Alexander W. Astin

Bio: Alexander W. Astin is an academic researcher from University of California, Los Angeles. The author has contributed to research in topics: Higher education & Service-learning. The author has an hindex of 59, co-authored 198 publications receiving 29634 citations. Previous affiliations of Alexander W. Astin include American Council on Education & Portland State University.

Student involvement: A developmental theory for higher education.

Abstract: Even a casual reading of the extensive literature on student development in higher education can create confusion and perplexity. One finds not only that the problems being studied are highly diverse but also that investigators who claim to be studying the same problem frequently do not look at the same variables or employ the same methodologies. And even when they are investigating the same variables, different investigators may use completely different terms to describe and discuss these variables. My own interest in articulating a theory of student development is partly practical—I would like to bring some order into the chaos of the literature—and partly self-protective. I and increasingly bewildered by the muddle of f indings that have emerged from my own research in student development, research that I have been engaged in for more than 20 years. The theory of student involvement that I describe in this article appeals to me for several reasons. First, it is simple: I have not needed to draw a maze consisting of dozens of boxes interconnected by two-headed arrows to explain the basic elements of the theory to others. Second, the theory can explain most of the empirical knowledge about environmental influences on student development that researchers have gained over the years. Third, it is capable of embracing principles from such widely divergent sources as psychoanalysis and classical learning theory. Finally, this theory of student involvement can be used both by researchers to guide their investigation of student development—and by college administrators and

What matters in college? : four critical years revisited

Abstract: From the author of Four Critical Years--a book the Journal of Higher Education called the most cited work in higher education literature--What Matters in College? presents the definitive study of how students change and develop in college and how colleges can enhance that development. Based on a study of more than 20,000 students, 25,000 faculty members, and 200 institutions, the book shows how academic programs, faculty, student peer groups, and other variables affect students' college experiences.

Where's the Learning in Service-Learning?

Abstract: 1. Identifying the Learning Outcomes of Service 2. Personal and Interpersonal Development 3. Understanding and Applying Knowledge 4. Engagement, Curiosity, and Reflective Practice 5. Critical Thinking 6. Perspective Transformation 7. Citizenship 8. Program Characteristics of Effective Service-Learning 9. Strengthening the Role of Service in the College Curriculum Resources A. College and University Participants in the Studies B. Sample and Methods of the Studies C. Survey and Interview Instruments D. Survey Regression Tables: Impact of Service-Learning E. Survey Regression Tables: Impact of Program Characteristics F. Interview Regression Tables: Impact of Well-Integrated Service-Learning.

How Undergraduates Are Affected by Service Participation.

Abstract: Based on entering freshman and follow-up datacollected from 3,450 students (2,287 women and1,163 men) attending 42 institutions withfederally funded community service programs,the impact of community service participationon undergraduate student development wasexamined. Even after regression analysescontrolled for individual student characteristicsat the time of college entry, including thepropensity to engage in service, results indicatethat participating in service during the under-graduate years substantially enhances thestudent’s academic development, life skilldevelopment, and sense of civic responsibility.

Dropout from Higher Education: A Theoretical Synthesis of Recent Research

Abstract: Despite the very extensive literature on dropout from higher education, much remains unknown about the nature of the dropout process. In large measure, the failure of past research to delineate more clearly the multiple characteristics of dropout can be traced to two major shortcomings; namely, inadequate attention given to questions of definition and to the development of theoretical models that seek to explain, not simply to describe, the processes that bring individuals to leave institutions of higher education.

Student involvement: A developmental theory for higher education.

Abstract: Even a casual reading of the extensive literature on student development in higher education can create confusion and perplexity. One finds not only that the problems being studied are highly diverse but also that investigators who claim to be studying the same problem frequently do not look at the same variables or employ the same methodologies. And even when they are investigating the same variables, different investigators may use completely different terms to describe and discuss these variables. My own interest in articulating a theory of student development is partly practical—I would like to bring some order into the chaos of the literature—and partly self-protective. I and increasingly bewildered by the muddle of f indings that have emerged from my own research in student development, research that I have been engaged in for more than 20 years. The theory of student involvement that I describe in this article appeals to me for several reasons. First, it is simple: I have not needed to draw a maze consisting of dozens of boxes interconnected by two-headed arrows to explain the basic elements of the theory to others. Second, the theory can explain most of the empirical knowledge about environmental influences on student development that researchers have gained over the years. Third, it is capable of embracing principles from such widely divergent sources as psychoanalysis and classical learning theory. Finally, this theory of student involvement can be used both by researchers to guide their investigation of student development—and by college administrators and

Does Active Learning Work? A Review of the Research

Abstract: This study examines the evidence for the effectiveness of active learning. It defines the common forms of active learning most relevant for engineering faculty and critically examines the core element of each method. It is found that there is broad but uneven support for the core elements of active, collaborative, cooperative and problem-based learning.

Seven principles for good practice in undergraduate education

Abstract: Arthur Chickering is Distinguished Professor of Higher Education at Memphis State University. On leave from the Directorship of the Center for the Study of Higher Education at Memphis State, he is Visiting Professor at George Mason University. Zelda Gamson is a sociologist who holds appointments at the John W. McCormack Institute of Public Affairs at the University of Massachusetts-Boston and in the Center for the Study of Higher and Postsecondary Education at the University of Michigan.

Publication records and tenure decisions in the field of strategic management

Abstract: To better define levels of accomplishment for publishing journal articles in strategic management, a bibliometric study was performed on the publication records of 96 doctorates in the field whose first post-degree job was in academics. By examining 20 journals that are outlets for research in strategic management, publication records were developed for each individual for the first 5-10 years following receipt of the doctoral degree. Two factors influenced the publication records of these new faculty. Having publications prior to receiving the doctorate and getting a first job at an institution with a graduate program in management were associated with more frequent publishing after an academic career began. As expected, the number of papers published was related to the likelihood of receiving tenure. However, despite the fact that they had produced more papers during the first 5 years than male faculty members and had higher citation rates, female faculty members were less likely to receive tenure. The findings are discussed in terms of institutional policy for hiring and evaluating new faculty.