1
Positivity as a Predictor ofStudent Retention
PNAIRP Conference PresentationMonday, Oct. 4, 2010
Joe Montgomery, Ph.D.Dean for Institutional Effectiveness
Columbia Basin College
2
Retention as a Major Concern for Colleges
• Considerable resources are devoted to reducing student attrition: Counseling/Advising First Year Introduction (FYI) Probation programs Tutor Center Student Support Services Faculty involvement• Nonetheless, fall-to-fall retention is about 50%• Four-year graduation rates at around 30%• Even lower retention rates for students enrolled in dev math • Studies of student attrition often find that work responsibilities and financial issues contribute to some students leaving– but not all. These factors aren’t under college control• There is definitely a need for greater understanding of student attrition and effective interventions
3
Definition of Positive Psychology
• “Scientific study of optimal human functioning”• P.P. helps people develop qualities that lead to greater fulfillment for themselves and others• Main dimensions:
- Positive emotions and subjective states, constructive thoughts, optimism, hope
- Positive individual traits (e.g., courage, persistence, honesty, wisdom)- Positive institutions (e.g., healthy families, work environments, positive communities)
• Shifting attention from alleviating human suffering (medical model) to cultivating human flourishing• Why is this of interest to us in IR?
4
Positivity
• Defined by Fredrickson as moments of positive emotion thatquickly come and go (fits in with first dimension of PP)
• Occurs when we feel connected to others, loved, playful, joyful, creative, excited. Includes emotions of love, joy, gratitude, serenity, interest, inspiration• Positivity is the building block for her “Broaden and Build “theory
- With more positivity we feel good- Positive affect changes how our mind works–literally! We are
smarter, more creative, more open to new ideas etc.- Builds our resources for the future– new skills, interests, better relationships, greater resilience- Blocks negativity, reduces negative symptoms of stress (e.g., reduces blood pressure)- “Tipping point” effect: our lives dramatically improve when “Positivity ratio” exceeds 3/1- We can take charge of an increase our positivity; noticing when it occurs is a big first step
5555
PositivityLevel Feelings Mood Physical
Condition Intelligence Creativity Personal Relations Resilience Long-Term Trend
Positivity ratio > 3.0; tipping
point exceeded.
Very positive, optimistic
Very positive
Feel strong & fit, body feels great,
resistant to illness
Bright, quick, sharp, rapid
recall
Apply learning in new
contexts, new/unique thoughts and
ideas
Very warm, outgoing,
welcoming
Rapid recovery from negative events, losses
“Broaden and Build”: Positive
Spiral, “Flourishing”
Positivity ratio < 1.0,
approaching 0.
Very depressed, highly anxious, acute sadness
Very negative
Major illnesses, lasting insomnia,
painful joints, back injury, headaches,
poor vision
Very slow to understand,
respond; poor memory
No new ideas, can’t apply learning to
new contexts
Hostile, antagonistic
Failure to recover from
negative events, losses
“Fight or Flight”: Negative Spiral,“Languishing”
Fredrickson’s Broaden and Build Model
6
ALL RIGHT, WHO CHOSE WHO WE STAND BY? I HAVE STANDARDS.
7
CAN YOU BELIEVE WHAT THIS DUDE LOOKS LIKE WET? HA HA HA
8
Link Between Broaden and Build and Retention
Hypothesis:Positivity is associated with many positive outcomes, including creativity, expanded awareness, greater intelligence, favorable relationships.Consequently, students high in Positivity should perceive collegeas being less difficult, more rewarding, have more positive perceptionsof the college, and should perceive fewer barriers to their education. Students higher in Positivity should be more likely to stay in school, graduate/transfer, and report more satisfaction with their education, as compared to low Positivity students.
9
CBC Student Survey 7 main sections, 124 items (mostly 5-point Likert-type items)Part I. Student Education and Learning A. Educational activities (e.g., class participation, integrating ideas from multiple sources, working with other students, etc.) B. Educational experiences (items related to faculty teaching style, class discussion, higher-level thinking, etc.)– items derived from Ken Bain’s book What the best college teachers doPart II. Educational and Personal Growth– Personal Development (how much CBC has prepared them to transfer, provided a broad education, prepared them for employment)Part III. CBC as an Institution (able to enroll in desired classes, placement, advising, Resource Center, Tutor Center, cultural events)Part IV. Potential Barriers to College Success (work responsibilities, financial pressures, high school academic preparation, family support)Part V. Positivity items (taken from Fredrickson, 2009, with permission) Part VI. Overall Evaluation of Education at CBC (quality of instruction, value of education, interactions with instructors, preparation for transfer, equipment and technology, etc.)Part VII. Student Demographics (full/part time, work schedule, credits earned to date, gender, ethnic group, major, parents’ education, income, etc.)
10
Positivity Scale (Fredrickson, 2009)
• Consists of 20 “Emotional Descriptors”• Students rate the “greatest amount” that they experienced each feeling within the past 24 hours, from “not at all” to “extremely”• 10 positive items. Examples include: Amused, fun-loving, silly Awe, wonder, or amazement Grateful, appreciative, or thankful Hopeful, optimistic, or encouraged• 10 negative items. Examples include: Angry, irritated, or annoyed Contemptuous, scornful, or disdainful Embarrassed, self-conscious, or blushing• Available online at www.positivityratio.com/single.php • Her approach to scoring: count positive items rated 2 or higher (P), count negative items rated 1 or higher (N), compute P/N• Goal is to exceed the “tipping point” of 3.0
11
Comments on Scoring Positivity Scale
• Fredrickson’s scoring procedure is puzzling– she takes interval-level data (from Likert items) and converts them to simple counts (nominal scale), thus losing lots of information•I added my own scoring procedure– after establishing strong internal consistency reliability, computed summative score for Positive and Negative items, ratio of Positive/Negative and compared these values with Fredrickson’s measure • Reliability results:
Positive Items: Alpha= 0.89Negative Items: Alpha= 0.84All Items: 0.77Note: reliability values for each section of the Student survey exceeded 0.70
12
Correlation of Positivity Measures with Survey Dimensions
Survey Dimension: Mean: Ed. Activities
Mean: Perceptions of
Faculty
Mean: Educational &
Personal Growth
Mean: CBC as an Institution
Mean: Barriers to
College Success
Total Score r 0.129 0.160 0.156 0.088 0.092p-value 0.002 0.0001 0.0001 0.04 0.03
N 579 571 577 574 574
Positive Total r 0.162 0.191 0.216 0.188 -0.176p-value 0.0001 0.000001 0.000001 0.000001 0.000001
N 570 566 569 568 569
Negative Total r -0.015 -0.002 -0.038 -0.095 0.336p-value NS NS NS 0.02 0.000001
N 579 571 577 574 572
Pos/Neg Ratio r 0.127 0.167 0.179 0.206 -0.327p-value 0.002 0.000001 0.000001 0.000001 0.000001
N 570 566 569 568 569
Fredrickson's P ratio r 0.108 0.105 0.116 0.164 -0.217
p-value 0.01 0.01 0.006 0.0001 0.000001N 554 546 552 549 547
13
1. Work responsibilities
2. Financial pressures
3. A physical disability
4. Insufficient financial assistance college
5. Weak high school prep
6. Difficulty completing math
7. Poor physical health
8. Feelings of depression, anxiety
9. Inadequate financial assistance family
10. Difficulty connecting with faculty
11. Lack of family encouragement
12. Limited English
13. Family responsibilities
Mean Pos Items
r -.062 -.105* -.070 -.099* -.127** -.065 -.127** -.253** -.104* -.101* -.176** -.057 -.101*
p-value NS .013 NS .019 .003 NS .003 .000 .014 .017 .000 NS .018
Mean Neg Items
r .128** .154** .156** .146** .192** .208** .173** .405** .237** .298** .267** .117** .148**
p-value .002 .000 .000 .001 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .006 .000
Positivity Ratio (Likert)
r -.130** -.180** -.134** -.170** -.189** -.175** -.176** -.397** -.229** -.264** -.280** -.108* -.170**
p-value .002 .000 .002 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .000 .012 .000
Positivity Ratio (Fredrickson)
r -.068 -.080 -.061 -.089* -.125** -.164** -.121** -.264** -.148** -.209** -.202** -.075 -.097*
p-value NS NS NS .039 .004 .000 .005 .000 .001 .000 .000 NS .025
Correlations Between Positivity Measures and Barriers to Education
14
Barriers to Educational Success
Barriers to Education Mean St. Dev.
2. Financial pressures 3.54 1.18
1. Work Responsibilities 3.34 1.14
4.Financial assistance: college 2.81 1.22
13. Family responsibilities 2.72 1.3
6. Difficulty completing math 2.56 1.29
5. Weak high school prep. 2.51 1.21
9. Financial help: family 2.48 1.26
10. Connecting with faculty 2.48 1.07
8. Depression, anxiety 2.45 1.24
3. A physical disability 2.05 1.06
7. Poor physical health 2.02 1.02
11. Family encouragement 1.92 1
12. Limited English ability 1.64 0.95
2. F
inan
cial
pre
ssur
es
1. W
ork
Resp
onsib
ilitie
s
4. In
suffi
cien
t fina
ncia
l ass
istan
ce fr
om c
olle
ge
13. F
amily
resp
onsib
ilitie
s
6. D
ifficu
lty c
ompl
eting
mat
h re
quire
men
ts
5. W
eak
high
scho
ol p
rep.
9. In
adeq
uate
fina
ncia
l hel
p fr
om fa
mily
10. D
ifficu
lty c
onne
cting
with
facu
lty
8. F
eelin
gs o
f dep
ress
ion,
anx
iety
3. A
phy
sical
disa
bilit
y
7. P
oor p
hysic
al h
ealth
11. L
ack
of fa
mily
enc
oura
gem
ent
12. L
imite
d En
glish
abi
lity
00.5
11.5
22.5
33.5
4
1515
Emotional Descriptors: MeanStd. Dev.
1. Amused, fun-loving, or silly 3.38 1.102. Angry, irritated, or annoyed 2.60 1.163. Ashamed, humiliated, or disgraced 1.60 0.974. Awe, wonder, or amazement 2.36 1.175. Contemptuous, scornful, or disdainful 1.50 0.886. Disgust, distaste, or revulsion 1.47 0.867. Embarrassed, self-conscious, or blushing 1.92 1.128. Grateful, appreciative, or thankful 3.61 1.129. Guilty, repentant, or blameworthy 1.64 1.0010. Hate, distrust, or suspicion 1.60 0.9811. Hopeful, optimistic, or encouraged 3.47 1.1112. Inspired, uplifted, or elevated 3.16 1.2313. Interested, alert, or curious 3.34 1.1514. Joyful, glad, or happy 3.53 1.1315. Love, closeness, or trust 3.46 1.2616. Proud, confident, or self-assured 3.33 1.1617. Sad, downhearted, or unhappy 2.10 1.1718. Scared, fearful, or afraid 1.79 1.1119. Serene, content, or peaceful 2.93 1.1920. Stressed, nervous, or overwhelmed 3.14 1.31Mean for Emotional Descriptor Items 2.60 0.50Mean for Positive Items 3.24 0.85Mean for Negative Items 1.97 0.72
Part V. Emotional Well-Being Items
1616
1. A
mus
ed, f
un-lo
ving
, or s
illy
4. A
we,
won
der,
or a
maz
emen
t
8. G
rate
ful,
appr
ecia
tive,
or t
hank
ful
11. H
opef
ul, o
ptim
istic,
or e
ncou
rage
d
12. I
nspi
red,
upl
ifted
, or e
leva
ted
13. I
nter
este
d, a
lert
, or c
urio
us
14. J
oyfu
l, gl
ad, o
r hap
py
15. L
ove,
clos
enes
s, o
r tru
st
16. P
roud
, con
fiden
t, or
self-
assu
red
19. S
eren
e, co
nten
t, or
pea
cefu
l
2. A
ngry
, irr
itate
d, o
r ann
oyed
3. A
sham
ed, h
umilia
ted,
or d
isgra
ced
5. C
onte
mpt
uous
, sco
rnfu
l, or
disd
ainf
ul
6. D
isgus
t, di
stas
te, o
r rev
ulsio
n
7. E
mba
rras
sed,
self-
cons
cious
, or b
lush
ing
9. G
uilty
, rep
enta
nt, o
r bla
mew
orth
y
10. H
ate,
dist
rust
, or s
uspi
cion
17. S
ad, d
ownh
eart
ed, o
r unh
appy
18. S
care
d, fe
arfu
l, or
afr
aid
20. S
tres
sed,
ner
vous
, or o
verw
helm
ed
1.00
1.50
2.00
2.50
3.00
3.50
4.00
Part V. Emotional Well-Being Items
Positive Descriptors Negative Descriptors
17
Likert and Fredrickson P-Ratios: Regression with Quadratic Term
Dependent Variable:Likert-Based Positivity Ratio
EquationModel Summary Parameter Estimates
R Square F df1 df2 Sig. Constant b1 b2Linear .533 621.181 1 545 .00000 1.132 .263Quadratic .640 483.704 2 544 .00000 .564 .665 -.042Exponential .433 416.293 1 545 .00000 1.119 .144
• Y= .564+ .665*Fred+ (-.042*Fred-squared)
• Fredrickson’s 3.0 tipping point corresponds to 2.18 0n the Likert-based P ratio
18
Positivity Ratio Count Pct Cum Pct<1.5 211 36.89 36.89
1.5 to 2 119 20.80 57.692 to 2.5 103 18.01 75.702.5 to 3 65 11.36 87.063 to 3.5 42 7.34 94.413.5 to 4 16 2.80 97.204 to 4.5 12 2.10 99.30
> 4.5 4 0.70 100.00Total 572 100.00
<1.5 1.5 to 2 2 to 2.5 2.5 to 3 3 to 3.5 3.5 to 4 4 to 4.5 > 4.50
50
100
150
200
250
Positivity Ratio Distribution
19
Summary/Conclusions
• Fredrickson’s Broaden and Build Theory suggests that students low in positivity may be at a cognitive and emotional disadvantage in terms of completing their education, hence more likely to drop out • Students with higher ratings on negative affect items and lower P ratios perceived greater barriers to educational success• Within the Barriers scale, the P-ratio and Neg. Emotions correlated with “difficulty completing the math requirement”, “feelings of depression and anxiety”, “inadequate financial support from my family”, “difficulty connecting with the faculty”, “lack of family support, encouragement”• Implications: early identification of those low on “P” and establishing interventions may reduce the risk of dropping out • 2010 cohort study: longitudinal tracking of students, following initial Psychological Well-Being assessment
20
Appendix
21
Age GroupPositivity Measure: < 20 20-24 25-29 30-39 40+Positive Item Mean 3.21 3.31 3.10 3.15 3.44Negative Item Mean 2.04 2.00 1.93 1.83 1.83Difference 1.21 1.34 1.23 1.32 1.61Pos/ Neg 1.78 1.95 1.87 1.94 2.28Fred. p ratio 2.15 2.79 2.88 2.92 3.01
n 163 206 87 66 39
Positive Item Mean
Negative Item Mean
Difference Pos/ Neg Fred. p ratio1.00
1.50
2.00
2.50
3.00
3.50
4.00
< 2020-2425-2930-3940+
Positivity Results by Age Group
22
Parents Who Attended CollegePositivity Measure: Mother Father Both NeitherPositive Item Mean 3.34 3.11 3.24 3.24
Negative Item Mean 1.98 1.98 1.99 1.95
Difference 1.40 1.13 1.28 1.32
Pos/ Neg 1.97 1.78 1.87 1.96
Fred. p ratio 2.66 2.55 2.54 2.75
n 84 63 191 218
Positive Item Mean
Negative Item Mean
Difference Pos/ Neg Fred. p ratio1.00
1.50
2.00
2.50
3.00
3.50
MotherFatherBothNeither
Positivity Results by Parent Education
23
Ethnic Group
Positivity Measure: Asian Hispanic White Decline
Positive Item Mean 3.50 3.43 3.19 2.97Negative Item Mean 2.11 1.98 1.95 1.85Difference 1.39 1.45 1.28 1.12Pos/ Neg 1.90 1.99 1.91 1.74Fred. p ratio 2.34 2.71 2.67 2.10
n 21 118 352 26
Positive Item Mean
Negative Item Mean
Difference Pos/ Neg Fred. p ratio1.00
1.50
2.00
2.50
3.00
3.50
4.00
AsianHispanicWhiteDecline
Positivity Results by Ethnic Group
24
Income Group
Positivity Measure:
< $16215
$16216- $21855
$21856- $27465
$27-466- $33075
$33076-38685
$38686- $44295
$44296- $49905
$49906- $55515
$55516 or more
Positive Item Mean 3.27 3.13 3.31 3.09 3.36 3.30 3.27 3.11 3.25
Negative Item Mean
2.17 1.88 1.94 1.83 1.85 1.81 1.76 2.03 1.94
Difference 1.15 1.29 1.37 1.27 1.51 1.50 1.56 1.19 1.30
Pos/ Neg 1.81 1.90 1.95 1.95 2.03 1.99 2.07 1.84 1.93
Fred. p ratio 2.44 2.77 2.48 2.84 2.91 2.71 2.64 2.44 2.67
n 135 63 40 37 31 32 27 26 142
Positive Item Mean
Negative Item Mean
Difference Pos/ Neg Fred. p ratio1.00
1.50
2.00
2.50
3.00
3.50
< $16215$16216- $21855$21856- $27465 $27-466- $33075 $33076-38685 $38686- $44295 $44296- $49905 $49906- $55515 $55516 or more
Positivity by Income Level
25
Positivity Measure: Full- time Part- timeTotal EWB 2.64 2.51Positive Item Mean 3.26 3.18Negative Item Mean 2.00 1.85Pos/ Neg 1.88 2.00Fred. p ratio 2.55 2.89
n 446 127
Positivity Results by Full vs Part Time
Positive Item Mean
Negative Item Mean
Pos/ Neg Fred. p ratio1.00
1.50
2.00
2.50
3.00
3.50
Full- timePart- time
26
Positivity Measure: Female MalePositive Item Mean 3.28 3.19
Negative Item Mean 1.92 2.02
Difference 1.37 1.22
Pos/ Neg 1.97 1.85
Fred. p ratio 2.75 2.54n 321 240
Positivity Results by Gender
Positive Item Mean
Negative Item Mean
Difference Pos/ Neg Fred. p ratio.00
.50
1.00
1.50
2.00
2.50
3.00
3.50
FemaleMale
Top Related