Student connectedness data for the large sample at Time

Connectedness Results

In this research, university student connectedness is defined as supportive relationships and conditions that a student experiences in conjunction with significant people (family, peers, students, university staff and community), in appropriate places, with relevant activities. The first collection period obtained complete survey data for 183 participants. Of the initial population, 87 participants (47.5%) were involved in the first semester intervention while the other 96 participants (52.5%) provided the control population. Table 8.1 presents reliability coefficients, means and standard deviations for the large sample at Time 1. The reliability coefficients (Cronbach alphas), which were previously shown to be internally consistent in the pilot activities, reported an excellent overall scale alpha of 0.935.

136 Table 8.1

Connectedness Reliability Coefficients (Cronbach’s Alpha), Means and Standard Deviations for the Large Sample (n=183) at Time 1

Connectedness Subscales Number

of items Alpha (α) M SD Personal Connectedness 10 0.798 40.20 3.72 Family Connectedness 10 0.926 44.21 4.95 Students Connectedness 10 0.884 39.84 4.25 Lecturers Connectedness 10 0.866 39.01 3.98 Community Connectedness 10 0.937 41.27 4.69 Overall Scale Connectedness 50 0.935 204.53 21.59

An examination of the reliability contribution of each subscale to the total score was deemed necessary to continue to build knowledge for the working party members. In particular, this was for knowledge that alphas for the connectedness subscales of community (0.937) and family (0.926), which are external to university influence, build confidence that the pilot data was not an anomaly. Excellent reliability coefficients for family and community connectedness were discussed as expected, given that most commencing students were school leavers, aged 18 - 19 years, living at home with family and presumably with established links across their communities.

The reliability coefficients for the remaining three subscales, which were subjected to university influences and needed to consider internal sources of university connectedness, continued to presented lower alphas. The connectedness subscales alphas for other students (0.884) and lecturers (0.866) both recorded good reliability coefficients. The personal subscale alpha recorded the lowest coefficient (0.798) at Time 1, but this was an acceptable level of reliability. Lower alphas for other students, lecturers and personal connectedness were not surprising as they reflected recently formed relationships and a lack of familiarity in a new setting. This was helpful information because it enabled the working party to understand the variability in the data, the opportunity to monitor connectedness fluctuations over time, and whether student participation in support programs could enhance student connectedness levels.

137

Efforts to answer the first research question as to the levels of connectedness for commencing university students required an examination of the overall connectedness scale mean and the five subscale means. These means, also shown in Table 8.1, revealed a similar pattern to the reliability coefficients. The means for family and community revealed the two highest means at the first collection, and both sources were considered as being external to university influence. In descending order, there was the personal mean, followed by the two lowest subscale means for other students and lecturers, and all three of these internal sources were considered susceptible to university influence. Early in the first semester of university, high levels of perceived connectedness from family and community sources confirmed students, one-third of whom were first in family to university, perceived high levels of support beyond the influence of the university. Just within the top quintile, the mean for personal connectedness reflected early positive perceptions of connectedness; however means for the subscales of other students and lecturers were lowest. The standard deviation for the overall scale at Time 1 was largely influenced by the subscales of family, community and other students, indicating a broad range of responses early in the students’ university journey. In contrast, a smaller response variation for lecturer and personal connectedness indicated greater similarity in student perceptions.

Examination of the five connectedness means as a percentage contribution of the overall connectedness score, addressed the second research question. Those contributions, categorized by internal and external sources, reveal that the family (21.6%) and community (20.17%) sources contribute 41.8% to the connectedness score. The internal sources of personal (19.65%), other students 19.47% and lecturers 19.07%, are within the influence of the university, and contribute to 58.2% of the connectedness scale for the sample at Time 1. Such data was helpful to indicate the balanced nature of perceived student connectedness across broader social areas. In contrast, perceptions of personal, other student and lecturer connectedness, perceived as malleable by university support programs, comprised 58.19% of the student connectedness score. The three lowest means signalled an opportunity to monitor connectedness changes over time, and perhaps identify other times of student need and monitor impact of participation.

To this point, the relevance of this knowledge is important for several reasons: (i) to see if the tool functioned effectively to capture university student perceptions of connectedness from five sources of influence, (ii) to gain confirmation of lower connectedness means for

138

lecturers, other students and personal, combined with similarity of responses, providing an early signal for ongoing student support and (iii) to assess whether the availability of baseline data was useful to the working party to understand supportive influences (family and community) existing in students’ broad social context, and thus where to focus their resources.

8.2.2 Homogeneity of connectedness data amongst participant subgroups at Time 1