limitations………………………………………………………………………………56

Conclusions………………………………………………………………………………57

Recommendations………………………………………………………………………..61

References………………………………………………………………………………………..63

Appendix A: Survey……………………………………………………………………….........68

Appendix B: Survey Statements in Relationship to Research Objectives………………………72

Appendix C: Cover Letter to EOC Participants…………………………………………………75

Appendix D: Telephone Script…………………………………………………………….........76

7

List of Tables

Table 1: New Economy Index Rankings…………..…………………………………………….11

Table 2: Educational Attainment Reported by 2006-2008 American Community Survey…......11

Table 3: Educational Attainment ……………………………………………………………….12

Table 4: Educational Attainment for Persons 25 Years Old and Over……………………........24

Table 5: Educational Attainment and Percent of Persons 25 Years and Over by Wisconsin

Counties Studied in the NOW Report: April 1, 2000…………………………………...25

Table 6: Educational Attainment and Percent of Persons 25 Years and Over by Wisconsin

Counties served by the Educational Opportunity Centers: U.S. Census 2006-2008

American Community Survey…………………………………………………………...26

Table 7: Gender and Age by County……………………………………………………………36

Table 8: Ethnicity by County……………………………………………………………………36

Table 9: Situational Barriers Having a Major Impact…………………………………………...37

Table 10: Situational Barriers Having No Impact………………………………………………38

Table 11: Institutional Barriers Having a Major Impact………………………………………..39

Table 12: Institutional Barriers Having No Impact……………………………………………..39

Table 13: Dispositional Barriers Having a Major Impact………………………………………40

Table 14: Dispositional Barriers Having No Impact……………………………………………41

Table 15: Other Barriers – Rusk County………………………………………………………..42

Table 16: Other Barriers – Sawyer County……………………………………………………..42

Table 17: Other Barriers – Washburn County…………………………………………………..43

Table 18: Internal Motivating Factors Having a Major Impact…………………………………44

Table 19: Internal Motivating Factors Having No Impact………………………………………45

Table 20: Internal Motivating Factors Having a Major Impact by Gender and Ethnicity………46

Table 21: Internal Motivating Factors Having a Major Impact by Age………………………...47

8

Table 22: External Motivating Factors Having a Major Impact………………………………..48

Table 23: External Motivating Factors Having No Impact……………………………………..48

Table 24: External Motivating Factors Having a Major Impact by Gender and Ethnicity……..49

Table 25: External Motivating Factors Having a Major Impact by Age………………………..50

Table 26: Other Motivating Factors – Rusk County………………………………………........51

Table 27: Other Motivating Factors – Sawyer County……………………………………........51

Table 28: Other Motivating Factors – Washburn County………………………………………52

Table 29: Current Participation in Education by Percentage of Respondents…………………..53

Table 30: Educational Attainment for Individuals by County…………………………………..54

Table 31: Educational Attainment for Mother or Guardian by County…………………………54

Table 32: Educational Attainment for Father or Guardian by County…………………….........55

Table 33: Number of Respondents Holding Veteran Status……………………………….........55

9

Chapter I: Introduction

Background of Study

The Wisconsin Technology Council offers the following vision of Wisconsin‟s future in

the publication Vision 2020: A Model Wisconsin Economy.

In a knowledge-based economy, Wisconsin‟s ability to compete will increasingly depend

on its ability to produce and retain a highly skilled, highly-educated workforce that can

fill positions in high-tech businesses. Rapidly growing, high-tech businesses require

large numbers of technically-skilled workers and technically-proficient managers.

(Wisconsin Technology Council, 2002, p. 12)

Wisconsin looks to institutions of higher education to increase this highly skilled, highly

educated workforce which is said to drive Wisconsin‟s economy. “Universities often are called

economic engines in reference to the bounty of human capital and new knowledge these

institutions produce for their states and the nation” (University of Wisconsin Madison News,

2006). Wisconsin public universities, technical colleges, community, and private colleges play

an integral part in educating the workforce and increasing knowledge-based jobs. It is said

Wisconsin‟s technical colleges “stimulate local economic development by providing a well-

educated workforce based solely on the occupational needs of local business and industry”

(Wisconsin Technical College System, 2009). Increasing human capital stimulates regional

economies; however, institutions of higher education cannot work alone to supply the vast

number of tech-savvy workers needed to compete in the new economy. Tom Still, President of

the Wisconsin Technology Council notes that partnerships are a natural off-shoot in fact, “It will

require partnerships between business, education and government.” (Still, 2004)

10

Economic factors pose a challenge to Wisconsin‟s ability to compete in a knowledge-

based economy. According to the National Bureau of Economic Research, the month of

December 2007, marked the beginning of a national recession. It was identified as “the peak

month, after determining that the subsequent decline in economic activity was large enough to

qualify as a recession” (National Bureau of Economic Research, 2008, pg. 2). Wisconsin‟s

economy has also suffered with a loss of 194,100 jobs through December 2009 (Wisconsin

Department of Revenue 2010, p.1). Wisconsin‟s unemployment rate rose to a 27 year high of

9.4% in March 2009, surpassing the national rate for the first time since June 2007 (Hupp, 2009).

With the downtown in the economy, Wisconsin fell 3 spots from a 2007 national rank of

30 to a rank of 33, in the 2008 New Economy Index, published by the Information Technology

and Innovation Foundation. The New Economy Index tracks economic factors by 26 indicators

and measures the overall structure of state economies instead of actual economic performance.

“The 29 indicators fall under five broad categories: knowledge jobs, globalization, economic

dynamism and entrepreneurship, the digital economy, and technological innovation” (Vanden

Plas, J. 2008). The 2008 highest ranked state in our region was Minnesota, 14th

, followed

closely by Illinois, 16th

, Michigan, 17th

, and Ohio, 30th

. A comparison of ranking by year can be

seen in Table 1. It should be noted that despite Minnesota leading Wisconsin in rank, both

Minnesota and Wisconsin fell equally in the 2008 overall rank by three percentage points which

may be attributed to the worsening of the national economy as a whole.

11

Table 1

New Economy Index Rankings

Minnesota Illinois Michigan Ohio Wisconsin

2008 14th 16th 17th 30th

33rd

2007 11th 16th

19th

29th

30th

A second challenge facing Wisconsin‟s ability to compete in a knowledge-based

economy is postsecondary educational attainment levels. Wisconsin trails Minnesota, neighbor

in the I-94 corridor technology zone, in two census categories as can be seen in Table 2.

Minnesota leads both Wisconsin and the U.S. in percent of population 25 years and over holding

bachelor‟s degrees and per capita income (U.S. Census Bureau, 2008).

Table 2

Educational Attainment Reported by 2006-2008 American Community Survey

2008 Population 25

Years and Over

Bachelors Degree Estimated Per Capita Income

(2008 inflation-adjusted dollars)

WI 3,727,936 631,711 or 16.9% $26,824

MN 3,418,723 724,208 or 21.2% $30,090

U.S. 197,794,576 34,295,753 or 17.3% $27,466

However, according to the 2006-2008 Population and Housing Narrative, Wisconsin

leads Minnesota and the U.S. in the national average of high school graduates with 34.4% or

1,281,302 graduates as can be seen in Table 3. Minnesota ranks 28.2 percent or 962,578

graduates falling just short of the U.S. National average 29.6 percent or 58,488,235 graduates

(U.S. Census Bureau, 2008).

12

Table 3

Educational Attainment

2008 Population 25

Years and Over

High School

Diploma

(or equivalency)

Percentage with

High School Diploma

(or equivalency)

WI 3,727,936 1,281,302 34.4%

MN 3,418,723 962,578 28.2%

U.S. 197,794,576 58,488,235 29.6%

The postsecondary educational attainment of Wisconsin‟s workforce is an integral piece

in gaining shares of total employment across all economic sectors and growing the knowledge-

based economy. It should be noted that there is a great disparity by county of Wisconsin

residents holding Bachelor‟s degrees. “Despite signs of progress, the State must concentrate on

the education level of its workforce. Below average numbers of college graduates is an area of

concern. A state that is willing to invest in human capital can become a National leader in this

new economy” (Ward, 2005).

In 2007, a study was commissioned by the Northern Wisconsin Higher Education

Initiative (NOW). NOW conducted three studies to identify an interest and/or need for

additional educational opportunities in seventeen Wisconsin counties north of or adjacent to

Highway 8. Results showed only 14 percent of northern Wisconsin residents age 18-44 had

completed a bachelor‟s degree compared to 21 percent of counterparts in the rest of the state.

Moreover, results showed “the northern counties cannot be considered a homogenous area…and

a „one-size-fits-all‟ solution is not appropriate” (University of Wisconsin Colleges, 2008, p. 25).

Based on the information collected by the three studies, there seems to be “an immense but

13

dispersed need for higher education in Northern Wisconsin and specific implementation plans

should be developed for the provision of those additional opportunities” (University of

Wisconsin Colleges, 2008, p. 4).

Statement of the Problem

Wisconsin ranks higher in percentage of adults 25 years and older who have completed a

high school diploma than Minnesota and the country as a whole but ranks lower in percentage of

adults with a Bachelor‟s degree or higher. (U.S. Census Bureau, 2007) Moreover, Wisconsin‟s

educational attainment levels vary widely by county with fewer northern Wisconsin adults

pursuing higher education than in the rest of the state. (University of Wisconsin Colleges, 2008)

Purpose of the Study

The purpose of the study was to identify barriers to higher education impacting adults in

Northern Wisconsin and identify motivations that exist in overcoming these barriers. Findings

and recommendations will benefit students and educational institutions in the State of Wisconsin.

A survey developed by the researcher was used to collect data from adults in counties served by

the Educational Opportunity Centers located in Eau Claire and Rice Lake, Wisconsin. The

Educational Opportunities Centers (EOC) is a federally funded TRIO program providing

counseling and information on college admissions to low-income and first-generation adults

entering or continuing a program of postsecondary education. The survey will be conducted in

December 2010.

Research Objectives

The following research objectives will be addressed by this study:

1) Determine barriers perceived to limit adult participation in postsecondary education.

14

2) Determine motivating factors that increase aspirations in adults to participate in

postsecondary education.

3) Identify the difference in barriers perceived to limit adult participation in postsecondary

education common to specific counties in Northern Wisconsin.

4) Identify differences in motivating factors that increase aspirations in adults to participate

in postsecondary education common among gender, ethnicity and age groups.

Importance of Topic

This research topic is important for the following reasons:

1) Barriers, if any, should be determined to widen participation in education by adults in

northern Wisconsin.

2) Motivational factors that caused adults to come forward and seek services for career

planning or the admissions process should be documented.

3) Current educational disparities of the number of college graduates in northern Wisconsin

as compared to the rest of the state should be studied. This study may provide insight as

to the type of post-secondary planning or assistance northern Wisconsin adults need in

continuing their education beyond high school. The data may also aid institutions of

higher education in developing regional recruitment strategies.

4) If Wisconsin invests in human capital and provides educational opportunities for

increasing educational attainment, citizens will enjoy increased prosperity. This

investment could provide a dual benefit of increasing Wisconsin‟s highly skilled, highly

educated workforce, and strengthening its standing in the new economy.

Limitations of Study

This study has the following limitations:

15

1) The study was not able to sample all counties in Northern Wisconsin and was restricted

to participants of the three northern-most counties served by the Educational Opportunity

Centers (EOC) headquartered in Eau Claire. Therefore, the survey results will be limited

to the opinions and responses from the residents of the three-county area.

2) This study was administered to adults seeking services from the EOC. It is understood

that some motivating factor or life changing event caused them to seek help with career

exploration and the possibility of continuing their education.

3) This study is a one-time survey producing a regional snap-shot of adults during a

particular time period. The results may shift over time depending upon changing

demographics or how quickly the economy recovers in a particular sub-region.

Definition of Terms

The following terms are defined for the purpose of this study:

Educational Opportunity Centers (EOC) - The Educational Opportunity Centers

Program (EOC) is a federally funded TRiO program providing counseling and information on

college admissions to qualified adults seeking to enter or continue a program of postsecondary

education. The goal of the EOC program is to increase the number of adult participants who

enroll in postsecondary education institutions (U.S. Department of Education).

First-Generation College Student – “An individual both of whose parents did not

complete a baccalaureate degree; or in the case of any individual who resided with and received

support from only one parent, an individual whose only such parent did not complete a

baccalaureate degree.” (U.S. Department of Education)

Knowledge-Based Economy - Embedded knowledge creates a wealthy society with an

ever increasing standard of living for everyone. The higher the educational attainment of the

16

worker, the more knowledge the person could apply to the job, thereby increasing the worker‟s

overall effectiveness (Wisconsin Technology Council, 2002)

Non-traditional Students – Part-time status and age are most common factors. Students

who satisfy one of the following: delays enrollment after high school, attends part-time for some

of the academic year, works 35 or more hours per week while enrolled, qualifies for financially

independent status for financial aid, has dependents other than a spouse, no high school diploma

or has a GED or other credential. (National Center for Education Statistics, 2002)

TRIO Programs – “The Federal TRIO Programs (TRIO) are Federal outreach and

student services programs designed to identify and provide services for individuals from

disadvantaged backgrounds.” (U.S. Department of Education)

17

Chapter II: Literature Review

Introduction

This chapter includes a comprehensive literature review of models and theories of adult

participative behavior. Adult learners, barriers and deterrents to postsecondary education, and

motivation to overcome barriers are addressed in this chapter. Postsecondary educational

attainment and regional disparity of educational attainment in Wisconsin is reviewed. The

importance of increasing the number of adults with some credits past high school to participate

in higher education is explored. Literature brings to light the perspectives of stakeholders and

the effectiveness of collaboration and partnerships. The chapter concludes with the importance

of participation in higher education thereby increasing the number of high paying knowledge-

based jobs to strategically aligning Wisconsin to compete in the new, global economy.

Models and Theory of Adult Participative Behavior

To better understand the strategies for overcoming barriers to adult participation in

postsecondary education, existing models and theories of participative behavior were reviewed.

The Rubenson Recruitment Paradigm model is a cognitive approach sometimes referred to as an

expectancy-valence approach. It focuses on adult learner perceived value of the learning activity

(valence) and the likelihood of being able to participate and benefit from the learning activity

(expectancy). Participation hinges on the learner view of personal and environmental variables.

Personal variables include needs, attributes, and prior experience. Environmental variables

include learner perception of control over their life, social norms and what educational

possibilities are available. (Rubenson 1977)

The Cross Chain-of-Response model is based on self-concept or self-evaluation and

attitude toward learning. Participation comes from within the individual not from outside forces.

18

Valence and expectancy are largely influenced by life transitions and motivation plays a big role

in learner response to barriers and educational opportunities. Cross categorized barriers by

situational, institutional, and dispositional. (Cross 1981)

The Darkenwald and Merriam Psychosocial Interaction Model is based on a set of

responses to both internal and external stimuli and finds socio-economic status as the strongest

determining factor of participation. The model proposed that the more perceived value placed

on education the higher the participation rate. Four types of barriers were found: situational,

institutional, psychosocial, and informational. (Darkenwald and Merriam 1982) Darkenwald

and others also developed the Deterrents to Participation Scale which identified six barriers:

lack of confidence, lack of course relevancy, time constraints, low personal priority, cost, and

personal and family. (National Center for Education Statistics, 1998)

In a review of several theories, C.L. Scanlon found that deterrents contain multiple

variables which are influenced by individual learner perception of their significance, and the

impact of the variables vary according to individual and life circumstances. Scanlon‟s eight

categories of deterrence factors are listed below (Scanlon, C.L. 1986).

Individual and family or home related problems

Cost concerns

Questionable worth, relevance or quality of educational opportunities

Negative educational perceptions, including prior unfavorable experiences

Apathy or lack of motivation

Lack of self confidence

A general tendency toward non-affiliation

Incompatibilities of time and/or place.

19

The review of literature also described demographic variables of age, gender, ethnicity,

income, employment, and place of residence. Other variables common to special populations

were noted. For example, in a 2009 study of Chicago public schools, three central barriers to

college degree attainment were found: “poor academic preparation that undermines minority and

low-income students‟ access to and performance in college, students‟ difficulties in navigating

the college enrollment process, and the declining real value of financial aid combined with rising

college costs.” (Nagaoka, Roderick, & Coca, 2009)

Adult Learners

Malcom Knowles, historian and champion of adult education in the United States,

defined adult learners in a broad sense. Knowles‟ social definition is when “an individual begins

to perform adult roles such as full-time worker, participating citizen, spouse, parent, etc. and the

psychological definition being when “individuals develop a self-concept of being responsible for

their own life” (Crawford, 2004).

Much of the literature categorized adult learners by a variety of factors ranging from age,

gender, employment, socio-economic status, veteran, living on or off-campus, and by various

levels of educational attainment. Titles included: first-time/full-time, non-traditional, adult/re-

entry, stopping out, independent, first-generation, ageless, lifelong, and third age learner. To

further complicate the profile, in much of the literature, adult learners were classified by various

age groups including 25 years and over, 18-44, 25-34, 35-44, 44 and up, and over the age of 50.

Literature classified adult learners by educational attainment levels of high school graduate or

equivalency, some college-no degree, associates, bachelor, graduate or professional. These

conflicting definitions, factors, and age groups made comparison of adult learners difficult.

Barriers and Deterrents to Postsecondary Education

20

Barriers were described as “factors which keep people who want to participate in some

activity from doing so (Marsden 1980). However, barriers were also viewed as constraints that

can drop participation below a certain level but not eliminate participation entirely. Alexandris

and Carroll (1997) found a distinct difference between two kinds of constraints: “blocking

constraints, those that completely preclude participation, and inhibiting constraints, those that

merely inhibit the ability to participate to a certain extent” (National Center for Education

Statistics, 1998). Because barrier connotates an impediment or unmovable obstacle, another

term found in the literature review was deterrent. This less simplistic term was used by

Valentine and Darkenwald (1990) and demonstrated that deterrents can be multi-faceted and

work in combination with other factors in affecting participation in adult education.

Many research studies are available on barriers to participation in higher education

classified by particular types of adult education. In a review of several studies on barriers by the

U.S. Department of Education‟s National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) two important

situational barriers were consistent: 1) lack of time, and 2) family responsibilities. Two main

institutional barriers were found: 1) inconvenient scheduling of classes, and 2) cost of courses.

Six important dispositional barriers were reported: 1) lack of encouragement or support from

family or friends, 2) worry about ability to succeed, 3) negative prior educational experiences, 4)

fear of not fitting in, 5) feeling too old to be going to school, and 6) perceived notion of difficulty

in starting.

Motivation to Overcome Barriers

“It is some motive that energizes the athlete, and it is some motive that directs the

student‟s behavior toward one particular goal rather than another. The study of

motivation concerns those processes that give behavior its energy and direction. Energy

21

implies that behavior has strength – that it is relatively strong, intense, and persistent.

Direction implies that behavior has purpose – that it is aimed or guided toward achieving

some particular goal or outcome”. (Reeve 2005, pg. 6)

Motivation theory originated in ancient Greece yet motivation study has only developed

over the last hundred years. Motivational concepts evolved from three grand theories based on

the biological and physiological perspectives: Will (Descartes), Instinct (Darwin), and Drive

(Woodworth, 1918; Freud, 1915; and Hull, 1943). During the 1960‟s and 1970‟s the field of

psychology and the study of motivation transitioned away from the biological and physiological

perspective and moved to the cognitive perspective of goals and expectancy. This time period

became known as the Cognitive Revolution.

Mini-theories of Motivation (Reeve 2005, pg. 33):

Achievement motivation theory (Atkinson, 1964)

Attributional theory of achievement motivation (Weiner, 1972)

Cognitive dissonance theory (Festinger, 1957)

Effectance motivation (White, 1959; Harter, 1978a)

Expectancy X Value theory (Vroom, 1964)

Flow theory (Csikszentmihalyi, 1975)

Intrinsic motivation (Deci, 1975)

Goal-setting theory (Locke, 1968)

Learned helplessness theory (Seligman, 1975)

Reactance theory (Brehm, 1966)

Self-efficacy theory (Bandura, 1977)

Self-schemas (Markus, 1977)

22

The Cognitive Revolution led to the humanistic movement and Abraham Maslow‟s

Hiirarchy of Needs. According to Maslow, “an individual is ready to act upon the growth needs

if and only if the deficiency needs are met” (Huitt, 2001).

Motivation is a variable to be measured in participative behavior. The two main types of

motives are said to be intrinsic or extrinsic. Intrinsic or internal experiences are based on needs,

cognitions, and emotion and the need for achievement. Adult learners do not usually return to

school because of peer pressure or parental expectations but instead because of some internal

need like self-improvement or studying a subject of interest. Internal motives can either energize

a learners approach to education or cause them to avoid the environment all together.

External or extrinsic motivation consists of tensions that are internalized originating from

perceived expectations of others. Adult learners may return to school due to an external event

like the loss of a job or retraining. “The best way to motivate adult learners is simply to enhance

their reasons for enrolling and decrease the barriers” (Lieb, 1991).

Postsecondary Educational Attainment

Over the last two decades the United States has fallen as the leader in educational

attainment rankings. In its report Adult Learning in Focus, the Council for Adult and

Experiential Learning (CAEL) reports that the United States now ranks “tenth among

Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development countries in the percentage of young

adults (aged 25-34) with a postsecondary credential” (Council for Adult and Experiential

Learning, 2008 pg. 22). It is thought that this ranking in part is not because the U.S. is declining

but that other nations are catching up and outperforming the United States. Barry McGaw,

director of the Paris-based Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, a 30-

nation group ranking educational systems by country, applauds the U.S. for remaining “atop the

23

„knowledge economy,‟ one that uses information to produce economic benefits.” However,

McGaw cautions that "education's contribution to that economy is weakening" (Lagorio, 2005).

At the national level, an area of concern is the change in educational attainment among

younger adults. An aging workforce and the retirement of the baby boom generation may be to

blame. The College Board warns “For the first time in the history of our country we face the

prospect that the educational level of one generation of Americans will not exceed, will not

equal, perhaps will not even approach, the level of its parents” (College Board Advocacy, 2008,

pg. 5). To further illustrate this trend,

Young adults are less likely to have earned a degree than their older counterparts,

according to a new report from the Brookings Institution that gathers nearly a decade‟s

worth of data from the government's American Community Survey and foreshadows next

year‟s release of the 2010 Census. Though the percent of adults with a baccalaureate

degree rose from 24 to 28 from 2000 to 2008, a smaller percentage of 25-to-34 year-olds

than 35-to-44 year-olds held one in 2008. The reverse was true in 2000. (Falling

Education Attainment, 2010)

When comparing Wisconsin to national educational attainment levels, Wisconsin leads

the nation in percentage of high school graduates but falls behind in percentage of Bachelor‟s

degrees and advanced degrees or more as can be seen in Table 4 (U.S. Census Bureau, 2007)

24

Table 4

Educational Attainment for Persons 25 Years Old and Over

2007 Percent with High

School or more

Percent with

Bachelor‟s or more

Percent with Advanced

degree or more

U.S. 84.5 27.5 10.1

Wisconsin 89.0 25.4 8.5

Regional Disparity of Educational Attainment

According to UW Madison‟s Applied Population Laboratory demographic analysis of

northern Wisconsin,

Educational attainment in the northern region lags behind the State of Wisconsin total.

At Census 2000, 76% of the population age 18-44 in the Northern Region had not

completed any higher education degree, compared to only 70% for the State of Wisconsin

as a whole. Looking specifically at Bachelor‟s degrees, only 14% of Northern Region

residents age 18-44 had completed a Bachelor‟s degree, compared to 21% for the State.

(University of Wisconsin Colleges, 2008, p. p.11)

This regional disparity may be a result of fewer 2-year and 4-year colleges being

geographically located in the northern part of the state. The NOW demographic profile of the

Northern Region of Wisconsin indicated that young adults currently in college or graduate

school “tend to be concentrated in counties with University of Wisconsin System campuses.

Enrollment of older adults in higher education is more widespread across Northern Wisconsin.”

(University of Wisconsin Colleges, 2008, p.11)

At Census 2000, the educational attainment levels of the 17 counties studied in the NOW

report north of or adjacent to Highway 8 can be seen in Table 5 below.

25

Table 5

Educational Attainment and Percent of Persons 25 Years and Over by Wisconsin Counties

Studied in the NOW Report: April 1, 2000

County High School

Grad

(including

equivalency)

Some

College, No

Degree

Associate

Degree

Bachelor‟s

Degree

Graduate or

Professional

Degree

Ashland 40.51 19.74 7.33 11.15 5.35

Bayfield 34.18 21.55 9.64 14.69 6.89

Barron 39.47 19.40 8.62 10.65 4.22

Burnett 42.68 20.37 5.72 10.03 3.96

Douglas 36.19 22.29 9.08 12.85 5.43

Florence 44.33 21.53 5.44 8.87 3.57

Forest 42.71 20.96 4.81 7.14 2.88

Iron 38.08 24.43 8.04 9.45 3.71

Lincoln 41.41 18.61 7.98 9.18 4.40

Marinette 44.70 19.16 5.77 9.07 3.83

Oneida 36.48 21.68 6.95 13.02 6.94

Polk 41.10 21.93 7.29 10.69 4.87

Price 43.44 18.94 7.04 9.66 3.32

Rusk 43.40 18.46 6.09 8.24 2.93

Sawyer 39.95 21.67 6.63 10.93 5.53

Vilas 39.78 21.61 6.47 12.64 4.93

Washburn 39.69 21.68 7.13 10.83 4.42

26

The Educational Opportunity Centers at UW-Eau Claire provides services to a 10- county

area. According to the U.S. Census 2006-2008 American Community Survey, the educational

attainment levels of the 10 counties served by the EOC can be seen in Table 6 below.

Table 6

Educational Attainment and Percent of Persons 25 Years and Over by Wisconsin Counties

served by the Educational Opportunity Centers: U.S. Census 2006-2008 American Community

Survey

County High School

Grad

(including

equivalency)

Some

College,

No Degree

Associate

Degree

Bachelor‟s

Degree

Graduate or

Professional

Degree

Barron 39.9 19.02 9.9 11.4 5.4

Chippewa 37.3 19.1 14.3 12.5 4.7

Clark 43.9 16.2 8.1 7.7 3.5

Dunn 38.5 19.0 8.9 16.2 8.1

Eau Claire 29.8 20.4 11.4 19.3 10.2

Jackson 41.7 18.7 7.3 8.0 3.3

Rusk 43.4 18.5 6.1 8.2 2.9

Sawyer 39.9 21.7 6.6 10.9 5.5

Trempealeau 40.9 18.5 8.3 9.2 4.1

Washburn 39.7 21.7 7.1 10.8 4.4

Adults with Some Credit Past High School

Of special note in tables 5 and 6 above is the percentage of adult learners who have

completed some college but no degree. This population could be targeted for recruitment

strategies and holds great potential for increasing Wisconsin‟s education attainment levels.

27

According to the CAEL Wisconsin Profile of Adult Learners, “of the 3,519,690 Wisconsin

working-age adults (18 to 64) with no college degree, 833,128 have completed some college but

no degree” (Council for Adult and Experiential Learning 2008, p.1). Unfortunately, this number

is not broken down by county or region.

Other states are targeting this population. The state of Kentucky is seeking to double the

number of adults in the labor force who have college degrees. In a study titled Colleges Woo

Adults Who Have Some Credits but No Degree, it is reported that “there are 11,000 or so people

in Kentucky who came within a course or two of earning a college degree, but never did. Almost

half a million more took a few college courses but then dropped out. Now educators are trying

to lure back those erstwhile students to finish what they started”. (Sander, L, 2008)

Perspectives of Stakeholders and Importance of Collaboration and Partnerships

As mentioned in Chapter I, Tom Still notes that partnerships between business,

education, and government should be encouraged. Still states the importance of cooperation

“within that triangle, throughout the „K-through-gray‟ learning spectrum (Still, 2004). Part of

the challenge of maintaining connections to adult learners who have no high school diploma or

have stopped out from postsecondary education is putting in place a system of collaboration

between stakeholders. True collaboration occurs at a variety of levels and arises from a shared

vision. “The term collaboration is reserved for organizations that join together to create a new

entity.” (Padak & Sapin, 2000) Formal agreements are recommended to address goals,

financing, and outline areas of contribution. Padak & Sapin have found the best way to match

collaborators at the community level is to begin with a needs assessment of the adult learner and

begin exploring possible partnerships. The authors caution that collaborative relationships are

complex and note the importance of consensus decision-making.

28

The Florida K-20 educational system is applauded for designing a vehicle for collecting

data such as electronic transcripts of high school students. The Florida K-20 Education Data

Warehouse “includes data on all students in public K–12, college, university, and career and

technical students, and can measure student employment and earnings outcomes by connecting

to the state‟s wage record files” (Brookings). To date, there are only a few states that have

student data systems in place. However, as a result of the stimulus package, other states are

moving in this direction. This may provide the link that is needed to assess the effectiveness of

partnerships and measure earnings by educational attainment in Northern Wisconsin.

In November 2009, the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation awarded $100,000 to the

Midwestern Higher Education Compact (MHEC) to lead a one year initiative to explore a multi-

state online credential repository. The Minneapolis-based MHEC was founded in 1991,

consisting of twelve neighboring states including Wisconsin. The Midwestern Credential

Repository for Education, Skills, and Training (Midwest-CREST) would allow citizens to “bank

or store college credits they have earned from multiple institutions in a single location and to

document workplace training, community education, and other formalized learning experiences”

(Roberson, 2009). The information would then be made available to schools of higher education

who would bid for the students to complete their degree at their institution. The initiative would

benefit students who start and stop their education or attend courses at multiple schools. It

would help reduce transfer credit loss and bundle educational and career achievements. “The

Midwest-CREST would help facilitate this process by converting credits and other learning

experiences into credentials that have currency in the labor market.” (Roberson, 2009)

Knowledge-Based Jobs

29

At a meeting of the National Governors Association, Virginia Governor Mark Warner

described a new reality in which “Knowledge-based jobs are going to go where the knowledge

workers are and the promise of economic growth and prosperity is going to go with them” (Hunt

& Tierney, 2006, p. 7). Similarly, Wisconsin Governor Jim Doyle offered his vision of the

Wisconsin economy by the year 2020. Governor Doyle envisioned Wisconsin as a “globally

competitive center of research and applied technology…with the help of cutting-edge

technologies developed at home” (Wisconsin Technology Council, 2002, p. 1). Moreover,

Governor Doyle envisioned a state with per capita wages above that of the national average.

Higher per capita wages go hand-in-hand with larger concentrations of college educated

residents. Wisconsin faces a dual challenge in increasing the number of adults participating in

higher education and in increasing the number of high paying knowledge-based jobs in the state

to retain those workers.

Summary

The literature review clearly indicates sufficient data on types of barriers facing adult

learners but somewhat less data on intrinsic and extrinsic motivation of adult learners. There is a

lack of literature on perceived barriers faced by adult learners in the Northern half of Wisconsin.

Therefore, additional information gathered from survey respondents may provide an important

starting point to increase educational attainment in Northern Wisconsin.

30

Chapter III: Methodology

Introduction

The purpose of this research was to identify barriers to higher education impacting adults

in Northern Wisconsin and discover motivational factors that increase aspiration to participate in

postsecondary education. This chapter includes subject selection and description,

instrumentation, data collection procedures, data analysis, and limitations.

Subject Selection and Description

The subjects in this study were limited to active 2009-2010 EOC participants from the

Wisconsin counties of Rusk, Sawyer, and Washburn. These counties represent the three

northern-most counties served by the EOC. Twenty percent of Sawyer County residents, 16% of

Rusk County residents, and 13% of Washburn residents were in poverty (U.S. Census Bureau:

2008). This is in comparison to the state average of 11%. It should be noted that Sawyer County

has the second highest poverty rate in the state. Non-probability convenience sampling was

used, a technique whereby not all members of a population are given an equal chance to be

selected. This type of sampling was selected because the participants were readily accessible to

the researcher. Surveys were administered to all available EOC participants in the three-county

area. Participation was on a voluntary basis. There were a total of 15 males and 20 females

surveyed for a total of 35 subjects. Twenty-one participants completed the survey resulting in a

60% response rate.

Instrumentation

A 46 statement survey was developed by the researcher after a review of existing

literature on barriers to participation in postsecondary education. The survey was constructed

using Qualtrics software. A five-point Likert scale ranking was used for questions relating to

31

barriers to education and motivating factors for participation. It was felt that the Likert scale

offered the best possible way to collect responses relevant to participants‟ situations. The Likert

scale is effective for expressing respondents‟ attitudes or feelings and for ease of scoring survey

results by the researcher. Two open-ended questions were provided for respondents to list other

barriers and motivating factors experienced. It was felt that an open ended question would allow

for collecting extra information that could be used for secondary analysis by the faculty and staff

of the EOC. Please refer to Appendix A for a copy of the finalized survey.

The survey was modeled after the Chain-of-Response Model (Cross 1981) whereby adult

participation in learning is thought to come from an internal response rather than from outside

influences. The main precepts affecting participation in postsecondary education being self-

evaluation and attitude toward education; influence of life transitions; and the effect motivation

plays on an individual‟s perception and subsequent reaction to opportunities and barriers.

Additional survey questions were modeled after Scanlon‟s review of several theories of

deterrents to participation in adult education (Scanlon, 1986) whereby a deterrent includes

variables that are influenced by an individual‟s perception of their significance, and how they

affect the individual based on life circumstance. Questions were organized according to:

individual, family or home related problems; cost; perceived value of educational opportunity;

negative prior educational experience; lack of motivation; lack of self-confidence; non-affiliation

issues, and incompatibilities of time and place. (Scanlan 1986)

Demographic questions collected background information on each subject to compare

findings by sub-groups and counties. Demographic information included: county of residence,

gender, age, and ethnicity. Questions to determine barriers perceived to limit adult participation

in postsecondary education were arranged by situational barriers, institutional barriers, and

32

dispositional barriers. Situational barrier questions included: lack of time to complete a

program, lack of transportation, lack of childcare, family responsibilities, classes offered during

work hours, distance between home and school, and limited or no access to computer/Internet.

Institutional barrier questions included: cost of courses, time and place courses are scheduled,

long waiting lists, perceived quality of educational opportunities, lack of online courses or

programs, and difficulty registering for courses. Dispositional barrier questions included: lack

of encouragement from family/friends, lack of confidence, past negative educational experience,

feeling too old to be going back to school, not knowing what to study or where to start, and

doubt about the worth of additional education. In addition to these three types of barriers, an

open-ended response question was included to solicit specific types of barriers respondents have

experienced. Several of the barrier questions also measured barriers common to life situation,

prior educational experience, and access to educational opportunities.

Questions to determine motivating factors that increase aspirations in adults to participate

in postsecondary education were arranged by internal and external motivating factors. Internal

motivating factor questions included: self-improvement, meeting new people, need for

achievement, learning new things, setting a positive example for children, and career

advancement. External motivating factor questions included: job change, marriage, having

children, earning more money, approaching retirement, retraining, and expectations from family

and friends. In addition to these two types of motivating factors, an open-ended response

question was included to solicit specific types of motivating factors respondents have

experienced. Several of the motivating factors questions also measured motivating factors

common to individual needs, self-perceptions, and major life events.

33

The remaining questions recorded respondents‟ current participation in postsecondary

education, highest education level completed by respondent, mother, father, and/or guardian, and

respondents‟ Veteran status. Please refer to Appendix B listing survey statements in relationship

to research objectives.

Data Collection Procedures

The Institutional Review Board (IRB) at UW-Stout approved the survey instrument and

accompanying cover letter. Please refer to Appendix C for a copy of the cover letter.

Respondents were selected from the EOC Student Access database. The anonymous online

survey was distributed on December10, 2010. The cover letter included a link to the survey and

explained the survey would take approximately five minutes to complete. Participation was

voluntary and results confidential as once the survey was submitted the data could not be

withdrawn or linked to the respondent. No responses were initially received from the online

survey. A second contact was made by telephone (see Appendix D for telephone script used)

beginning December 28, 2010 through January 20, 2011. Confidentiality was insured by

assigning each respondent a number with no other identification marks on the surveys.

Data Analysis

Basic descriptive statistics and cross tabulations were collected in Qualtrics software as

well as mean, variance, standard deviation, and number of total responses collected. Data was

downloaded to Microsoft Excel for analysis. Percentages were computed relative to county

demographic category.

Limitations

1) The survey instrument was designed to meet the needs of this study in particular therefore

there are no measures of validity or reliability.

34

2) Existing participants of the EOC were surveyed therefore it is probable that motivating

factors would be high in this particular population.

3) The percent of people in poverty in these particular counties is high; therefore life

circumstance may play a large part in responses.

35

Chapter IV: Results

Introduction

This chapter presents the results of this research study, barriers to higher education and

motivational factors experienced by adults in Rusk, Sawyer, and Washburn Counties. It provides

information pertaining to the study population and those subjects participating in the study.

Participants

There were 35 subjects from the 2009-2010 EOC participant pool from the Wisconsin

counties of Rusk, Sawyer, and Washburn. Twenty-one (60%) EOC participants completed the

survey.

Research Questions

Data percentages have been rounded to the nearest whole number. Survey questions one

through four, collected demographic information by county of residence, gender, age, and

ethnicity. It was determined that the majority (57%) of respondents were from Washburn county

(n=12), followed by 29% respondents from Rusk county (n=6), and 14% respondents from

Sawyer county (n=3). Of the twenty-one respondents, the majority (67%) were females (n=14)

and 33% were males (n=7). The majority (43%) of respondents fell in the age range of 18-24

years (n=9), followed by 33% ages 25-44 (n=7), and 24% ages 45+ (n=5). See Table 7, Gender

and Age by County. The majority of respondents (76%) were Caucasian (n=16), followed by

Native Americans (19%) (n=4), and 4% Hispanic/Latino (n=1). See Table 8, Ethnicity by

County.

36

Table 7

Gender and Age by County

Respondents Females Males Age 18-24 Age 25-44 Age 45+

Rusk 29% 14% 57% 11% 43% 40%

Sawyer 14% 14% 14% 11% 14% 20%

Washburn 57% 71% 29% 78% 43% 40%

Table 8

Ethnicity by County

Caucasian Native American Hispanic/Latino

Rusk 6 - 38% 0% 0%

Sawyer 1 - 6% 2 - 50% 0%

Washburn 9 - 56% 2 - 50% 1 - 100%

Following the demographic section, questions pertained to barriers to higher education.

The barrier questions were presented in three categories: situational, institutional, and

dispositional. Impact was ranked on a Likert scale of no impact, minor impact, unsure,

moderate impact, or major impact.

Situational Barriers Questions

5. Lack of time to complete a program

6. Lack of transportation

7. Lack of childcare

8. Family responsibilities

37

9. Classes offered during work hours

10. Distance between home and school

11. Limited or no access to computer/Internet.

Respondents indicated the following situational barriers as having a major impact to

continuing their education. In Rusk County, the majority (83%) responded “distance between

home and school”. In Sawyer county, three situational barriers were equally found to have a

major impact on continuing their education: “lack of time to complete a program”, “classes

offered during work hours”, and distance between home and school” (67%). In Washburn

County, the majority (58%) responded “distance between home and school”. Table 9,

Situational Barriers Having a Major Impact shows the results.

Table 9

Situational Barriers Having a Major Impact

Situational Barrier

Rusk Sawyer Washburn

Distance between home and school 83% 67% 58%

Lack of time to complete a program 67%

Classes offered during work hours 67%

Respondents indicated the following situational barriers as having no impact on

continuing their education. In Rusk County, the majority (83%) responded “limited or no access

to computer/Internet”. In Sawyer County, two situational barriers were equally found to have no

impact: “family responsibilities” and “limited or no access to computer/Internet” (100%). In

Washburn County, the majority (83%) responded “limited or no access to computer/Internet”.

See Table 10, Situational Barriers Having No Impact.

38

Table 10

Situational Barriers Having No Impact

Situational Barrier Rusk Sawyer Washburn

Limited or no access to computer/Internet 83% 100% 83%

Family responsibilities 100%

Institutional Barrier Questions

12. Cost of courses

13. Time and place courses are scheduled

14. Long waiting lists

15. Perceived quality of educational opportunities

16. Lack of online courses or programs

17. Difficulty registering for courses

Respondents indicated the following institutional barriers as having a major impact to

continuing their education. In Rusk County, the majority (100%) responded “cost of courses”.

In Sawyer County, the majority (67%) responded “time and place courses are scheduled”. In

Washburn County, the majority (67%) responded “cost of courses”. Table 11, Institutional

Barriers Having a Major Impact shows the results.

39

Table 11

Institutional Barriers Having a Major Impact

Institutional Barrier

Rusk

Sawyer

Washburn

Cost of courses 100% 67%

Time and place courses are scheduled 67%

Respondents indicated the following institutional barriers as having no impact on

continuing their education. In Rusk County, two institutional barriers were equally found to

have no impact: “long waiting lists” and “difficulty registering for courses” (67%). In Sawyer

County, the majority (100%) responded “lack of online courses or programs” as having no

impact. In Washburn County, the majority (75%) responded “perceived quality of educational

opportunities” as having no impact. See Table 12, Institutional Barriers Having No Impact.

Table 12

Institutional Barriers Having No Impact

Institutional Barrier

Rusk

Sawyer

Washburn

Long waiting lists 67%

Difficulty registering for courses 67%

Lack of online courses or programs 100%

Perceived quality of educational opportunities 75%

Dispositional Barrier Questions

18. Lack of encouragement from family or friends

19. Lack of confidence

40

20. Past negative educational experience

21. Feeling too old to be going back to school

22. Not knowing what to study or where to start

23. Doubt about the worth of additional education

Respondents indicated the following dispositional barriers as having a major impact to

continuing their education. In Rusk County, the majority (17%) responded “not knowing what to

study or where to start”. In Sawyer County, two dispositional barriers were equally found to

have a major impact: “not knowing what to study or where to start” and “lack of confidence”

(33%). In Washburn County, two dispositional barriers were equally found to have a major

impact: “not knowing what to study or where to start” and “lack of encouragement from family

or friends” (25%). Table 13, Dispositional Barriers Having a Major Impact shows the results.

Table 13

Dispositional Barriers Having a Major Impact

Dispositional Barrier

Rusk

Sawyer

Washburn

Not knowing what to study or where to start 17% 33% 25%

Lack of confidence 33%

Lack of encouragement from family or friends 25%

Respondents indicated the following dispositional barriers as having no impact on

continuing their education. In Rusk County, two dispositional barriers were equally found to

have no impact: “lack of confidence” and “past negative educational experience” (100%). In

Sawyer County, the majority (100%) responded to three dispositional barriers as equally having

no impact: “past negative educational experience”, “lack of encouragement from family and

41

friends”, and “doubt about the worth of additional education”. In Washburn County, the

majority (92%) responded equally that “past negative educational experience” and “feeling too

old to be going back to school” had no impact on continuing their education. See Table 14,

Dispositional Barriers Having No Impact.

Table 14

Dispositional Barriers Having No Impact

Dispositional Barrier

Rusk

Sawyer

Washburn

Lack of confidence 100%

Past negative educational experience 100% 100% 92%

Lack of encouragement from family and friends 100%

Doubt about the worth of additional education 100%

Feeling too old to be going back to school 92%

The following open-ended question collected responses by county about other barriers

that may prevent respondents from participating in postsecondary education. See Table 15,

Other Barriers – Rusk County, Table 16, Other Barriers – Sawyer County, and Table 17, Other

Barriers – Washburn County.

42

24. What other barriers may prevent you from participating?

Table 15

Other Barriers - Rusk County

Rusk County Response

Time to go to school when having to work full time.

Finances and being out of school for a long time. Strong math skills but not much

background in science. Also not good with technology.

Would come back to school if I could take one course at a time and still qualify for

financial aid. UW Superior is about the only choice for a 4 year college

Table 16

Other Barriers – Sawyer County

Sawyer County Response

Have a lot going on in “retired” state

Insecurity and lack of computer knowledge. Know how to log on but not proficient.

One hour drive from home to school

43

Table 17

Other Barriers - Washburn County

Washburn County Response

Being stubborn and school doesn't know how to interact with other agencies (Division of

Voc Rehab).

Recently laid off. No financial aid for cosmetology program. Have 3 small kids - just can't

do it right now.

Lack of online courses at university level. College is too expensive. Problem at last school

with financial aid and had to drop out.

Was at 3rd grade reading level - now at 12th grade level but took 2 years. School could

have helped more.

Money for buying textbooks

Poor grades. Took 6 classes the first semester but could have only taken 4 and still been

full time student for financial aid.

Interested but working full time right now

DVR Service

Lack of jobs available. Will most likely have to relocate.

Online course experience too impersonal. Lack of work study jobs to supplement grants

and loans. Need more offerings from Extension or Outreach. No programs available for

studying to be a counselor. Too many cookie cutter programs like nursing and business.

Motivating factors for participating in postsecondary education were presented in two

categories: internal and external motivating factors. Impact was ranked on a Likert scale of no

impact, minor impact, unsure, moderate impact, or major impact.

Internal Motivating Factors

25. Self-improvement

44

26. Meeting new people

27. Need for achievement

28. Learning new things

29. Setting a positive example for children

30. Career advancement

Respondents indicated the following internal motivating factors as having a major impact

to continuing their education. In Rusk County, the majority (50%) responded “career

advancement”. In Sawyer County, the majority (67%) responded “setting a positive example for

children”. In Washburn County, the majority (42%) responded “career advancement”. Table 18,

Internal Motivating Factors Having a Major Impact shows the results.

Table 18

Internal Motivating Factors Having a Major Impact

Internal Motivating Factors

Rusk

Sawyer

Washburn

Career Advancement 50% 42%

Setting a positive example for children 67%

Respondents indicated the following internal motivating factors as having no impact on

continuing their education. In Rusk County, four internal motivating factors were equally found

to have no impact: “meeting new people”, “need for achievement”, “learning new things”, and

“setting a positive example for children” (67%). In Sawyer County, the majority (67%)

responded that “career advancement” had no impact. In Washburn county, three internal

motivating factors were equally found to have no impact: “meeting new people”, “need for

45

achievement”, and “self-improvement” (67%). See Table 19, Internal Motivating Factors

Having No Impact.

Table 19

Internal Motivating Factors Having No Impact

Internal Motivating Factors

Rusk

Sawyer

Washburn

Meeting new people 67% 67%

Need for achievement 67% 67%

Learning new things 67%

Setting a positive example for children 67%

Career advancement 67%

Self-improvement 67%

Responses to internal motivating factors were collected by gender and ethnicity. The

majority of female respondents (43%) indicated “career advancement” and the majority of male

respondents (43%) indicated “setting positive example for children” as having a major impact on

motivation. The responses by ethnicity indicated the majority of Caucasian respondents (31%)

indicated “career advancement”. The majority of Native American respondents (75%) equally

found “learning new things” and “setting positive example for children”. The majority of

Hispanic-Latino respondents (100%) indicated “career advancement” as having a major impact

in motivation to continue their education. Table 20, Internal Motivating Factors Having a Major

Impact by Gender and Ethnicity shows the results.

46

Table 20

Internal Motivating Factors Having a Major Impact by Gender and Ethnicity

Internal Motivating Factors

Female

Male

Caucasian

Native

American

Hispanic-

Latino

Self-improvement 14% 29% 13% 50% 0

Meeting new people 7% 29% 6% 50% 0

Need for achievement 7% 29% 6% 50% 0

Learning new things 14% 29% 6% 75% 0

Setting positive example for children 29% 43% 25% 75% 0

Career advancement 43% 29% 31% 50% 100%

Responses to internal motivating factors were collected by age group. The majority of

respondents in the 18-24 age group (44%) indicated “career advancement” as having a major

impact on motivation. The majority of respondents in the 25-44 age group (57%) responded

equally “setting positive example for children” and “career advancement”. In the 45+ age group,

the majority (20%) responded that “self-improvement”, “meeting new people”, “need for

achievement”, “learning new things”, and “setting a positive example for children” equally had a

major impact in motivation to continue their education. Table 21, Internal Motivating Factors

Having a Major Impact by Age shows the results.

47

Table 21

Internal Motivating Factors Having a Major Impact by Age

Internal Motivating Factors Ages

18-24

Ages

25-44

Ages

45+

Self-improvement 0 43% 20%

Meeting new people 0 29% 20%

Need for achievement 0 29% 20%

Learning new things 11% 29% 20%

Setting positive example for children 22% 57% 20%

Career advancement

44% 57% 0

External Motivating Factors

31. Job change

32. Marriage

33. Having children

34. Earning more money

35. Approaching retirement

36. Retraining

37. Expectations from family and friends

Respondents indicated the following external motivating factors as having a major impact

to continuing their education. In Rusk County, the majority (83%) responded “job change”. In

Sawyer County, the majority (33%) responded “earning more money”. In Washburn County, the

majority (50%) responded “earning more money”. Table 22, External Motivating Factors

Having a Major Impact shows the results.

48

Table 22

External Motivating Factors Having a Major Impact

External Motivating Factors

Rusk

Sawyer

Washburn

Job change 83%

Earning more money 33% 50%

Respondents indicated the following external motivating factors as having no impact on

continuing their education. In Rusk County, two external motivating factors were equally found

to have no impact: “approaching retirement” and “expectations from family and friends” (67%).

In Sawyer County, two external motivating factors were equally found to have no impact:

“approaching retirement” and “marriage” (100%). In Washburn County, the majority (83%)

responded that “approaching retirement” had no impact. See Table 23, External Motivating

Factors Having No Impact.

Table 23

External Motivating Factors Having No Impact

External Motivating Factors

Rusk

Sawyer

Washburn

Approaching retirement 67% 100% 83%

Expectations from family and friends 67%

Marriage 100%

Responses to external motivating factors were collected by gender and ethnicity. The

majority of female respondents (64%) indicated “earning more money” and the majority of male

respondents (57%) indicated equally “job change” and “retraining” as having a major impact on

49

motivation. The responses by ethnicity indicated the majority of Caucasian respondents (63%)

indicated “job change”. The majority of Native American respondents (75%) and the majority of

Hispanic-Latino respondents (100%) indicated “earning more money” as having a major impact

in motivation to continue their education. Table 24, External Motivating Factors Having a Major

Impact by Gender and Ethnicity shows the results.

Table 24

External Motivating Factors Having a Major Impact by Gender and Ethnicity

External Motivating Factors

Female

Male

Caucasian

Native

American

Hispanic-

Latino

Job change 43% 57% 63% 0 0

Marriage 0 0 0 0 0

Having children 29% 14% 25% 25% 0

Earning more money 64% 29% 44% 75% 100%

Approaching retirement 7% 0 6% 0 0

Retraining 14% 57% 38% 0 0

Expectations from family and friends 29% 29% 25% 50% 0

Responses to external motivating factors were collected by age group. The majority of

respondents in the 18-24 age group (56%) and the 25-44 age group (71%) indicated “earning

more money” as having a major impact on motivation. In the 45+ age group, the majority (60%)

responded equally “job change” and “retraining” had a major impact in motivation to continue

their education. Table 25, External Motivating Factors Having a Major Impact by Age shows

the results.

50

Table 25

External Motivating Factors Having a Major Impact by Age

External Motivating Factors

Ages

18-24

Ages

25-44

Ages

45+

Job change 44% 43% 60%

Marriage 0 0 0

Having children 33% 29% 0

Earning more money 56% 71% 20%

Approaching retirement 0 0 20%

Retraining 11% 29% 60%

Expectations from family and friends 44% 29% 0

The following open-ended question was included to collect responses by county about

other motivating factors that may cause respondents to participate in postsecondary education.

See Table 26, Other Motivating Factors – Rusk County, Table 27, Other Motivating Factors –

Sawyer County, and Table 28, Other Motivating Factors – Washburn County.

38. What other motivating factors may cause you to return to school?

51

Table 26

Other Motivating Factors - Rusk County

Rusk County Response

Getting a good job

Had a knee replacement and can't do physical jobs anymore

If they offered online international education courses

Table 27

Other Motivating Factors - Sawyer County

Sawyer County Response

Desire to continue on in life

Admires grandmother who went back to school in her 70‟s

To get the job I want

52

Table 28

Other Motivating Factors – Washburn County

Washburn County Response

Becoming disabled in a car accident three years away from retirement. Went back to

school at DVR request.

Very self-motivated. Son knows I want to go to school and he keeps asking about it.

Having to support a family. Got CNA license but not much work available.

In medical assistant program but may switch to food service. Always wanted to own a

restaurant.

Went back to school at same time with a cousin and was able to ride share.

Know it is necessary to become a teacher and get a good career.

Recently got a new job but would like to know how to market a small publishing business.

Self-improvement

Daughter

Training for a better job

Was working in the trades‟ field but can‟t stand for long periods and have to work out of

the weather.

Questions 39-42 collected responses on current participation in postsecondary education.

Sawyer and Washburn Counties were equally found to have 67% of respondents currently

attending school full time compared with 33% of Rusk County respondents. However, 50% of

Rusk County respondents expressed an interest in attending school but were not currently

enrolled. Table 29, Current Participation in Education by Percentage of Respondents shows the

results.

53

Table 29

Current Participation in Education by Percentage of Respondents

Full Time

Student

Half Time

Student

Not Currently Enrolled

But would like to

Attend

Not Interested

At This Time

Rusk 33% 17% 50% 0

Sawyer 67% 0 33% 0

Washburn 67% 8% 17% 8%

Questions 43-45 collected responses on highest education level by individual, mother

and/or guardian, and father and/or guardian.

43. Highest education level (yourself)

EOC participants are potential first-generation students. The highest education level

attained by survey respondents was the Associates Degree by residents of Washburn County

(8%). The next highest education was Some College-No Degree and was equally found in Rusk

and Sawyer Counties (67%). The next highest education level was the High School diploma by

residents of Sawyer County (34%), followed by Rusk County (17%), and Washburn County

(8%). The lowest education level was the GED/HSED reported by Rusk County (17%). Table

30, Educational Attainment for Individuals by County shows the results.

54

Table 30

Educational Attainment for Individuals by County

Percent with

GED HSED

Percent with

Grade 12

Percent with

Some College No

Degree

Percent with

Associates degree

Rusk 17% 17% 67% 0%

Sawyer 0% 34% 67% 0%

Washburn 0% 8% 0% 8%

44. Highest education level (mother or guardian)

The highest education level attained by mother or guardian was Grade 12, equally found

in Rusk and Washburn Counties (100%), and Sawyer County (67%). The lowest education level

attained by mother or guardian was Grade 11, found in Sawyer County (33%). Table 31,

Educational Attainment for Mother or Guardian by County shows the results.

Table 31

Educational Attainment for Mother or Guardian by County

Percent with

Grade 11

Percent with

Grade 12

Percent with

Some College No

Degree

Percent with

Associates degree

Rusk 0% 100% 0% 0%

Sawyer 33% 67% 0% 0%

Washburn 0% 100% 0% 0%

45. Highest education level (father or guardian)

55

The highest education level attained by father or guardian was the Bachelors degree

found in Sawyer County (33%). The next highest education level was Grade 12 found in Rusk

County (100%), Washburn County (92%), and Sawyer County (67%). The lowest educational

level attained by father or guardian was Grade 10, found in Washburn County (8%). Table 32,

Educational Attainment for Father or Guardian by County shows the results.

Table 32

Educational Attainment for Father or Guardian by County

Percent with

Grade 10

Percent with

Grade 12

Percent with

Bachelors degree

Rusk 0% 100% 0%

Sawyer 0% 67% 33%

Washburn 8% 92% 0%

46. Veteran Status

Question 46 collected information on Veteran Status. The majority (95%) of survey

respondents indicated non-veteran status. See Table 33, Number of Respondents Holding

Veteran Status by County.

Table 33

Number of Respondents Holding Veteran Status by County

Yes No

Rusk 0 6

Sawyer 0 3

Washburn 1 11

56

Chapter V: Summary, Limitations, Conclusion and Recommendations

Summary

The primary purpose of this study was to identify barriers encountered by adults pursing

postsecondary education in Northern Wisconsin. A secondary purpose was to discover

motivational factors which encouraged participation in postsecondary education. By

determining these factors, the Educational Opportunity Centers (EOC) program in particular and

educational institutions in general, will be able to take appropriate action to provide services that

lessen barriers and widen participation in postsecondary education in Northern Wisconsin.

Limitations

This study has the following limitations:

1) The study was not able to sample all counties in Northern Wisconsin and was

restricted to participants of the three northern-most counties served by the

Educational Opportunity Centers (EOC) headquartered in Eau Claire. Therefore,

the survey results were limited to the opinions and responses from residents of the

three-county area.

2) This particular population had experienced some type of motivational factor

prompting them to seek the services of the EOC for help in setting career and

educational goals. It is probable that motivating factors were high in this particular

population.

3) Rusk, Sawyer, and Washburn Counties are rural in make-up. There was a high

probability that situational barriers identified would be similar.

57

4) The survey instrument was designed to meet the needs of this study in particular

therefore; there are no measures of validity or reliability beyond this particular

population.

Conclusions

Each research question will be now be restated and conclusion offered for each.

Research Question #1: Determine barriers perceived to limit adult participation in

postsecondary education.

Cross (1981) categorized barriers by situational, institutional, and dispositional. The

results of this survey indicated the major barriers were: distance between home and school

(situational), cost of courses (institutional), and not knowing what to study or where to start

(dispositional). These top three barriers may be due in part to the rural nature of the counties,

higher than average poverty rates, and a lack of area services that offer career and educational

planning.

Consistent with the U.S. Department of Education‟s National Center for Education

Statistics (NCES) findings, results revealed that lack of time, cost, and inconvenient scheduling

of classes were also found to be barriers. Contradictory to the NCES, family responsibilities,

past negative educational experience, and feeling too old to be going back to school had minor or

no impact on participation. This may be due to the fact that fifty-seven percent of respondents

were EOC clients currently enrolled full time in school. The obvious conclusion being they may

have overcome this particular set of barriers.

Scanlon (1986) found that deterrents contain multiple variables which are influenced by

individual learner perception of their significance and vary according to the individual and life

58

circumstance. Two barriers were identified from the analysis consistent with Scanlon‟s

construct: cost of courses and time and place courses are scheduled.

In responses related to technology and educational offerings, the majority of respondents

from all counties reported having access to a computer/internet and reported no lack of online

courses or programs. However, from the responses to the open-ended barrier question,

respondents expressed an interest in a broader array of programming. The lack of programming

choice could be directly related to the region itself, with fewer institutions of higher education

located in Northern Wisconsin than in the rest of the state.

Research Question #2: Determine motivating factors that increase aspirations in adults

to participate in postsecondary education.

Motivation plays an important role in participative behavior and participation hinges on

the learner view of personal and environmental variables. Personal variables include needs,

attributes, and prior experience. Environmental variables include learner perception of control

over their life, social norms, and what educational possibilities are available. (Rubenson 1977)

The results of this survey indicated the major internal motivating factors were setting a positive

example for children and career advancement. The primary external motivating factors were

earning more money and job change.

Results from the open-ended question on motives for participation revealed major life

events like job loss, disability, and changes in health. The researcher cannot be certain if

respondents confused question number 31 (job change) with job loss. A job change is

considered a major life event however; could be viewed in a different light than a job loss. If the

intent of a job change is to better oneself and family, it is consistent with Goal Setting Theory

(Locke, 1968). Responses about major life events were consistent with the open-ended barrier

59

question citing the need for better coordination of services between educational institutions and

other agencies.

Research Question #3: Identify the difference in barriers perceived to limit adult

participation in postsecondary education common to specific counties in Northern Wisconsin.

The barriers cited in the three counties were more alike than different. Two barriers were

found across all counties: distance between home and school (situational) and not knowing what

to study or where to start (dispositional). Rusk County respondents also reported a lack of time

to complete a program (situational), cost of courses (institutional), and time and place courses are

scheduled (institutional). Sawyer County reported lack of time to complete a program

(situational), and classes offered during work hours (situational). Washburn County reported

cost of courses (institutional).

Distance between home and school is a major factor because a large portion of these

counties are held in public owned forests and tribal lands. Bridging the difference could be less

of a factor in the future if coordination of the Rusk, Sawyer, and Washburn regional

transportation plan is implemented or if high speed broadband internet is deployed.

Valentine and Darkenwald (1990) demonstrated that barriers or deterrents can be multi-

faceted and work in combination with other elements in affecting participation in adult

education. For this reason, an open-ended barrier question collected responses about other

variables for analysis by county. Rusk County reported “time to go to school when having to

work full time”, “being out of school for a long time”, “not good with technology”, and “UW

Superior is about the only choice for a 4-year college”. Sawyer County reported “insecurity and

lack of computer knowledge” and “one hour drive from home to school”. Washburn County

cited “poor grades”, “low reading level”, “lack of jobs available”, and “will most likely have to

60

relocate”. These responses indicate a need for brushing up on academic skills and could also

highlight an area of concern about the type of jobs available being related to tourism or seasonal

in nature.

Research Question #4: Identify differences in motivating factors that increase

aspirations in adults to participate in postsecondary education common among gender, ethnicity

and age groups.

Female respondents outnumbered male respondents two to one. The majority of both

genders reported external motivating factors as having a major impact. The majority of females

indicated “earning more money” while males indicated “job change” and “retraining” as equally

having a major impact.

Motivating factors were compared by ethnicity. The majority of Caucasian and

Hispanic/Latino respondents reported external motivating factors as having a major impact.

Caucasian respondents indicated “job change” and Hispanic/Latino respondents reported

“earning more money”. Native American/Alaska Native respondents cited internal motivating

factors of “learning new things” and “setting a positive example for children” as having a major

impact.

In comparing motivating factors by age groups, the individual need for career

advancement was reported as the most common internal motivating factor among the 18-24 and

25-44 age groups. These findings were consistent with the mini-theories of motivation (Reeve

2005). The 45+ age group reported multiple internal motivating factors like self-improvement,

wanting to learn new things, and meeting new people. Major life events seemed to contribute to

external motivating factors reported. Job change was the most common external motivating

factor among all age groups. The internal motivation of self-improvement and the external

61

motivating factors of earning more money and expectations from family and friends were also

reported among the 18-24 and 25-44 age groups.

Recommendations

The following recommendations are offered about the study:

1) Some of the barriers could be eliminated from the questionnaire to shorten the length

of the survey. The situational barrier “family responsibilities” could be eliminated as

it is vague in meaning and easily confused with another barrier “lack of childcare”.

The institutional barrier “long waiting lists” may not accurately reflect a true barrier

as most students are able to take other general education courses while waiting to be

accepted into a program of study. Another institutional barrier “difficulty registering”

could have multiple meanings from difficulty with the admissions process to limited

number of course seats available.

2) More open-ended questions about motivating factors could be included to let

respondents tell their unique story. A less structured format could yield more in-

depth answers and seek a relationship between motivation and attitudes and beliefs

about postsecondary education. Example questions: “In what ways did your parents

and/or guardians prepare you for postsecondary education?” and “What made you

consider continuing your education beyond high school?”

3) Coping strategies to barriers could be the focus of future studies. This would seem to

be a natural pairing with a study of barriers. Findings could reveal important

strategies for coping with common problems students face like time management or a

general fear of not succeeding. Future EOC participants could benefit from

developing a list of these strategies.

62

4) Better participation in the survey could be gained by conducting the survey in person.

A more personal approach would be to conduct the survey at the end of the

counseling appointment at the EOC. Respondents would be able to answer the survey

questions at a time convenient for them and in a private setting with no interruptions.

The following recommendations are made as a result of the research:

1) The EOC should take into consideration the majority of respondents‟ availability to

computers and the internet. A technology-intensive communications plan should be

developed using social media to reach more potential clients and motivate current

participants.

2) The EOC should continue partnering with local business and the Wisconsin

Department of Workforce Development and develop a formal notification system in

the event of plant closings or mass layoffs. This will allow for earlier identification

and quicker response time to coordinate services for employees experiencing a job

loss.

3) The EOC should design an online repository for career and educational planning

resources and information on how to apply and pay for college.

4) The EOC should provide more detailed information of available support services by

county that strengthen academic skills and begin adults on a positive path to college.

5) The EOC should conduct additional research on coping strategies adults use to

overcome barriers.

6) Rusk County should be the next target area for concentrated EOC services due to the

high percentage of respondents who are not currently enrolled but would like to

attend.

63

References

College Board Advocacy. (2008, December). Coming to our senses: Education and the

American future. Retrieved from:

http://professionals.collegeboard.com/profdownload/coming-to-our-senses-college-

board-2008.pdf

Council for Adult and Experiential Learning. (2008). Adult learning in focus. Retrieved from:

http://www.cael.org/pdf/State_Indicators_Monograph.pdf

Council for Adult and Experiential Learning. (2008). Wisconsin profile of adult learners.

Retrieved from: http://www.cael.org/pdf/state_profiles/WISCONSIN.pdf

Crawford, S.R. (2004). Androgogy: Malcom Knowles. Document posted in online Old Dominion

University archived at

http://www.odu.edu/educ/roverbau/Class_Websites/761_Spring_04/Assets/course_docs/I

D_Theory_Reps_Sp04/Knowles-Crawford.pdf

De Vise, D. (2010, July 22). U.S. goes from leading to lagging in young college graduates.

Washington Post. Retrieved from: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-

dyn/content/article/2010/07/22/AR2010072201250.html

Falling Education Attainment. (2010, May 10). Inside Higher Ed. Retrieved from:

http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2010/05/10/demographics

Huitt, W. (2001). Motivation to learn: An overview. Educational Psychology Interactive.

Valdosta, GA: Valdosta State University. Retrieved from:

http://www.edpsycinteractive.org/topics/motivation/motivate.html

64

Hunt, J., Tierney, T., (2006, May). American higher education: how does it measure up for the

21st century?. Retrieved from:

http://www.highereducation.org/reports/hunt_tierney/Hunt_Tierney.pdf

Hupp, M. (2009, April 16). Wisconsin‟s unemployment rate hits 27-year high of 9.4%. Journal

Sentinal Online. Retrieved from: http://www.jsonline.com/business/43111002.html

Lagorio, C. (2005). U.S. education slips in rankings. CBS News. Retrieved from:

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/09/13/national/main838207.shtml

Lieb, S. (1991). Principles of adult learning Vision, Fall 1991. Retrieved from:

http://honolulu.hawaii.edu/intranet/committees/FacDevCom/guidebk/teachtip/adults-

2.htm

Nagaoka, J., Roderick, M., & Coca, V. (2009). Barriers to college attainment: lessons from

Chicago. Center for American Progress. Retrieved from:

http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2009/01/chicago_schools.html

National Bureau of Economic Research. (2008). Determination of the december 2007 peak in

economic activity. Retrieved from: http://www.nber.org/dec2008.pdf

National Center for Education Statistics. (2009). U.S. Department of Education. Institute of

Education Sciences. Adult education participation decisions and barriers: Review of

conceptual frameworks and empirical studies. Retrieved from:

http://nces.ed.gov/pubs98/9810.pdf

National Center for Education Statistics. (2009). U.S. Department of Education. Institute of

Education Sciences. Special analysis 2002: Nontraditional undergraduates. Retrieved

from: http://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/2002/analyses/nontraditional/sa01.asp

65

Northern Wisconsin Higher Education Initiative Demographic Profile. (2007). Applied

Population Laboratory. Retrieved from:

http://www.apl.wisc.edu/publications/NOW_report_final.pdf

Padak, N., & Sapin, C. (2000). Collaboration: Working together to support adult learners. Ohio

Literary Resource Center. Retrieved from: http://literacy.kent.edu/Oasis/Pubs/0400-

11.pdf

Reeve, J.M. (2005). Understanding motivation and emotion. New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons,

Inc.

Roberson, M. (2009, November 9). Initiative seeks to explore online platform to promote degree

completion. Midwestern Higher Education Compact. Retrieved from:

http://www.mhec.org/index.asp?pageID=396

Sander, L. (2008, February 15). Colleges woo adults who have some credits but no degree.

Chronicle of Higher Education, 54 (23), 29. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No.

EJ788876) Retrieved from ERIC (Educational Resources Information Center) database

Scanlon, C.L. (1986). Deterrents to participation: An adult education dilemma. ERIC

Clearinghouse on Adult, Career, and Vocational Education. Retrieved from:

http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED272768.pdf

Spanard, J.M. (1990). Beyond intent: Reentering college to complete the degree. [Electronic

Version] American Educational Research Association, 60(3), 309-344. Retrieved from:

JSTOR database

Still, T. (2004, June 30). Higher ed cooperation will produce more skilled workers for

Wisconsin. Wisconsin Technology Network. Retrieved from:

http://wistechnology.com/articles/971/

66

Tech-savvy workers in demand. (2009, February 9). Converge magazine. Retrieved from:

http://www.convergemag.com/stem/Tech-Savvy-Worker-Demand.html

U.S. Census Bureau. (2000). Educational attainment of the total population 25 years and over

for Wisconsin counties: April 1, 2000. Retrieved from:

http://www.doa.state.wi.us/docs_view2.asp?docid=405

U.S. Census Bureau. (2000). State and County Quick Facts. Retrieved from:

http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/27000.html

U.S. Census Bureau. (2007). American FactFinder 2007 American Community Survey.

Retrieved from: http://www.census.gov/compendia/statab/2010/tables/10s0228.pdf

U.S. Census Bureau. (2008). American Community Survey Fact Sheet. Retrieved from:

http://factfinder.census.gov/servlet/ACSSAFFFacts

U.S. Department of Education. Educational Opportunity Centers Program. Retrieved from:

http://www2.ed.gov/programs/trioeoc/index.html

U.S. Department of Education. Office of Postsecondary Education. Retrieved from:

http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ope/trio/index.html

U.S. Department of Education. Higher Education Act of 1965, 1998 Higher Education Act

Amendments. Retrieved from: http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ope/trio/triohea.pdf

U.S. Department of Education. National Center for Education Statistics. Adult education

participation decisions and barriers: Review of conceptual frameworks and empirical

studies. Working Paper No. 98-10, by Tim Silva, Margaret Cahalan, and Natalie

Lacierno-Paquet. Peter Stowe, Project Officer. Washington, D.C.: 1998. Retrieved from:

http://nces.ed.gov/pubs98/9810.pdf

67

University of Wisconsin Colleges. (2008, Jan). Northern Wisconsin higher education initiative

report. Retrieved from:

www.uwex.uwc.edu/chancellor/documents/NOW_report.pdf

UW Extension (2008, June 22). Wisconsin vs. Minnesota: wages in three important sectors.

Retrieved from:

http://www.uwex.edu/CES/cced/economies/economicsnapshot/documents/06-22-08.pdf

University of Wisconsin Madison News. (2006, April 24). Forum weighs impact of higher

education on economy. Retrieved from: http://www.news.wisc.edu/12497

Vanden Plas, J. (2008, November 18). Wisconsin slips in 2008 new economy ranking; kanavas

talks capital formation. Wisconsin Technology Network. Retrieved from:

http://wistechnology.com/articles/5234/

Ward, D. J. (2005, May 31). Human capital and brain power in the wisconsin economy:

Shaping the new wisconsin economy. Retrieved from:

http://www.northstareconomics.com/HumanCapitalReport-final.pdf

Wisconsin Department of Revenue. Division of Research and Policy. (2010, May).

Wisconsin economic outlook. Retrieved from:

http://www.revenue.wi.gov/ra/econ/2010/q1/execsumm.pdf

Wisconsin Technical College System (2009). What we do. Retrieved from:

http://www.wtcsystem.edu/do.htm

Wisconsin Technology Council. (2002). Vision 2020: A model wisconsin economy.

Retrieved from: http://www.wisconsintechnologycouncil.com/uploads/documents/

Vision_2020_web2.pdf

68

Appendix A: Survey

The Educational Opportunity Centers invite you to participate in a voluntary survey.

“This research has been reviewed by the UW-Stout IRB as

required by the Code of Federal Regulations Title 45 Part 46.”

Survey on Motivations and Barriers

Please note: The results of this survey are confidential.

1. Please enter below the county in which you reside:

2. Gender

Female

Male

3. Age

18-24 years

25-44 years

45 +

4. Ethnicity

African-American

Asian

Caucasian

Hispanic/Latino

Native American/Alaska Native

Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander

Other

69

What impact do you think each of the following Situational Barriers had or may have in

continuing your education?

No

Impact

Minor

Impact Unsure

Moderate

Impact

Major

Impact

5.Lack of time to complete a program 6. Lack of transportation 7. Lack of childcare 8. Family responsibilities 9. Classes offered during work hours 10. Distance between home and school 11. Limited or no access to

computer/Internet

What impact do you think each of the following Institutional Barriers had or may have in

continuing your education?

No

Impact

Minor

Impact Unsure

Moderate

Impact

Major

Impact

12. Cost of courses 13. Time and place courses are

scheduled

14. Long waiting lists 15. Perceived quality of educational

opportunities

16. Lack of online courses or programs 17. Difficulty registering for courses

What impact do you think each of the following Dispositional Barriers had or may have in

continuing your education?

No

Impact

Minor

Impact Unsure

Moderate

Impact

Major

Impact

18. Lack of encouragement from family

or friends

19. Lack of confidence 20. Past negative educational experience 21. Feeling too old to be going back to

school

22. Not knowing what to study or where

to start

23. Doubt about the worth of additional

education

70

24. What other barriers may prevent you from participating?

What impact do you think each of the following Internal Motivating factors had or may have

in continuing your education?

No

Impact

Minor

Impact Unsure

Moderate

Impact

Major

Impact

25. Self-improvement 26. Meeting new people 27. Need for achievement 28. Learning new things 29. Setting a positive example for

children

30. Career advancement

What impact do you think each of the following External Motivating factors had or may

have in continuing your education?

No

Impact

Minor

Impact Unsure

Moderate

Impact

Major

Impact

31. Job change 32. Marriage 33. Having children 34. Earning more money 35. Approaching retirement 36. Retraining 37. Expectations from family and

friends

38. What other motivating factors may cause you to return to school?

Current participation (Choose One):

39. Full Time Student

40. Half Time Student

41. Not Currently Enrolled but Would like to Attend

71

42. Not Interested at This Time

Highest education level:

Less

than

9th

Grade

10th

Grade

11th

Grade

12th

Grade

GED

or

HSED

Some

College,

No

Degree

Associate's

Degree

Bachelors

Degree

Graduate or

Professional

Degree

Doctorate

43.

Yourself

44.

Mother

or

guardian

45.

Father

or

guardian

46. Veteran Status

Yes

No

72

Appendix B: Survey Statements in Relationship to Research Objectives

Research Objectives

Survey Statements Determine

barriers

perceived to

limit adult

participation in

postsecondary

education.

Determine

motivating

factors that

increase

aspirations in

adults to

participate in

postsecondary

education.

Identify

differences by

county in

barriers

common to

life situation,

prior

educational

experience,

and access to

educational

opportunities.

I Identify

differences

by gender,

age, and

ethnicity in

motivating

factors

common to

individual

needs, self-

perceptions,

and major

life events.

1. County of

Residence

Life situation Life situation

2. Gender Life situation Life situation

3. Age Life situation Life situation

4. Ethnicity Life situation Life situation

Situational Barriers

5. Lack of time to

complete a

program

X Life situation

6. Lack of

transportation

X Life situation

7. Lack of childcare X Life situation

8. Family

responsibilities

Life situation

9. Classes offered

during work hours

X Access

10. Distance between

home and school

X Access

11. Limited or no

access to

computer/internet

X Access

Institutional Barriers

12. Cost of courses X Access

13. Time and place

courses are

scheduled

X Access

14. Long waiting lists X Access

15. Perceived quality

of educational

opportunities

X Prior

experience

73

16. Lack of online

courses or

programs

X Access

17. Difficulty

registering for

courses

X Access

Dispositional Barriers

18. Lack of

encouragement

from

family/friends

X Prior

experience

19. Lack of

confidence

X Self-

perception

20. Past negative

educational

experience

X Prior

experience

21. Feeling too old to

be going back to

school

X Self-

perception

22. Not knowing

what to study or

where to start

X Access

23. Doubt about the

worth of

additional

education

X Self-

perception

24. Other barriers

(open-ended

question)

X

Internal Motivating Factors

25. Self-improvement X Individual

needs

26. Meeting new

people

X Individual

needs

27. Need for

achievement

X Individual

needs

28. Learning new

things

X Individual

needs

29. Setting a positive

example for

children

X Self-

perception

30. Career

advancement

X Individual

needs

External Motivating Factors

31. Job change X Major life

event

74

32. Marriage X Major life

event

33. Having children Major life

event

34. Earning more

money

X Individual

needs

35. Approaching

retirement

X Major life

event

36. Retraining X Individual

needs

37. Expectations from

family and friends

X Self-

perception

38. Other motivating

factors (open-

ended question)

X

Current Participation

39. Full time student X X

40. Half time student X X

41. Not currently

enrolled but

would like to

attend

X X

42. Not interested at

this time

X X

Highest Education Level

43. Yourself X X

44. Mother or

guardian

X X

45. Father or

guardian

X X

46. Veteran Status X X

75

Appendix C: Cover Letter to EOC Participants

Dear EOC Participant:

I am writing to ask for your participation in an online survey to find out what barriers you face in

reaching your educational goals and the types of motivating factors that may contribute to

overcoming these barriers. The information gained from this survey will help the Educational

Opportunity Centers provide services in the future by providing insight as to the type of

assistance adults need in continuing their education beyond high school.

The survey can be accessed by clicking on the link below.

https://uweauclaire.qualtrics.com/SE/?SID=SV_4O26PUoSxuRBqjq Participation in the survey should take approximately five minutes of your time. The survey is

anonymous and your name will not be included on any documents. We do not believe that you

can be identified from any of this information.

Your participation in this study is entirely voluntary. You may choose not to participate without

any adverse consequences to you. You have the right to stop the survey at any time. However,

should you choose to participate and later wish to withdraw from the study, there is no way to

identify your anonymous document after it has been turned into the investigator. If you are

participating in an anonymous online survey, once you submit your response, the data cannot be

linked to you and cannot be withdrawn. By completing the survey, you agree to participate in

the project entitled, Motives for and Barriers to Participation in Postsecondary Educational

Attainment in Northern Wisconsin.

This study has been reviewed and approved by The University of Wisconsin-Stout's Institutional

Review Board (IRB). The IRB has determined that this study meets the ethical obligations

required by federal law and University policies. If you have questions or concerns regarding this

study, please contact me at 715.836.2024 or via email at collinpm@uwec.edu or you may also

contact Advisor Howard Lee at HLee@uwstout.edu. Should you have any questions, concerns,

or reports regarding your rights as a research subject, you may contact Sue Foxwell, IRB

Administrator, 152 Vocational Rehabilitation Building, UW-Stout, Menomonie, WI,

715.232.2477 or foxwells@uwstout.edu.

I look forward to receiving your response and I thank you in advance for your assistance in

researching this important topic.

Sincerely,

Paula M. Collins University Services Program Associate | Educational Opportunity Centers University of Wisconsin-Eau Claire| 105 Garfield Avenue | PO Box 4004 Eau Claire WI 54702-4004 |Ph: 715.836.2024 | Toll Free: 800.335.3113 | Email: collinpm@uwec.edu

76

Appendix D: Telephone Script

Hi, my name is __________, and I am conducting a research study about barriers to education.

We emailed you recently about the survey and we are following up with a phone call. The

survey will take approximately five minutes to complete. As a former client of the Educational

Opportunity Centers, are you willing to participate in this study?

(If Yes, continue. If No, thank them for their time.)

Before we begin, you should know that your participation is entirely voluntary and your name

will not be included on any of the documents. We do not believe that you can be identified from

any of this information. You have the right to stop the survey at any time. By completing the

survey, you agree to participate in the project entitled, Motives for and Barriers to Participation

in Postsecondary Educational Attainment in Northern Wisconsin.

Ask demographic questions 1-4

Now, I will read a set of barriers.

Have any of the following barriers affected your education?

(Please answer Yes, No, or Unsure)

Begin reading barrier questions 5-23

(If No or Unsure, keep going down the list of barriers)

(If Yes, ask them if the barrier had a Major, Moderate, or Minor Impact)

What other barriers may prevent you from attending school?

_____________________________________________________________

Now, I will read a set of motivating factors.

Have any of the following motivated you to continue your education?

(Please answer Yes, No, or Unsure)

Begin reading motivating factor questions 25-37

(If No or Unsure, keep going down the list of barriers)

(If Yes, ask them if the barrier had a Major, Moderate, or Minor Impact)

What other motivating factors may cause you to return to school?

_____________________________________________________________

Read the rest of the demographic questions 39-46

That completes our survey questions.

Thank them for their time. Tell them that the information gained from this survey will help the

Educational Opportunity Centers provide services in the future. Let them know that if they have

any questions, they can contact: Sue Foxwell, IRB Administrator, 152 Vocational Rehabilitation

Building, UW-Stout, Menomonie, WI, 715.232.2477