Abstract
The purpose of this research was to investigate the motivational orientations of non‐traditional adult students to enroll in a degree‐seeking program based on their academic goal. The Education Participation Scale (EPS) was used to measure the motivational orientations of participants. Professional advancement, cognitive interest, and educational preparation were found to be the dominant motivational orientations of non‐traditional adult college students. There were significant differences in motivational orientations among associate, bachelor's, master's, and doctoral degree students. The findings from this study provide opportunities for instructors and administrators in higher education to use motivational orientations data in designing recruitment materials and activities for their program as well as in adopting curriculum and instruction strategies to increase students’ motivation toward learning.
Keywords
According to research conducted by the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES), the number of non‐traditional or adult re‐entry students is significantly increasing in colleges and universities across the United States (Snyder, 2009). Adult learners have become the new majority among college students in the U.S. (Kasworn, Sandman, & Sissel, ; Merriam, Caffarella, & Baumgartner, ). Part of such majority includes traditional age college students, ranging in ages 18‐ 24 and non‐traditional or adult re‐entry students ages 24 years or older (Horn, Neville, & Griffin, ).
In this study, the term “non‐traditional or adult re‐entry student” refers not only to a college student who is over 24 years of age, but also has had a minimum of three years separation from previous formal study, and has returned to seek an associate, a bachelor's, a master's, or a doctoral degree. In other words, non‐traditional adult students have usually discontinued their education for various reasons and decide later to return to college (Wirt, Choy, Gerald, Provasnik, Rooney, Watanabe, &Tobin, 2002). Similarly, Compton, Cox and Laanan ( ) found that non‐traditional adult students tend to be individuals in transition who may be dealing with life transition crises such as separation, divorce, unemployment or geographic relocation. Their return to college can represent a major change or challenge due to their status of full‐time or part‐time employees, single parents, family caregivers, or other significant obligations while maintaining full‐time or part‐time student status in a degree‐seeking program. The question is what would motivate an adult with multiple time constraint obligations to want to return to higher education?
Several studies have attempted to explain the dramatic increase of returning adult students in higher education as resulting from life transitions or employment related issues (Bye, Pushkar, & Conway, ; Compton, Cox, & Laanan, ). Ross‐Gordon ( ) indicated that occupational pressures, change in family situations, and personal challenges were among the major motivational factors of adults to return to school. Others suggested that adults participate in education to improve their job performance and satisfy societal roles ( Galbraith & James, 2002 ), or to make a career change (Aslanian, ). Eppler, Carsen‐Plentl and Harju ( ) argue that motivational orientations of individuals to participate in learning programs are critical factors for academic success. For example, Murphy and Roopchand ( ) found not only that many non‐traditional adult students have high level of self‐esteem, but also there was positive correlation between their self‐esteem and intrinsic motivation. Understanding the motivational orientations of adult students can help educators create successful learning environment (Miller, ). It can also help higher education administrators use targeted marketing approach for recruitment (Ghosh, Javalgi, & Whipple, ).
Research on motivation and participation tend to focus on one single category of students at a time (Aslanian, ; Flynn, ; Hatkevich, ; Reilly, ), without comparing groups of students. There is no clear consensus regarding the dominant motivational orientations of returning or non‐traditional adult college students. As Choy ( ) suggested, there is no universally accepted framework for motivation and participation. For example, no study has investigated whether there is any significant difference in motivational orientations depending on the academic goal (associate, bachelor, master, or doctoral degree) of students.
Adults constitute the fastest growing segment of all population groups in higher education (O'Donnell, ). The number of non‐traditional adult students (over age 24) increased from 2.4 million in 1970 to 6.9 million in 2006. The National Center for Education Statistics ( NCES ; O'Donnell, ) indicates that non‐traditional adult students have a significantly higher dropout rate (38.9%) comparing to their traditional counterparts (18.2%). Because of the increasing demand of non‐traditional adult students in higher education and their likelihood to dropout from their degree completion program, it is important that adult education providers understand the motivational orientations of such students in order to design curriculum and instruction that speak to their motivations. Most of the recent studies on motivation for participation in higher education mentioned in the preceding paragraphs used convenience samples. This limits the generalization of their findings regarding the association between the motivational orientations of non‐traditional adult students and their academic goals. This study involves a quantitative research design with probability cluster sampling (Ary, Jacobs, & Sorensen, ), and adds to existing literature on motivational orientations of returning adult students.
Background and Previous Studies
Motivation
The term motivation refers to behavioral or social factors that explain why an individual does something with or without reinforcement (Hergenhalm & Olson, ). Also, Huit ( ) defines motivation as “an internal state or condition that activates behavior and gives direction; a desire or want that energizes and directs goal‐oriented behavior; an influence of needs and desires on the intensity and direction of behavior” (p.1). Motivation can be extrinsic if influenced by external factors such as availability of financial aid, support from spouse or friend, and prerequisite to obtain employment (Johnson, Schwartz, & Bower, ; Davey, ). On the other hand, motivation can be intrinsic when influenced by internal factors or inherent satisfaction such as an individual drive for personal academic achievement (Bye, Pushkar, & Conway, ; Morris, Brook, & May, ). There is no radical separation between extrinsic and intrinsic motivation. In other words, extrinsic and intrinsic factors are interrelated. Motivation can involve a combination of extrinsic and intrinsic factors (Ryan & Deci, ). Thompson and Thorton ( ) argued that a student's motivation can transit from extrinsic to intrinsic motivation. Given the interconnection between extrinsic and intrinsic motivation, the decision for a non‐traditional adult student to enroll in a postsecondary education program cannot be understood simply in terms of a dichotomy extrinsic‐intrinsic motivation. This may lead to a simple classification of leaners as evidenced by Houles’ ( ) typology. A more complex approach that accounts for various extrinsic and intrinsic factors as suggested by Boshier ( ) may better help understand the motivational orientations of non‐traditional adult students to enroll in a degree‐seeking program.
Motivational orientations
The theoretical framework for this study is based upon the Boshier ( ) education participation model, which was inspired by Houle ( )’s motivational orientation typology (Knowles, Holton, & Swanson, ). The study examined the relationships between the motivational factors as defined by the Education Participation Scale (EPS) and the academic goal (Associate, Bachelor, Master's, and Doctoral degree) of non‐traditional adult participants. The concept “motivational orientations” refers to the reasons that motivate an individual to attend a degree completion program (Erikson, ; Gars & Reid, ; & Plimmer & Schmidt, ). According to Garrison ( ), motivational levels impact the value that students place in learning and effort to achieve learning goals. Motivational orientations are very important to academic success (Compton, Cox, & Laanan, ). Justice and Dornan ( ) found that non‐traditional age college students have motivation and learning processes that are different from traditional‐age college students. Eppler, Carsen‐Plentl and Harju ( ) assert that students may lack motivation when the learning project is perceived as irrelevant to their lives. A survey on a UK sample of non‐traditional students conducted by Woodley and Wilson ( ) revealed that many of them felt frustrated by the inability to directly apply their knowledge in the labor market. Oblinger ( ) found that today adult learners have high customer service expectations, which might be a motivational factor to their retention and persistence in learning. The aforementioned studies clearly argue that perceived irrelevance of the learning project or program may contribute to a lack of student motivation. Therefore, an understanding of what influences students decision to participate in learning can help design better learning experiences that foster student's persistence in learning (Price & Patton, ).
Adults are motivated to learn by a variety of factors. Houle ( ) provided the first conceptual framework related to individual's orientations toward learning (Knowles, Holton, & Swanson, ). He explained that adults who participate in education programs are goal oriented, activity oriented, and learning oriented. The goal oriented learner participates in an education program as a means to accomplish a goal. The activity oriented learner motivation resides in the process of learning as an activity that can help escape from boredom, develop social relationships, or contribute to intellectual stimulation. The learning oriented learner participates in an education program for the sake of learning. Sheffield ( ) developed an expanded version of Houle's ( ) typology and identified five motives for adult participation in education: personal goals, societal goals, desire for sociability, need fulfillment, and learning. Each of the Sheffield motives could be included in one of the three factors suggested by Houle ( ): Goal oriented (personal goals, societal goals), activity oriented (desire for sociability, need fulfillment), and learning oriented (learning). Also, Burgess ( ) identified seven motives for adult participation in education: desire to know, desire to reach a personal goal, desire to reach a social goal, desire to reach a religious goal, desire to escape, desire to take part in an activity, and desire to comply with further requirements. The seven reasons suggested by Burgess ( ) could fit well in one of the three Houle's ( ) categories: goal oriented (desire to reach a personal goal, desire to reach a social goal, desire to reach a religious goal), activity oriented (desire to escape, desire to take part in an activity, and desire to comply with further requirements), and learning oriented (desire to know).
Boshier ( ) developed the Education Participation Scale (EPS) to determine motivational orientations of students in adult education programs, using Houle ( ) classification. The standard EPS included six factors: Social contact, social stimulation, professional advancement, community service, external expectations, and cognitive interest (Boshier, , ). Boshier (1972) argued that adult learners are either growth motivated (independent, creative, open to new experiences, inner directed) or deficiency motivated (influenced by social and environmental factors).
Later, Boshier ( ) modified his typology to include seven factors: Communication improvement, social contact/social relationships, educational preparation, professional advancement, family togetherness, social stimulation, and cognitive interest. According to Boshier ( ), Communication improvementsuggests a desire by the adult learner to improve verbal and written communication skills as well as other aspects of communication, Social contactrefers to a desire to meeting people and/or making new friends, Educational preparationinvolves remediation of past educational deficiencies and/or preparing for higher or more specialized education in the future, Professional advancementis related to improving status in an existing job or moving to a better one, Family togethernessimplies a desire to learn in order to bringing generation gaps and/or improving relationships in families, Social stimulationrefers to escaping unhappiness, loneliness, and/or boredom, Cognitive interestindicates a desire for seeking knowledge for its own sake and/or satisfying and expanding an inquiring mind.
Several studies have investigated the motivational orientations of non‐traditional adult students in the light of cluster of adult learners (Houle, ; Boshier, , ). Williams ( ) examined motivational orientations of re‐entry adult male graduate students to participate in higher education. Williams ( ) study revealed that professional advancement and cognitive interest were the primary motivators for students to enroll in a degree‐seeking program. However, the study did not address neither female graduate students nor undergraduate male and female students. On the other hand, Reilley ( ) explored the factors that motivate female registered nurse baccalaureate students to enroll in their degree‐seeking program. According to Reilley ( ), personal satisfaction was the primary motivating factor for participants to return to school. Although, Reilley ( ) study complements the limitations noticed in William ( ) research, Reilley ( ) used a convenience and homogeneous sample that makes the findings very difficult to be understood beyond the profile of the homogenous participants.
Furthermore, Flynn ( ) conducted a study on motivational orientations of graduate (Master's degree) students to enroll in a degree‐seeking program. The study revealed that participants were primarily motivated by professional advancement or career change, personal desire to learn and become more competent. Flynn ( ) found that older students had higher professional advancement motivation than younger students; females had higher professional advancement and cognitive interest motivation than males. The study sample included only Master's degree students and did not take into account the motivational orientations of doctoral students. Also, the interpretations of the findings could not apply to undergraduate students, which were not part of the scope of the study. The limitations of Flynn ( ) study were partly addressed by Hatkevich ( ) who investigated motivational orientations of different generations (traditionalist, baby boomer, generation X, and generation Y) of students enrolled in a community college. The study revealed that social contact and social stimulation were the primary motivations of generation X students to enroll in a community college program and there were significant differences among the different generations. However, there were no significant differences among different generations for the motivational factors of communication, professional advancement, family togetherness, and cognitive interest. This study was drawn from a convenience sample and included both traditional (ages 17 ‐24) and non‐traditional (ages over 24) students. The findings did not provide a generalizable understanding of motivational orientations of returning adult students in community colleges.
Despite the limitations underlined in Reilley ( ), Flynn ( ), and Hatkevich ( ) studies, some trends emerged, indicating that non‐traditional adult students are particularly motivated by professional advancement and cognitive interest (Flynn, ; Williams, ). However, none of the studies have addressed the motivational orientations of non‐traditional adult students across academic goals (Associate, bachelor's, master's, and doctoral degrees), thus suggesting a need for further research. Dymock ( ) argued that motivation to participate in adult education is based on the learner's experience and readiness to learn. Pont ( ) found that there is a strong correlation between initial education of adults and their motivation to participate in further learning. Therefore, the context of education goal of non‐traditional adult students may have implications for experience and readiness. For example, non‐traditional adult students who are pursuing graduate degrees may have different sets of experience and level of readiness for learning compared to those seeking to earn undergraduate degrees. The interactions between degree goal and motivational orientations can help understand the context of possible differences in motivational orientations of non‐traditional adult students based on whether they are seeking an associate, a bachelor, master, or doctoral degree. Therefore, additional empirical studies can contribute to a better understanding of motivational orientations for participation of non‐traditional adult students. This study adds to existing literature on the motives that influence participation of non‐traditional adult students to enroll in a degree‐seeking program based on their academic goal.
Purpose of the Study and Research Questions
The purpose of this research was to investigate the motivational orientations of non‐traditional adult students to enroll in a degree‐seeking program based on their academic goal. The research questions that this study addressed were: What are the dominant motivational orientations of non‐traditional adult students to enroll in a degree‐seeking program? Are there significant differences among participants’ motivational orientations to pursue an associate degree, a bachelor's degree, a master's degree, or a doctoral degree?
Methods
Research Design
A quantitative survey method based on cluster sampling was used to assess the motivational orientations for participation of non‐traditional adult students in postsecondary education (Ary, Jacobs, & Sorensen, ). The choice of a quantitative method was based on the fact that most of the existing studies on motivational orientations of non‐traditional adult students used a convenience sampling, which significantly limits the generalization of their findings. The probability cluster sampling in this study enabled to use inferential statistics (Ary, Jacobs, & Sorensen, ). The inferential statistics helped estimate the extent to which the findings are likely to differ from what would have been found by studying the whole population (Ary, Jacobs, & Sorensen, ). Self‐report measures were obtained from the Education Participation Scale (Boshier, ) and a demographic questionnaire.
The Education Participation Scale (EPS)
Boshier ( ) developed a psychometric instrument to measure adult learning orientations. The first Boshier ( )’s Education Participation Scale (EPS) included six categories: Social contact, social stimulation, professional advancement, community service, external expectations, and cognitive interest (Boshier, , ). Then, Boshier ( ) updated the Education Participation Scale – Alternative form (EPS‐A Form), which encompasses seven factors: Communication improvement, social contact/social relationships, educational preparation, professional advancement, family togetherness, social stimulation, and cognitive interest. Boshier ( ) suggests to retire the old version with six factors to use the alternative form with seven clusters. The EPS – A form version used in this study includes 42 items on a four point ‐ scale labeled: 1 = no influence, 2 = little influence, 3 = moderate influence, and 4 = much influence. Data reduction and analysis were conducted according to the following seven categories (Boshier, ), previously outlined in the background section: Communication improvement: Desire by the adult learner to improve verbal and written communication skills as well as other aspects of communication, Social contact: Desire to meeting people and/or making new friends, Educational preparation: Remediation of past educational deficiencies and/or preparing for higher or more specialized education in the future, Professional advancement: Improving status in an existing job or moving to a better one, Family togetherness: Bringing generation gaps and/or improving relationships in families, Social stimulation: Escaping unhappiness, loneliness, and/or boredom, Cognitive interest: Seeking knowledge for its own sake and/or satisfying and expanding an inquiring mind.
The validity and reliability of the EPS are well established by existing literature. The validity of the EPS has been documented by various studies conducted by Boshier ( ), Fujita‐Starck ( ), Garst and Ried (1996), as well as Isaac, Guy, and Valentine ( ). In terms of the reliability of the EPS, Boshier ( ) reported coefficient alphas ranging from .76 to .91. Fujita‐Starck ( ) found overall reliability of .92 for the EPS. Garst and Reid ( ) reported coefficients alphas that ranged from .60 to .74 while the coefficients alphas for Norton ( ) varied from .81 to .85.
Population and Sample
According to the National Center for Education Statistics (Snyder & Dillow, 2009), there are 6.9 million non‐traditional adults (over age 24) in the United States. Total enrollment for degree‐granting institutions in 2006 (the most recent year available at the time) was 17.7 million students, including 4.7 million doctoral students (26%), 4.0 million master's degree students (23%), 2.4 bachelor's degree students (14%), and 6.5 million associate degree students (37%), as illustrated in table .
The population of this study involved the metropolitan Tampa ‐ Bay area (Tampa‐Ste. Petersburg – Clear Water) of Florida, which includes a total enrollment of 161,000 students in degree‐granting institutions. The metropolitan Tampa Bay area has 29 four –year colleges (and/or universities) and 9 community college campuses, including three institutions with enrollment of over 20, 000 students.
A sample size of 120 participants was first retained, using an effect size of .25 and a power of. 80 (Cohen, ). According to Kalton ( ), the design effect in cluster sampling is 1.3, which means that the standard error for the sample is 30% higher than that of derived from a random sampling. Consequently, the sample size was increased by 1.3, to 156 participants. Anticipating a rate of return of 40%, based on existing rate of return reported in previous studies (Archer, ), a total of 390 students received the survey. Based on percentage of enrollment in U.S. degree‐granting institutions, 144 associate degree students (37%), 55 bachelor's degree students (14%), 90 master's degree students (23%), and 101 doctoral degree students (26%) received the survey. A total of 162 students returned the questionnaires. This represents a 41.53% rate of return, which is higher than the average 40% rate reported in other studies (Arcer, ).
Collection of the Data
The Institutional Review Board (IRB) approved the research project and the method. Participants were selected through a multistage sampling. First, there was a systematic selection of 2 doctoral granting universities; 2 four‐year colleges that award master's degree, but do not confer doctoral degrees; 2 four‐year colleges that do not award master's degree; and 2 community colleges. The researcher verified the existence of programs that target non‐ traditional adult students from each school website. The eligibility of each participant was assessed through a demographic questionnaire, asking about their age group, and the number of years they have been out of a formal education program at the time of starting their current degree‐seeking program. At each institution, two classes were randomly selected from a class schedule of courses’ offerings, in collaboration with either an assistant dean or an assistant director for academic services. Then, contacts were established with each course instructor to administer the survey. Participants were randomly selected from the class roster. The instructors distributed the questionnaires to their students and collected the completed questionnaires sealed in an envelope provided. The researcher collected the completed questionnaires from the instructors.
Data Analysis
The data were processed and analyzed through the computer‐based SAS software. Data were analyzed to ensure of normal distribution of scores and homogeneity of variance across groups. Descriptive statistics such as means, standard deviations, skewness, and kurtosis were calculated for each subscale. Each distribution was examined for outliers and missing data. Cronbach's alpha and correlations of each subscale were conducted. An alpha coefficient of 0 .832 and a standardized alpha of 0.838 were obtained for the Education Participation Scale. Descriptive statistics were calculated to answer research question 1 “What are the dominant motivational orientations of non‐traditional adult students to enroll in a degree‐seeking program based on their academic goal?” A Multivariate Analysis of Variance (MANOVA) including mean differences, standardized mean differences, and effect size (e.g. Mahalanobis Distance) was conducted to answer research question 2 “Are there significant differences among participants’ motivational orientations to pursue an associate degree, a bachelor's degree, a master's degree, or a doctoral degree?”
Results and Discussions
Characteristics of the Participants
The participants of the study were 58% females and 42% males, including 35% associate degree students, 19% bachelor's degree students, 24% master's degree students, and 22% doctoral degree students. There was no significant difference between the characteristics of the sample by academic goal and the percentage of enrollment by academic goal in U.S. degree granting institutions. Participants were seeking their degree in Business (22%), Education (29%), Finance (11%), Human Services (15%), and Nursing (23%). Also, 31% of the participants were between ages 25‐34, 34% between ages 35‐44, 25% between ages 45‐54, and 10% over 55 years of age. With respect to marital status, 12% of them were single, 31% were married/partnered, 23% were separated, 26% were divorced, and 8% were widowed. The majority of the respondents worked between 20 – 39 hours (38.3%) and over 40 hours (36.7%). And, at last, but not the least, 70% were full‐time students, and 30% were part‐time students (see table ).
MANOVA Assumptions
According to Stevens ( ), the assumptions for MANOVA include the independence of observations, the multivariate normal distribution in each group, and the homogeneity of group population variance‐covariance matrices. The assumption of independence was not violated in this study. Participants were randomly selected from their class roster. Individual entries were made for each participant. Multivariate normality distribution was assessed using multivariate skewness and kurtosis. The multivariate normality distribution was statistically significant, b1p = 18.23, χ2(84, N = 162) = 432.24, p = 0. The multivariate kurtosis was not statistically significant, b2 p = 73.90, Z upper = 7.13 and Z lower = 5.08. The homogeneity of group population indicates no violation of variance and covariance matrices, χ2(84, N = 120) = 1178.02, p < .0001. The screening for multivariate outliers produced a maximum Mahalanobis distance of 32.33, F (7, 154) = 5.57, p = .000. The furthest multivariate outlier is the 70thobservation from the data set. The analysis was re‐run without the outliers, and indicated no significant difference.
Motivational Orientations of Participants
The first research question addressed by this study was: What are the dominant motivational orientations of non‐traditional adult students to enroll in a degree‐seeking program? A descriptive statistical analysis of the data from the Education Participation Scale (Boshier, ) indicated that the professional advancement category received the highest mean scores (2.92, S.D. =.74). The second highest mean scores were observed for the cognitive interest category (2.89, S.D. = .68). The third highest mean scores were observed for the educational preparation category (2.67, S.D. = .64). Communication improvement (2.15, S.D. = .63), social contact (1.96, S.D. = .63), family togetherness (1.78, S.D. = .64), and social stimulation (1.59, S.D. = .68) had lower mean scores (see table ).
Motivational Orientations and Academic Goal
The second research question asked whether there are significant differences among participants’ motivational orientations to pursue an associate degree, a bachelor's degree, a master's degree, or a doctoral degree. A MANOVA was conducted to determine if there are differences among the four groups of participants (Associate degree, bachelor, master's, and doctoral). Results from the MANOVA show a statistically significant difference between the centroids, Wilks’ Λ = .73, F (21, 437) = 2.35, p < .005. About 27% of the variance in the 7‐variable system could be attributed to their membership in different groups.
Some researchers question the use of ANOVAs as follow‐up tests to significant MANOVA, arguing that univariate ANOVAs do not take into account the multivariate nature of MANOVA (Vickers, ). Consequently, Discriminant Function Analysis was used as an alternative to conduct follow‐up analyses with respect to the determination of group membership. Three linear composites derived from the discriminant function analysis. Two of the dimensions were statistically significant. Dimension one had a canonical correlation of 0.79, p < .0001, between the academic goal of the participants and the motivational orientation variables. Dimension two had a canonical correlation of 0.43, p < .0001. Dimension three was not statistically significant, and is not included in the table.
The total – sample standardized canonical coefficients was examined. The standardized canonical coefficients for both dimensions are presented in table . The first dimension was positively weighted by communication improvement (.66), educational advancement (.38), and family togetherness (.02), while negatively weighted by cognitive interest (‐ 1.10), social stimulation (‐ .21), professional advancement (‐ .20), and social contact (‐ . 17). The doctoral degree and master's degree‐seeking participants were high on the first discriminant function. The associate degree and bachelor's degree‐seeking participants were low on the first discriminant function. Dimension two was positively weighted by communication improvement 1.12), cognitive interest (.35), social contact (.18), and social stimulation (.02) and negatively weighted by educational preparation (‐.99), family togetherness (‐.18), and professional advancement (‐.08). The master's degree and the associate degree‐seeking participants were high on the second discriminant function. The bachelor's degree and the doctoral degree‐seeking participants were low on the second discriminant function. After controlling for group membership, there was no change in the signs of the correlations. Also, there was no significant change in the magnitudes of the correlations.
There were significant differences in the mean scores for participants that are motivated to enroll in a degree‐seeking program for communication improvement, cognitive interest, or their educational preparation. Participants motivated to enroll in a degree‐seeking program for communication improvement differed significantly based on their academic goal, F (3, 158) = 29.80, MSE = .67, p = .0001. As indicated in table , associate degree‐seeking participants had the highest mean scores on communication improvement (M = 2.63, SD = 0.69). The bachelor's degree‐seeking participants had the next highest mean scores (M = 2.59, SD = 0.60). The master's degree‐seeking participants had the lowest mean scores (M = 1.56, SD = 0.63). The doctoral degree‐seeking participants had the next lowest mean scores (M = 1.67, SD = 0.72).
In addition, participants who were motivated to enroll in a degree‐seeking program for educational preparation differed significantly based on their academic goal, F (3, 158) = 12.90, MSE = .71, p = .0001. The associate degree‐seeking participants had the highest mean scores on educational preparation (M = 2.83, SD = 0.68). The doctoral degree‐seeking participants had the next highest mean scores (M = 2.53, SD = 0.78). The bachelor's degree‐seeking participants had the lowest mean scores (M = 2.31, SD = 0.72). The next lowest mean scores were observed for the master's degree‐seeking participants (M = 2.35, SD = 0.67).
Furthermore, there were significant differences based on the academic goal in participants enrolled in a degree‐seeking program to satisfy their cognitive interest, F (3, 158) = 56.53, MSE = .61 , p = .0001. The highest mean scores were observed in participants enrolled in a doctoral degree‐seeking program (M = 3.39, SD = 0.66). Participants seeking a master's degree had the next highest mean scores (M = 3.22, SD = 0.53). The lowest mean scores were observed for participants seeking an associate degree (M = 2.77, SD = 0.57). Participants seeking a bachelor's degree had the next lowest mean scores (M = 3.00, SD = 0.67).
Conclusion and Implications
This study suggests that professional advancement, cognitive interest, and educational preparation are the three main reasons for which nontraditional adult students attend higher education degree programs in Business, Education, Finance, Human Services, and Nursing. These findings are not in total contradiction with previous studies, which reported cognitive interest as a strong motivator for adult participation in education (Boshier, ; Knowles, Holton, & Swanson, ). These findings have implications for theory and practice.
Implications for theory
The study also reveals that non‐traditional doctoral and master's degree‐seeking students are primarily motivated by cognitive interest. Non‐traditional associate and bachelor's degree‐seeking students are particularly motivated by communication improvement. This finding contradicts previous studies suggesting that students with prior educational level score higher in professional advancement and external expectations (Cross, ). Adult student prior education as a predominant factor has already been challenged by Cervero and Kirkpatrick ( ) who indicated that such factor is relevant only when combined with other variables such as student attitude toward learning and success in prior program. The differences in motivational orientations of non‐traditional students in relation to their academic goals represent a confirmation of the usefulness of the market segmentation strategies in recruitment effort of most postsecondary institutions (Fernando, Albena, & Josep, ). Students’ motivation to participate in higher education vary based on their academic goals. Therefore, the strategies to reach prospective students must reflect the diversified motivational orientations of non‐traditional adult students to enroll in a degree‐seeking program (Felix, ; Ghosh, Javalgi, & Whipple, ).
The strength of cognitive interest as predominant motivational factor for participation in higher education is an indicative of the predominance of the concept of lifelong learning in the lived experience of the non‐traditional adult student. Pires ( ) pointed out that “there is a lack of studies and research on adult reasons and expectations regarding learning, education and training, especially from a lifelong and life wide perspective (p.131)”. The findings in this study contribute to fill that void by stressing the dominant motivational orientations of non‐traditional adult students to participate in higher education from a lifelong perspective. In addition, motivational orientations of non‐traditional adult students to participate in education programs seem to be multidimensional, in the sense that they see learning as a way to acquire new knowledge, help them with their professional advancement, contribute to their community, and satisfy at the same time some external expectations. In fact, as Knowles, Swanson, and Holton ( ) indicated, the readiness of adult to learn is closely related to their social roles. Adults are willing to engage in learning programs that can help them cope effectively with real life situations. Adults want to learn what they can immediately apply in their present lives or what is related to their current situation. In other words, they tend to be life‐centered in their orientation for learning. They want to learn what can help them perform tasks or deal with problems related to their daily social roles. Furthermore, curriculum and instruction in master's and doctoral degree programs can allow greater opportunities for self‐directed learning activities (e.g. independent studies, and metacognition exercises) related to students’ cognitive interests.
Implications for practice
This study has added to the proposition that instructors and administrators in higher education should be cognizant of motivators that drive returning adult students to college to the extent that one can capitalize upon such motivation for participation to influence the motivation to learn and to persist until the degree sought is earned. Thompson and Thorton ( ) explained that a student might be extrinsically motivated to enroll in a degree‐seeking program, and become intrinsically motivated while attending such education program. Therefore, motivation to enroll can convert into motivation to learn.
Understanding the motivations for participation of non‐traditional adult students is a critical challenge for administrators of adult education programs. Previous frameworks have provided guidance to assess the reasons that motivate adults to attend a degree completion programs. The Education Participation Scale (Boshier, ), which was extensively explained in the background section, is an example of such framework of knowledge and method. Understanding returning adult student motivation to participate can help instructors and administrators in higher education develop strategies to attract and retain students. For example, during one‐on‐one or group recruitment, admission officers can assess the motivational orientations of students to enroll in a program by administering the EPS or a similar scale. Based on motivation factors obtained from the scale, prospective students can be referred to advisors who can highlight aspects of the programs that will satisfy, for example, one's cognitive interest or needs for communication improvement for greater employability skills. Several studies found that business school faculty, business practitioners, and employers rank oral and written communication skills among the top five skills desired in business school students and potential employees (Kryder, ; Quah & Lim, ; & Quek, ). Program administrators can collaborate with instructors to design research‐informed curricula that can help non‐traditional associate and bachelor's degree‐seeking students acquire communication skills desired by employers. Postsecondary institutions can market how they will help prospective non‐traditional master's and doctoral degree‐seeking students satisfy their cognitive interest.
Furthermore, admission officers can organize focus groups or group interviews with non‐traditional adult students in their institution to explore whether and how their motivation to participate in a postsecondary education influenced their enrollment decision. Information obtained from such focus groups or group interviews will help determine the effectiveness of particular strategies in recruiting non‐traditional adult students in relation to their motivational orientations. Higher education program administrators can use motivational orientations’ assessment tools not only to improve their recruitment approach, but also to facilitate the academic integration of non‐traditional adult students.
Limitations
The sample for this study was selected from non‐traditional adult students attending degree completion (associate, bachelor, master, and doctoral degrees) programs in community colleges, colleges, and universities in the South East region of the United States. Also, students were from only five major areas, Business, Education, Finance, Human Services, and Nursing. Therefore, the findings may not necessarily be generalizable to other regions, countries, or majors of study. Finally, the study examined motivational orientations to participate in higher education programs of non‐traditional adult students at one point in time. Therefore, the conclusion that one may reach about this study should be appreciated in the context of the demographic, regional, and academic characteristics of the participants.