# data[].attributes.headline
mental health in collegiate athletes citation 

# data[].attributes.subject
mental health in collegiate athletes citation 

# data[].attributes.body
Kilcullen, J.Ryan, et al. “Collegiate Athlete Mental Health: Comparing Treatment-Seeking Student-Athletes and Nonathletes on Service Utilization, Clinical Presentation, and Outcomes.” Sport, Exercise, and Performance Psychology, Nov. 2021. EBSCOhost, doi:10.1037/spy0000280.

# data[].attributes.headline
Connecting the youth to MLB- Carter Kelsey

# data[].attributes.subject
Connecting the youth to MLB- Carter Kelsey

# data[].attributes.body
How MLB can popularize and promote baseball in an engaging way to the young audience

# data[].attributes.body
Importance of mental health on collegiate athletes OR pollution in LBI (jersey shore)

# data[].attributes.body
something about women in sports or the lack of resources for mental health awareness in the NHL

# data[].attributes.body
Protecting endangered species in Hawai'i

# data[].attributes.headline
Student debt and its relation to student mental health

# data[].attributes.subject
Student debt and its relation to student mental health

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/0309877032000161814

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0167487096800146

https://www.researchgate.net/profile/David-Lester-3/publication/343262554_Suicide_Studies_2020_11/links/5f202111a6fdcc9626ba029b/Suicide-Studies-2020-11.pdf#page=49

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
The present paper provides an analysis of the relationship between attitudes toward debt and mental health among university undergraduates. Data were collected from the same cohort of students across their three years of university, with responses from 2146, 1360 and 1391 first, second and third year students, respectively. Mental health was measured using the General Population version of the Clinical Outcomes in Routine Evaluation (GP-CORE). Attitudes toward debt were measured using items that tapped current financial concerns and worry about debt on leaving university. Results showed that students become more concerned about their finances as they progress through university, that there was no relationship between anticipated debt and mental health and that attitudes toward debt were related to mental health levels. Students who were identified as having high financial concerns possessed significantly worse CORE-GP scores than students with low financial concern in all three years of university. In all three years students with high financial concerns felt more 'tense, anxious or nervous', more 'criticised by other people' and found it more 'difficult getting to sleep or staying asleep' than students with low financial concerns. There was also evidence that students with high worry about their debt anticipated leaving university with higher amounts of debt than low debt worry students. These findings are discussed in relation to the pattern of increased student debt in UK higher education.

Notes

It is worth noting that analyses were run using ANOVA to check the findings. Post-hoc analyses using Tukey's HSD reinforce the results from the effect size analyses. These data are available from the first author.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Student debt and its relation to student mental health

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The present paper provides an analysis of the relationship between attitudes toward debt and mental health among university undergraduates. Data were collected from the same cohort of students across their three years of university, with responses from 2146, 1360 and 1391 first, second and third year students, respectively.

# data[].attributes.body
Something about animals in shelters

# data[].attributes.body
The rise in water levels by the Jersey Shore, specifically Seaside Heights.

# data[].attributes.headline
How to help limit the pollution in our atmosphere

# data[].attributes.subject
How to help limit the pollution in our atmosphere

# data[].attributes.body
American education system

# data[].attributes.headline
The importance of mental health for college students

# data[].attributes.subject
The importance of mental health for college students

# data[].attributes.headline
Living on campus freshman yr/ Pollution in NYC

# data[].attributes.subject
Living on campus freshman yr/ Pollution in NYC

# data[].attributes.body
College Athletes' mental health

# data[].attributes.headline
Affects of Covid-19 on the Mental Health of Healthcare workers, children, and adults.

# data[].attributes.subject
Affects of Covid-19 on the Mental Health of Healthcare workers, children, and adults.

# data[].attributes.headline
Olivia D'Amato-How to accommodate commuter students in college.

# data[].attributes.subject
Olivia D'Amato-How to accommodate commuter students in college.

# data[].attributes.body
https://link.gale.com/apps/doc/A337070501/AONE?u=setonhallu&sid=bookmark-AONE&xid=5884f4f9

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Document controls

Main content

The purpose of this study was to investigate the relationship between work, levels of involvement and academic performance between residential and commuter students. One hundred and eight undergraduate students at a private college in the Northeast were surveyed. Surveys aimed at examining work and levels of involvement were administered to the participants. The results indicated no significant relationship between number of hours worked and GPA (r = .03, p > .05). There was an overall lack of involvement in school-sponsored activities, sports, and clubs among residential and commuter students. While residential and commuter students claimed they did feel like a part of the college community, they also reported a desire to participate more in school-sponsored activities. Implications of the results are discussed.

Numerous studies have examined differences between students who live on campus and those that commute to college, with some studies suggesting that students who live on campus tend to have advantages over those who commute to campus (Peterson, 1975). Some of these differences include involvement in student activities on campus and greater levels of stress as a result of working and commuting. Peterson (1975) suggests that "residence hall dwellers are better off financially, educationally, and in other ways to begin with. Then, largely because of their greater involvement in various educational and developmental activities, they make significantly greater gains, particularly in nonacademic personal development" (p. 2). "Understanding group differences between the commuters and noncommuters is critical, as the commuter population nationwide continues to increase and universities are forced to compete for the patronage of these commuter students" (Newbold, Mehta, & Forbus, 2011, p. 142). This study investigates differences in working while in college, levels of involvement, and academic performance between students who live on campus and students who commute to campus.

Working in College and Academic Performance

Many studies have been conducted examining the relationship between working in college and academic performance. Research indicates that "70 to 80 percent of students work while they are enrolled" (ACE Center for Policy Analysis, 2006; p. 1). Perna (2010) indicates that the trends in employment for full-time employed college students between the ages 16-24 increased from approximately 34% in 1970 to 49% in 2005, while the trend for part-time employed college students ages 16-24 has indicated a marginal increase of 3% from 1970 to 2005. However, research examining differences between residential and commuter students and working in college is scant.

Newbold, Mehta, and Forbus (2011) examined demographic differences between 108 commuter students and 345 residential students at a mid-sized Southwestern state university in order to determine student attitudes, opinions, and reasons for being in a university, their level of involvement and participation in various studies, attitudes toward work, social life and relationships, time management strategies, attitudes toward stress and how they cope with it. The results indicated that 51% of commuter students reported working over 21 hours a week, while only 37% of residential students reported the same. Commuters were significantly less active in on-campus activities, and that "there were no significant differences between commuters and non-commuters when it came to whether or not they were working. Roughly, 80%-85% of noncommuters and commuters, respectively, report working while going to school" (p. 148).

The Office of Institutional Research and Assessment at Bridgewater State College (2009) using the 2008 National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE) conducted a survey with 190 commuter students and 190 residential students at a public, mid-sized, liberal arts college in Bridgewater, Massachusetts. The results of this study indicated that commuter students work significantly more hours off-campus than did resident students (24% of commuter students working 31+ hours as opposed to only 1% of resident students) and that resident students were significantly more likely to participate in school activities like sports, clubs, or other extracurricular activities in comparison to commuter students.

In related research, Wentz and Yu (2010) examined the impact of work on academic achievement to determine whether or not it was detrimental to students' grades to hold a job with 6,992 undergraduate college students. The results indicated that students who worked studied more (in terms of hours) and had a higher GPA than students who did not work.

Bradley (2006) conducted a study to examine academic performance of 246 undergraduate college students (107 males, 139 females) at a large public university in Queensland, Australia. The study examined the amount of hours students worked, whether they worked during the week or on weekends, the time of day the students worked, and what type of job they had. The results of the study indicated that "approximately 85% of the sample of students from a single Australian university worked during semester" and that "the students who did not work were indistinguishable from their peers who worked." (pp. 496-497).

While the research on working in college and academic performance is mixed, Astin (1999) states that "retention suffers, however, if the student works off campus at a full-time job. Because the student is spending considerable time and energy on nonacademic activities that are usually unrelated to student life, full-time work off campus decreases the time and energy that the student can devote to studies and other campus activities" (pp. 523-524).

Levels of Student Involvement

According to Astin (1999), student involvement refers to

"the amount of physical and psychological energy that the student devotes to the academic experience. Thus, a highly involved student is one who, for example, devotes considerable energy to studying, spends much time on campus, participates actively in student organizations, and interacts frequently with faculty members and other students. Conversely, a typical uninvolved student neglects studies, spends little time on campus, abstains from extracurricular activities, and has infrequent contact with faculty members or other students." (p. 518).

Elkins, Forrester, and Noel-Elkins (2011) examined the degree to which involvement in campus recreational sports programs is associated with students' perceived sense of campus community with 330 undergraduate students (males = 98, females = 232; 42% lived on campus, 48% lived off campus) at a mid-sized postsecondary institution in the Midwest. They used an online questionnaire to collect data, asking questions about participation in organized sports, intramural sports, clubs, and other extracurricular activities. Their results suggested that participation in campus recreational sports significantly predicted a sense of community. Students who participated in sports perceived a greater sense of campus community based on the residential experience factor when compared with students who did not participate. Additionally, "students who participated in campus recreational sports occasionally, often, or very often perceived a greater sense of campus community based on the residential experience factor when compared with those students who did not participate." (p. 32).

In other research, Kuh, Gonyea and Palmer (2001) examined whether commuter students were less engaged than students who lived on campus of an institution. Their sample consisted of 105,000 first year and senior students at 470 different four-year colleges and universities in the United States using student responses from the National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE) survey in 2000 and 2001. The results indicated that "residential students were more engaged in effective educational practices and--in all likelihood--were most likely benefitting more from their college experience" (p. 6). "... driving commuters really do have less contact with their teachers (especially seniors) and do not take advantage of such opportunities as co-curricular activities, community service, study abroad, internships and so forth" (p. 8). "It appears that further away a student lives from campus (walking distance, driving distance), the less likely a student is to take advantage of the educational resources of the school." (p. 9).

Likins (1991) examined levels of involvement with commuter students at a large public research university. Students were asked to respond to questions about participating in activities on campus and the extent to which they feel like they are part of the university community. The results indicated that 34% of students participated in intramural/intercollegiate sports, 9% participated in the honor society, 1% participated in student government, 16% participated in a departmental club, 14% participated in a fraternity or sorority, and 10% participated in social/service clubs. With regard to feeling connected to the university, "Two-thirds reported feeling low or medium levels of connectedness with the university community. In contrast, 65% of commuter students indicated a desire to feel more a part of the university community." (p. 71).

Given the research regarding work, levels of involvement and academic performance, it was felt that this study should contribute significantly to the literature. The purpose of the current study was to investigate differences in work, levels of involvement, and academic performance between residential and commuter students.

1. Is there a relationship between number of hours worked per week and grade point average (GPA) for residential and commuter students?

2. Would there be a difference in levels of involvement in school-sponsored activities between residential and commuter students?

3. Would there be a difference between residential and commuter students with regard to the extent of how they feel about being a part of the college community?

4. What are the top three reasons that residential and commuter students' work?

5. Would there be differences in the experienced levels of stress as a result of working between residential and commuter students?

For the purpose of this study, a residential student was defined as one who lived on campus and a commuter student was defined as those who lived off campus. Based on these criteria, 25% (271 students) of the total student body was classified as commuters.

One hundred and eight undergraduate students at a private college in the Northeast were surveyed. There were 37 (34.3%) males and 71 (65.7%) females. The participants ranged in age from 18 to 46 (mean age for males = 20.18, SD = 2.36; mean age for females = 20.33, SD = 3.62). There were 66 (61.1%) residential students and 42 (38.9%) commuter students. The mean GPA for residential students was 3.17 (SD = .45) and the mean for commuter students was 3.19 (SD = .42). With regards to having a job, 75 (69.4%) students reported having at least one job, while as 33 (30.6%) did not have a job. Of the 75 students who have a job, 45 (60%) lived on campus and 30 (40%) lived off campus. For the 42 commuter students, the mean commuting time to campus was 28.66 minutes (SD = 17.21).

Four author created instruments were administered to the participants. The first instrument asked participants to complete demographic information like, gender, age, area of study, class standing, GPA and residential status. If participants indicated that they lived off campus, they were asked to estimate their commuting time to campus. Participants were also asked a Yes or No question to the following statement: "Do you have a job?"

The second instrument asked participants to indicate their work status. Questions included indicating the number of hours worked per week, number of jobs they held, days worked, and time of day worked. Participants were asked to report on their reasons for working, which were based on along the lines of Wenz & Yu's (2010) research. In addition, participants were asked to report on their level of stress at their job, where 1 = not stressful at all and 5 = very stressful.

The fourth instrument consisted of five questions that measured students' sense of campus community based along the lines of Likins' (1991) questions. Participants were asked to respond on a five point scale (where 1 = strongly agree and 5 = strongly disagree) to items like, "I feel like a part of the college community," and "I would like to participate more in school sponsored activities."

With regard to working, residential students reported working an average of 16.49 hours per week (SD = 11.92), while commuter students reported working an average of 20.43 hours per week (SD = 9.50). Correlations conducted between hours worked per week and GPA indicated that no significant relationship was obtained for residential students (r = -.05, p > .05) and for commuter students (r = .209, p > .05).

Levels of Involvement in School Sponsored Activities

Differences between residential and commuter students in school sponsored activities which include number of sports played, number of clubs participated in, number of school sponsored activities, number of school sponsored clubs, and number of school sponsored intramural athletics are presented below.

Extent of Feeling like a Part of the College Community

An examination of means and standard deviations for levels of stress experienced indicate significant differences in levels of stress experienced by residential and commuter students, F (1, 74) = 7.04, p < .01. For residential students, the mean for levels of stress was 2.55 (SD = 1.20) and for commuter students was 3.30 (SD = 1.18).

This study investigated differences between work, levels of involvement and academic performance for residential and commuter students. Four interesting findings emerged from the study:

1. There was no significant relationship between the number of hours worked and GPA for residential and commuter students.

3. Around 78% of residential students and 43% of commuter students "agree" to feeling like a part of the college community, while 68% of residential students and 50% of commuter students still also "agree" that they desire to participate more in school-sponsored activities.

The lack of a significant relationship between the number of hours worked and GPA is interesting because it indicates that despite having a job, employed students are finding enough time to maintain a similar GPA in comparison to those who are not working. Similar results were obtained by Eduljee and Marchigiano (2008) and Sullivan & Eduljee (2012) who found no found significant differences between hours worked and academic performance. Richards (2004) indicates that "the number of hours students work while attending college, and whether or not they choose to work on-campus or off-campus, directly affects their academic success and involvement on campus." (p. 65). If having a job has an impact on academic performance, then schools should find a way to acknowledge this and help students cope with the demands of school and a job.

When asked to what extent students feel like they are part of the college community, over 78.9% of residential students indicated to agree or strongly agree with the statement, whereas only 42.9% of commuter students agreed or strongly agreed with the statement. Despite the perception of significant involvement, both residential and commuter students reported a desire to participate more in school-sponsored activities. Tinto (1993) indicates that "students will be more likely to invest in greater effort to learn when they become involved as members of the college community" (p. 71). This necessitates the need for college campuses to design on-campus activities to help all students feel a part of the college community.

Lastly, commuter students indicate experiencing higher levels of stress at their place of employment than residential students. Student life departments on campus may also consider developing stress management classes or activities in order to reduce the stress levels of all students, including those who reported moderate to high stress levels at their places of employment.

Recommendations for Future Research

While this study does offer useful results to inform the literature, we suggest that further research be conducted to understand the relationship between work, levels of involvement and academic performance between residential and commuter students. Kuh, Kinzie, Buckley, Bridges, and Hayek (2006) indicate that "students who belong to an affinity group or take responsibility for student activities become invested in the activity and are more committed to the college and their studies" (p. 3). While this study yielded interesting findings, caution should be used in interpreting the results due to variables like student characteristics and size of the college. The study should be conducted with a larger sample of students, as it could be an important factor in determining the impact of work hours on academic performance, as well as actual levels of involvement and desired levels of involvement with residential and commuter students.

ACE Center for Policy Analysis (2006). Working their way through college: Student employment and its impact on the college experience. American Council on Education, www.acenet.edu.

Astin, A. W. (1984). Student involvement: A developmental theory for higher education. Journal of College Student Development, 40(5), 518-529.

Bridgewater State College. National Survey of Student Engagement: Commuter vs. Resident Student Responses (2009). Retrieved from: www.bridgew.edu/studentaffairs/assessment/CommutervsResident.pdf

Eduljee, N., and Marchigiano, G. (March, 2008). Gender differences and academic success: An examination of predictor variables for first year college students. Paper presentation at the 79th Annual Meeting of the Eastern Psychological Association, Boston, MA.

Elkins, D.J., Forrester, S.A., & Noel-Elkins, A.V. (2011). The contribution of campus recreational sports participation to perceived sense of campus community. Recreational Sports Journal, 35(1), 24-34.

Kuh, G.D., Genyea, R.M., & Palmer, M. (2001). The disengaged commuter student: fact or fiction? Commuter Perspectives, 27(1), 2-5.

Kuh, G.D., Kinzie, J., Buckley, J.A., Bridges, B.K. & Hayek, J.C. (July, 2006). What matters to students success: A review of literature. National Center for Educational Statistics (NCES) Website: http://nces.ed.gov/npcc/pdf/kuh_Team_ExecSumm.pdf

Likins, J.M. (1991). Research refutes a myth: Commuter students do want to be involved. NASPA Journal, 29(1), 68-74.

Newbold, J.J., Mehta, S.S., & Forbus, P. (2011). Commuter students: Involvement and identification with an institution of higher education. Academy of Educational Leadership Journal, 15(2), 141-153.

Perna, L.W. (2010). Understanding the Working College Student: New Research and Its Implications for Policy and Practice. Stylus Publishing, LLC.

Peterson, N.A. (1975). Commuting student lacks advantages of dorm resident. Comment, 23, 1-12.

Sullivan, C., & Eduljee, N. (May, 2012). First-Year college students" motivational beliefs, use of learning strategies, work status, and academic performance. Poster submission to the 24th Annual Meeting of the Association of Psychological Science, Chicago, IL.

Tinto, V. (1993). Leaving College: Rethinking the Causes and Cures of Student Attrition. (2nd edition). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Wenz, M., & Yu, W.C. (2010). Term-time employment and the academic performance of undergraduates. Journal of Education Finance, 35(4), 358-373.

Saint Joseph's College of Maine

NINA B. EDULJEE, PH.D.

Saint Joseph's College of Maine

Table 1. Work Related Variables for
Residential and Commuter
Students

                                 Residential   Commuter
                                  Students     Students
Background Variables              (n = 66)     (n = 42)

Do you have more than one job?
  Yes                             9 (20.0%)     5 (16.7%)
  No                             36 (80.0%)    25 (81.3%)

Is your job:
  Full-time?                      1 (2.2%)      4 (13.3%)
  Part-time?                     41 (91.1%)    24 (80.0%)
  Both?                           3 (6.7%)      2 (6.7%)

Do you work:
  Weekdays?                       9 (20.0%)     5 (16.7%)
  Weekends?                       7 (15.6%)     4 (13.3%)
  Both?                          29 (64.4%)    21 (70.0%)

When do you work?
  12am to 6 am                    1 (2.2%)      1 (3.3%)
  7 am to 12 pm                  10 (22.2%)     4 (13.3%)
  1 pm to 6 pm                   17 (37.8%)    12 (40.0%)
  7pm to 12 am                   17 (37.8%)    13 (43.3%)

Table 2. Levels of Involvement between
Residential and Commuter
Students in Collegiate Athletics

                   Number of Sports Played

                 None         One         Two

Residential
Students (n   48 (72.7%)   16 (24.2%)   2 (3.0%)
= 66)

Commuter
Students      33 (78.6%)   9 (21.4%)    0 (0.0%)
(n = 42)

Table 3. Levels of Involvement between
Residential and Commuter
Students in School Sponsored
Clubs

                Number of Clubs Participated In

               None       One       Two     Three

Residential     31        25         8        2
Students      (47.0%)   (37.9%)   (12.1%)   (3.0%)
(n=66)

Commuter        22        12         6        2
Students      (52.4%)   (28.6%)   (14.3%)   (4.8%)
(n=42)

Table 4. Levels of Involvement between Residential and Commuter
Students in School Sponsored Student Activities

                             Number of School Sponsored Student
                                         Activities

                                None         One          Two

Residential Students (n=66)  14 (21.2%)   17 (25.8%)   19 (28.8%)

Commuter Students (n=42)     28 (66.7%)   8 (19.0%)     3 (7.1%)

                               Number of School Sponsored
                                   Student Activities

                              Three       Four       Five

Residential Students (n=66)  6 (9.1%)   6 (9.1%)   4 (6.1%)

Commuter Students (n=42)     3 (7.1%)   0 (0.0%)   0 (0.0%)

Table 5. Levels of Involvement between
Residential and Commuter
Students in School Sponsored
Club Athletics

                          Number of School
                       Sponsored Club Athletics

                          None        One

Residential Students   62 (93.9%)   4 (6.1%)
(n=66)

Commuter Students      39 (92.9%)   3 (7.1%)
(n=42)

Table 6. Levels of Involvement between Residential and Commuter
Students in School Sponsored Intramural Athletics

                                  Number of School Sponsored
                                     Intramural Athletics

                                 None         One         Two

Residential Students (n=66)   37 (56.1%)   13 (19.7%)   9 (13.6)

Commuter Students (n=42)      32 (72.6)     8 (19.0%)   2 (4.8%)

                                Number of School Sponsored
                                   Intramural Athletics

                               Three       Four       Five

Residential Students (n=66)   5 (7.6%)   1 (1.5%)   1 (1.5%)

Commuter Students (n=42)      0 (0.0%)   0 (0.0%)   0 (0.0%)

Table 7. Responses to Statements about Feeling like a Part of the
College Community for Residential and Commuter Students

                               Extent to Which Students Feel A
                                Part of the College Community

                              Strongly
                              Disagree     Disagree    Undecided

I feel like a part of the College Community.

Residential Students (n=66)   1 (1.5%)     4 (6.1%)    9 (13.6%)

Commuter Students (n=42)      5 (11.9%)   12 (28.6%)   7 (16.7%)

I would like to participate more in school-sponsored activities.

Residential Students (n=66)   0 (0.0%)    8 (12.1%)    13 (19.7%)

Commuter Students (n=42)      3 (7.1%)    7 (16.7%)    11 (26.2%)

I would like to participate more in athletic activities.

Residential Students (n=66)   1 (1.5%)    21 (31,8%)   16 (24.2%)

Commuter Students (n=42)      4 (9.5%)    16 (38.1%)   13 (31.0%)

I would like to interact more with my professors.

Residential Students (n=66)   0 (0.0%)    7 (10.6%)    28 (42.4%)

Commuter Students (n=42)      2 (4.9%)    6 (14.6%)    18 (43.9%)

I would like to interact more with my peers/friends.

Residential Students (n=66)   0 (0.0%)    8 (12.1%)    8 (12.1%)

Commuter Students (n=42)      0 (0.0%)     3 (7.1%)    6 (14.3%)

                              Extent to Which Students
                                 Feel A Part of the
                                 College Community

                                            Strongly
                                Agree        Agree

I feel like a part of the College Community.

Residential Students (n=66)   34 (51.5%)   18 (27.3%)

Commuter Students (n=42)      16 (38.1%)    2 (4.8%)

I would like to participate more in school-sponsored
activities.

Residential Students (n=66)   38 (57.6%)   7 (10.6%)

Commuter Students (n=42)      18 (42.9%)    3 (7.1%)

I would like to participate more in athletic activities.

Residential Students (n=66)   24 (36.4%)    4 (6.1%)

Commuter Students (n=42)      7 (16.7%)     2 (4.8%)

I would like to interact more with my professors.

Residential Students (n=66)   28 (42.4%)    3 (4.5%)

Commuter Students (n=42)      15 (36.6%)    0 (0.0%)

I would like to interact more with my peers/friends.

Residential Students (n=66)   43 (65.2%)

Commuter Students (n=42)      25 (59.5%)   8 (19.0%)

Table 8. Reasons for Working for Residential and Commuter Students

                              Reasons for Working for Residential &
                                        Commuter Students

                                            Gain Skill in    Spending
                              Pay Tuition    Work Field       Money

Residential Students (n=66)   12 (26.7%)      5 (11.1%)     21 (46.7%)

Commuter Students (n=42)       7 (24.1%)      3 (10.3%)     4 (13.8%)

                               Reasons for Working for
                               Residential & Commuter
                                      Students

                              Gain General   Pay Bills/
                               Experience       Rent

Residential Students (n=66)     1 (2.2%)     6 (13.3%)

Commuter Students (n=42)        0 (0.0%)     15 (51.7%)

Alfano, Halley J.^Eduljee, Nina B.

Source Citation

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Differences in work, levels of involvement, and academic performance between residential and commuter students

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The purpose of this study was to investigate the relationship between work, levels of involvement and academic performance between residential and commuter students. One hundred and eight undergraduate students at a private college in the Northeast were surveyed. Surveys aimed at examining work and levels of involvement were administered to the participants.