This article describes how to use what we know about commuter students to design and implement strategies that enhance their retention. It includes a discussion of the extraordinary diversity of the commuter student population and their common needs and concerns and offers several theoretical frameworks that have proven to be useful in understanding commuter students, institutional environments, and the nature of interactions between them. It concludes by presenting an organizing model together with specific strategies that promotes commuter student success.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AstinA. W. (1985). Achieving educational excellence. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
2.
AstinA. W. (2001). What matters in college: Four critical years revisited. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
3.
BrookfieldS. D. (1986). Understanding and facilitating adult learning. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
4.
El-KhawasE. (1996). Student diversity on today's campuses. In KomivesS. & WoodardD. (Eds.), Student services: A handbook for the profession (3rd ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
5.
EvansN. J.ForneyD. S., & Guido-DiBritoF. (1998). Student development in college: Theory, research, and practice. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
6.
JacobyB. (1989). The student as commuter: Developing a comprehensive institutional response. ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Report, no. 7. Washington, DC: School of Education and Human Development, The George Washington University.
7.
JacobyB. (2000). Involving commuter students in learning. New Directions for Higher Education No. 109. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
8.
KeelingR. P. (1999). A new definition of college emerges: Everything that happens to … a (newly defined) student, in the context of a noisy visual “datascape.”NASPA Forum, 20(5), 4–5.
9.
KnowlesM. S. (1980). The modern practice of adult education: From pedagogy to andragogy (2nd ed.). Chicago: Follett Publishing Co.
10.
KnowlesM. S. (1984). Andragogy in action. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
11.
KnowlesM. S. (1990). The adult learner: A neglected species. Houston: Gulf.
12.
KuhG. D.GonyeaR. M., & PalmerM. (2001). The disengaged commuter student: Fact or fiction. Commuter Perspectives, 27(1), 2–5.
13.
LikinsJ. M. (1988). Knowing our students: A descriptive profile of commuter students at a large, public, midwestern university. Unpublished manuscript.
14.
MaslowA. H. (1982). Toward a Psychology of being (2nd ed.). New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold.
15.
MerriamS. B. & CafferellaR. S. (1999). Learning in adulthood: A comprehensive guide (2nd ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
16.
National Center for Education Statistics. U.S. Department of Education (2002). Profile of undergraduates in U.S. postsecondary institutions: 1999–2000, NCES 2002–168 by HornLauraPeterKatharin, & RooneyKathryn. Project Officer: Andrew G. Malizio. Washington, DC.
17.
NewtonF. B., & SmithJ.H. (1996). Principles and strategies for enhancing student learning. In EnderS. C.NewtonF. B., & CapleR. B. (Eds.), Contributing to learning: The role of student affairs. New Directions for Student Services, no. 75. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
18.
RosenbergM., & McCulloughB. C. (1981). Mattering: Inferred significance and mental health among adolescents. In SimmonsR. (Eds.), Research in community and mental health (Vol. 2). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press.
19.
SchlossbergN. K. (1985). Marginality and mattering: A life span approach. Paper presented at American Psychological Association meeting, Los Angeles, CA.
20.
SchlossbergN. K. (1989). Overwhelmed: Coping with life's ups and downs. New York: Lexington Books.
21.
SchlossbergN. K.LynchA. Q., & ChickeringA. W. (1989). Improving higher education environments for adults. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
22.
ShapiroN. S., & LevineJ. H. (1999). Creating learning communities: A practical guide to winning support, organizing for change, and implementing programs. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
23.
StrangeC. C. (1991). Managing college environments: Theory and practices. In MillerT. K. & WinstonR. B. (Eds.), Administration and leadership in student affairs. Muncie, IN: Accelerated Development.
24.
Study Group on the Conditions of Excellence in American Higher Education (1984). Involvement in learning: Realizing the potential of American higher education. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.
25.
WilmesM. B., & QuadeS. L. (1986). Perspectives on programming for commuters: Examples of good practice. NASPA Journal, 24(1), 25–35.
