California Association of Institutional Researchers
2003 Annual Meeting
Rohnert Park, CA

November 13, 2003
Counseling and Student
Services’ Contributions to
Students’ Self-Development
Esau Tovar  Carol Kozeracki  Merril A. Simon
1
Contact Information
Esau Tovar, M.S.
Faculty Leader/Counselor, Assessment Center
Santa Monica College
1900 Pico Blvd. Santa Monica, CA 90405
(310) 434-4012
tovar_esau@smc.edu
Carol Kozeracki, M.A.
Project Manager, Institutional Research
Santa Monica College
1900 Pico Blvd. Santa Monica, CA 90405
kozeracki_carol@smc.edu
Merril A. Simon, Ph.D.
Assistant Professor, Educational Psychology and Counseling
California State University Northridge
18111 Nordhoff St. Northridge, CA 91330-8265
merril.simon@csun.edu
2
Presentation Abstract
Given the increasing number of students attending
community colleges, we face ever-increasing budgetary
constraints while experiencing a demand to serve students’
diverse needs without sufficient resources to do so.
Understanding these needs will provide a greater ability to
make decisions about which services to apply and in what way.
This presentation will focus on the development and use of a
67-item student services survey measuring the use of collegewide student services and the degree of self-development
experienced by students as a result of attending college. Specific
contributions to students’ self-development by counseling and
other services will be highlighted.
3
About Santa Monica College
 Spring
2003 Enrollment:
 Population: 27,850 graded students
 Gender: 57% female, 43% male
 Status: 30% full-time; 10% F1-Visa
 Race/Ethnicity: 37% White,
27% Latino, 20% Asian, 9% African
American, 4% Other, 3% Filipino
4
Need for Study
 Primarily
resulting from accreditation
self-study;
 New accreditation standards
 Need to measure student learning outcomes
in both academic and student services;
 Focus on usage and satisfaction with services;
and
 Contribution of student services to students’
self-development (affective development)
5
Survey Characteristics
 67 Items with four sections:
1. Background information;
2. Awareness and usage of, and satisfaction
with twenty student services programs;
3. Importance and agreement to items relating
to counseling services, course
enrollment/registration services, financial
aid, safety and involvement; and
4. Degree to which students’ college
experiences contributed to their selfdevelopment.
6
Survey Characteristics (continued)

Internal Consistency – Chronbach’s alpha:
Total Survey
Awareness/usage of student services
Satisfaction with student services
Importance of counseling, course
enrollment, financial aid, safety/ involvement
Agreement of counseling, course enrollment,
financial aid, safety/involvement
Self-Development Full Scale
.99
.87
.99
.95
.96
.94
7
Sampling Protocol
 Administered
in-and-out of classroom:
 Randomly selected classes from across
disciplines (academic & vocational courses;
excluded non-graded; did not sample earlyending or online courses).
• Collected 1,156 (81% of total surveys )
 Also administered by 20 different Student
Services Programs as students presented for
services
• Collected 277 (19% of total surveys )
8
Demographics of Respondents

26% F1-Visa

Goal:
 86% AA Degree/Transfer;



8% Career Certificate;
4% Personal Growth;
1% Basic Skills.

Age: M = 24.5

SMC Attendance:




40% 1-2 semesters
31% 3-4 semesters
15% 5-6 semesters
14% Over 3 years
30.00%
25.00%
20.00%
15.00%
10.00%
5.00%
0.00%
Male
Female
Total
American Indian
Asian/Pacific Islander
Black/African American Latino
White
Other
9
Awareness of Student Services
Percentage of Least Aware
70
66
65
65
62
60
48
50
46
40
29
30
28
32
32
20
10
0
Not aware of service
TRIO/Student Support Services
Veterans' Programs
Psychological Services
Aware of service but never used it.
Student Success Project
Pico Partnership Program
10
Utilization of Student Services
Percentage of Most Used
70
59
60
50
50
40
37
29
30
20
10
34
29
25
20
19
18
10
12
11
13
8
16
11 12
2
4
0
Used service
once
Has used service
a few times
General Counseling
Assessment Center
Has used service
a lot
Transfer/Counseling
Health Services
Most Used
Financial Aid
11
Utilization of Student Services
Percentage of Least Used
8
7 7
7
6 6 6
6
5
4
4
3
2
3
3
3
3
2 2
2 2
1
1
2
1
1
1
1
2
1
1
1
0
Used service
once
Has used service
a few times
Student Success Project
Psychological Services
TRIO/Student Support Services
Has used service
a lot
Least Used
Women's Center
Pico Partnership Program
Veterans' Programs
12
Satisfaction with Student Services
Percentage of Most Satisfied
60
52 52 51
50
48
45
40
30
17 18
20
10
27
26
6 5
5
4
3
21
19
15
21
21
17
9
5 4 4 4
0
Very
disatisfied
Somewhat
disatisfied
Neutral
Somewhat
satisfied
Disabled Students Programs & Services
Latino Center/Adelante
African American Collegians Center/Black Collegians
TRIO/Student Support Services
Health Services
Very satisfied
13
Satisfaction with Student Services
Percentage of Least Satisfied
60
48
50
43
39
40
32
28
30
20
10
26
17
13
11 10
21
20
7
25
22
21
20
16
13 12
11
7 6
29
4
0
Very
disatisfied
Somewhat
disatisfied
Neutral
Veterans' Programs
Psychological Services
TRIO/Student Support Services
Somewhat
satisfied
Financial Aid
Scholarship Office
Very satisfied
14
Importance of Counseling Services
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
No importance
By
Decreasing
Level of
Importance
Little importance Moderate/average Great importance
importance
Very great
importance
Counselors provide me with accurate information on courses and degree requirements.
Counselors help me keep my educational plan current.
Counselors refer me to other sources for assistance when necessary.
Counselors are usually available to me by appointment.
Counselors help me identify majors of study that fit my current interests.
Counselors help me identify career areas that fit my current skills/interests.
Counselors are usually available to me through walk-in counseling.
Counselors help me identify ways to improve my study skills and habits.
15
Agreement Rating by Counseling Service
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Strongly disagree
By
Decreasing
Agreement
Somewhat
disagree
Neutral
Somewhat agree
Strongly agree
Counselors are usually available to me by appointment.
Counselors provide me with accurate information on courses and degree requirements.
The counseling staff are helpful and courteous.
Counselors refer me to other sources for assistance when necessary.
Counselors help me keep my educational plan current.
Counselors help me set realistic goals to work toward.
Counselors are usually available to me through walk-in counseling.
Counselors help me identify majors of study that fit my current interests.
Counselors help me identify career areas that fit my current skills/interests.
Counselors help me identify ways to improve my study skills and habits.
16
Contributions of Select
Student Services to
Students’ SelfDevelopment
17
Designing Self-Development Items

Designing new curricula emphasizing
both cognitive and non-cognitive components:
 e.g., American Cultures requirement

Moving beyond assessment of utilization/
satisfaction with services

Many student services designed and driven by
student development/environmental models:
 Student retention (Tinto, 1993)
 Student engagement (Astin, 1993)
 How College Affects Students (Pascarella & Terenzini,
1990)
18
Designing Self-Development Items

Interest in measuring the contributions of
student services—particularly counseling—to
students’ self-development while in college.

Items written were based on problems or
issues discussed with students in a counseling
setting.

Interest in operationalizing select components
of the Santa Monica College Counseling
Department’s Mission Statement.
19
Counseling Department Mission Statement
The Counseling Department is committed to promoting student
success by providing a broad range of innovative services that address
the educational, developmental, psychological, and social needs of
Santa Monica College students. We actively contribute to the broader
academic mission of the College through our instructional services
and by building a multicultural learning community.
Values Statement
The Counseling Department places priority on the following values as it pursues its
mission by fostering:
• Responsiveness to the developmental growth and changing needs of students and
staff.
• Innovation and creativity in the services we offer.
• Interpersonal respect at all levels.
• Reinforcement of student responsibility, self-direction, and decision-making skills.
• Diversity as reflected in our programs, services, and staff composition.
• Commitment to the ethical standards of the counseling profession.
20
Factor Analysis for Self-Development Items
(1 of 5)

Items subjected to:
 Principle Components Factor Analysis
 Varimax Rotation

Criteria for factor retention:
 Initial Eigenvalues > 1
 Scree Plot test
 Item loading > .40
 Theoretical justification of item loading
on factor

International students’ responses excluded
21
Self-Development Factor Analysis (2 of 5)
Extent to which experiences at Santa Monica College
has contributed to students’ self-development.
(1 = very negative effect; 5 = very positive effect)
Extracted
Communalities
56. Understanding my career prospects
.67
57. Developing my self-confidence
.75
58. Developing a sense of personal identity
.75
59. Recognize my potential for success
.72
60. Helping me cope with change
.74
61. Helping me handle stress
.61
62. Helping me develop a personal code of values and ethics
.72
63. Understanding people of diverse cultures, values, and ideas .74
64. Working with groups of people
.77
65. Developing leadership skills
.68
66. Taking responsibility for my own behavior
.68
67. Developing time management skills
.61
22
Self-Development Factor Analysis (3 of 5)
Total Variance Explained
Component
Initial Eigenvalues
Total
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
7.676
.754
.610
.480
.457
.417
.359
.327
.267
.246
.209
.197
% of Variance
63.965
6.282
5.087
4.001
3.812
3.474
2.994
2.726
2.227
2.048
1.744
1.641
Extraction Sums of Squared Loadings
Cumulative %
Total
63.965 7.676
70.247 .754
75.334
79.334
83.146
86.620
89.615
92.341
94.568
96.616
98.359
100.000
% of Variance
63.965
6.282
Cumulative %
Rotation Sums of Squared Loadings
Total
% of Variance
Cumulative %
63.965 4.651
70.247 3.778
38.762
31.485
38.762
70.247
23
Self-Development Factor Analysis (4 of 5)
24
Self-Development Factor Analysis (5 of 5)
Rotated Component Matrix
COMPONENT
1
2
Q56
Q57
Q58
Q59
Q60
Q61
Q67
Q63
Q64
Q65
Q66
Q62
Understanding my career prospects
Developing my se lf-confidence
Developing a sense of personal identity
Recognize my potential for success
Helping me cope with change
Helping me handle stress
Developing time management skills
Understanding people of diverse cultures, values,
and ideas
Working with groups of people
Developing leadership skills
Taking responsibility for my own behavior
Helping me develop a personal code of values and
e thics
.785
.779
.760
.753
.729
.683
.608
.373
.417
.393
.454
.376
.493
SelfDevelopment
Full Scale
α = .94
Understanding/
Management of
Self
α = .92
.818
.456
.469
.815
.687
.677
.557
.638
Developing
Personal
Values
α = .90
25
Influence of College
Attendance on
Self-Development
Effect of Ethnicity, Length of Attendance,
and Utilization of Student Services
26
MANCOVA for Effects of Ethnicity on
Self-Development
 Covariates
 Age:
p = .001 on Full Scale &
Understanding/Management of
Self Subscale
 Cumulative GPA, ns
 Significant
effects on:
 Self-Development Full Scale
 Understanding/Management of Self
Subscale
 Developing Personal Values Subscale
27
Self-Development Differences
by Ethnicity (1 of 2)

African American and Latino students
consistently expressed statistically significant
higher levels of development on the full scale and two
subscales compared to Asian and White students.
 Full Scale:
• Asians (AS) differed from African Americans*** (AA) & Latinos***
(LA);
• White (W) from AA*** & LA***.
 Understanding/Managing of Self:
• AS from AA* & from LA***;
• White (W) from AA**, & LA***.
 Developing Personal Values:
• AS & W differed from African Americans*** (AA) & Latinos*** (LA);
• White (W) from AA*** & LA***.
28
Self-Development Differences
by Ethnicity (2 of 2)
Semester s
Asian/Pacific Islander
Black/African American
Latino
White
Other
Self-Dev elopmen t
Full Scal e
Understanding/
Managing of Self
Developing
Person al Val ues
45.82
51.04
50.12
45.47
47.68
26.80
29.49
29.29
26.71
27.86
19.02
21.56
20.84
18.76
19.82
Note: Bonferroni Comparisons
* p < .05 ** p < .01 *** p < .001
Covariates appearing in the model
are evaluated at the following values:
AGE = 24.40; GPA = 2.8951.(ns)
29
MANCOVA for Effects of Length of
College Attendance on Self-Development

Covariates:
 Age:
• p = .001 on Full Scale &
Understanding/Management of Self
Subscale
 Cumulative GPA, ns

Significant effects on:
 Self-Development Full Scale
 Understanding/Management of Self
Subscale
 Developing Personal Values Subscale
30
Self-Development Differences
by Length of College Attendance
First year students expressed significantly
lower levels of self-development compared
to 3rd year and 4th+ year students;
 Findings consistent with theory (Vectors of
Development; Chickering & Reisser, 1993)

Semesters
1-2
5-6
3-4
6+
Self-Development
Full Scale
Understanding/
Managing of Self
Developing
Personal Values
45.97*, **
48.22
48.48*
49.33**
26.86*
28.14
28.45
28.80*
19.10*
20.03
20.03
20.53*
Note: Bonferroni Comparisons:
* p < .05, ** p < .01
Covariates appearing in the model are evaluated at
the following values: AGE = 24.40; GPA = 2.8951.(ns)
31
Vectors of Development (Chickering & Reisser, 1993)
 Developing
Competence;
 Managing Emotions;
 Moving Through Autonomy Toward
Interdependence;
 Developing Mature Interpersonal
Relationships;
 Establishing Identity;
 Developing Purpose;
 Developing Integrity.
32
MANCOVA for Effects of Utilization of
Counseling Services on Self-Development
 Covariates:
 Age:
• p = .05 on Full Scale &
• p = .01 on Understanding/Management of
Self Subscale
 Significant
effects on:
 Self-Development Full Scale
 Understanding/Management of Self
Subscale
 Developing Personal Values Subscale
33
MANCOVA for Effects of Utilization of
Counseling Services on Self-Development

As may be expected, the greater the number
of times a student used counseling services,
the greater their level of self-development.
Self-Development Understanding/
Developing
Full Scale
Managing of Self Personal Values
1. Not aware of ser vice
2. Aware of service but never used it
3. Used service once
4. Has use d service a few times
5. Has use d service a lot
45.14
46.50
46.79
48.38
49.78
Differences:
Full Scale: 1 & 4**; 1 & 5***; 2 & 4**; 2 & 5***; 3 & 5**
UMS Subscale: 1 & 4**; 1 & 5**; 2 & 4*; 2 & 5**; 3 & 5*
DPV Subscale: 1 & 4**; 1 & 5***; 2 & 4*; 2 & 5**; 3 & 5*
*p < .05; **p < .01; ***p < .001
26.47
27.20
27.27
28.30
28.95
18.67
19.30
19.51
20.08
20.84
Covariates appearing in the
model are evaluated at the
following values: AGE = 24.40.
34
Self-Development by Counselor
Task Performance

Construct validation for the self-development
scales is further enhanced by the statistically
significant correlations with a variety of “key” tasks
performed by counselors.
 Correlations are based on students’ level of agreement with each item.
Self-Development
Full Scale
Understanding/
Managing of Self
Developing
Personal Values
Pearson Correlation
N
Pearson Correlation
N
Pearson Correlation
N
Self-Development F ull Scale
Understanding/Managing of Self
Developing Personal V alues
1 .00
0.97
0.94
1 210
1 210
1 210
0.97
1 .00
0.82
1 210
1 239
1 210
0.94
0.82
1 .00
1 210
1 210
1 253
Keeping educational plan current
Setting realistic goals
Identifying career areas based on interest/skills
Identifying majors fitting current interests
Helping improve study skills and habits
Referrals to other services
Accuracy of information on course/degree reqs.
Counseling staff curteousness
Counselor availability: appointment
Counselor availability: walk-in
0.42
0.42
0.41
0.41
0.38
0.37
0.36
0.36
0.35
0.3
1051
1058
1058
1048
1025
1052
1088
1073
1086
1103
0.42
0.41
0.4
0.4
0.36
0.37
0.36
0.36
0.34
0.3
1075
1081
1082
1072
1047
1075
1112
1098
1111
1127
0.38
0.38
0.38
0.37
0.36
0.33
0.32
0.32
0.3
0.26
1080
1088
1089
1079
1053
1083
1121
1104
1121
1137
Note: correlations i n desc ending order by Full Scale
All correlations significant at p < .001
35
MANCOVA for Effects of Utilization of
Special Programs on Self-Development

Students participating in SMC’s select “special programs”
(e.g., African American Collegiate Center, Latino Center, Pico
Partnership) expressed significantly higher levels of selfdevelopment than non-participants.

Findings support the premise that the very nature of their function
and the added services they provide (social, cultural, affective)
further assist students.
Semesters
Self-Development
Full Scale
Understanding/
Managing of Self
Developing
Personal Values
Did Not Use Service
46.65
27.25
19.40
Used Service
51.27***
30.01***
21.26***
***p < .001
Covariates appearing in the model are
evaluated at the following values:
AGE = 24.01, GPA = 2.9126.
36
MANCOVA for Effects of Utilization of
Special Programs on Self-Development
EOPS participants differed to a significant
degree from non-EOPS participants
EOPS students required to meet with
counselor three times per semester.
Semesters
Self-Development
Full Scale
Did Not Use Service
47.00***
27.48**
19.52***
Used Few Times
48.67
28.68
19.99*
Used a Lot
51.25***
29.70**
21.55*, ***
*p < .05; **p < .01; ***p < .001
Understanding/
Managing of Self
Developing
Personal Values
Covariates appearing in the model
are evaluated at the following values:
AGE = 24.03, GPA = 2.9132.
37
MANCOVA for Effects of Financial Aid
on Self-Development
 Covariates:
 Age:
• p = .05 on Full Scale &
• p = .01 on Understanding/Management of
Self Subscale
 Significant
effects on:
 Self-Development Full Scale
 Understanding/Management of Self
Subscale
 Developing Personal Values Subscale
38
MANCOVA for Effects of Financial Aid
on Self-Development

Students using financial aid services—presumably
receiving financial aid—expressed significantly higher
degrees of self-development, compared to students not
receiving it (finding consisted with other studies).
Self-Development Understanding/
Developing
Full Scale
Managing of Self Personal Values
1. Not aware of service
2. Aware of service but never used it
3. Used service once
4. Has used service a few times
5. Has used service a lot
44.48
46.64
46.63
47.80
49.15
Differences:
Full Scale: 1 & 4*; 1 & 5***; 2 & 5**
UMS Subscale: 1 & 5**
DPV Subscale: 1 & 4*; 1 & 5***; 2 & 5***; 3 & 5*
*p < .05; **p < .01; ***p < .001
26.15
27.33
27.28
27.85
28.44
18.33
19.32
19.35
19.94
20.71
Covariates appearing in the
model are evaluated at the
following values: AGE = 24.01.
39
MANCOVA for Effects of Feeling Safe
on Campus on Self-Development
 Covariates:
 Age:
• p = .05 on Full Scale &
• p = .01 on Understanding/Management of
Self Subscale
 Significant
effects on:
 Self-Development Full Scale
 Understanding/Management of Self
Subscale
 Developing Personal Values Subscale
40
MANCOVA for Effects of Feeling Safe
on Campus on Self-Development

Students feeling safe on campus expressed
significantly higher scores on self-development. Safety
is a contributing factor to a supportive learning
environment.
Self-Development Understanding/
Developing
Full Scale
Managing of Self Personal Values
2. Disagree
3. Neutral
4. Somewhat agree
5. Strongly agree
41.10
43.39
45.14
49.68
Differences:
Full Scale: 2 & 4***; 2 & 5***; 3 & 4 *; 3 & 5***; 4 & 5***
UMS Subscale: 2 & 4***; 2 & 5***; 3 & 4 *; 3 & 5***; 4 & 5***
DPV Subscale: 2 & 4***; 2 & 5***; 3 & 5***; 4 & 5***
*p < .05; **p < .01; ***p < .001
23.93
25.30
26.40
29.03
17.17
18.10
18.74
20.64
Covariates appearing in the
model are evaluated at the
following values: AGE = 23.80.
41
Conclusions (1 of 3)
 College
attendance significantly and
positively impacts students’ selfdevelopment, particularly for:
 African Americans & Latinos;
 Those attending college for a longer
period of time;
 Students receiving counseling services,
including ethnic and SES-based programs
(e.g., Latino Center, EOPS);
 Students receiving financial aid assistance;
 Students feeling safe on campus.
42
Conclusions (2 of 3)

Students particularly credit college
attendance as positively impacting
their ability to:
 Understand people of diverse values and
cultures;
 Taking responsibility for their own
behavior;
 Helping shape a personal identity;
 Enhancing their self-development;
 Recognizing the potential for success.
43
Conclusions (3 of 3)
Assessment of student learning
outcomes should also emphasize
non-cognitive domains.
 There is a need for student services
to move beyond simply conducting
usage and satisfaction studies.
 Assessment should be ongoing and
embedded into student services’ ongoing
evaluations—not simply program reviews.
 Assessment should be used to improve
service delivery.

44
Select References
Astin, A. W. (1993). What Matters in College: Four Critical Years Revisited.
San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Chickering, A. W., & Reisser, L. (1993). Education and identity . San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Komives, S. R., Woodard, D. B., & Associates (2003) (4th ed.). Student
Services: A Handbook for the Profession. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Kuh, G., Schuh, J., Whitt, E., Andreas, R., Lyons, J., Strange, C., et al.
(1991). Involving colleges: Successful approaches to fostering student learning
and personal development outside the classroom. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Pascarella, E., & Terenzini, P. (1991). How college affects students: Findings
and insights from twenty years of research. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Tinto, V. (1993). Leaving college: Rethinking the causes and cures of student
attrition. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
45