The Impact of Expectations
and Expectation Violations on
Retention and Academic
Performance
Jennifer M. Regalado
Arizona State University West
Phoenix, AZ
Information about ASU West
 Arizona State University West serves over 6,500 undergraduate
and graduate students. ASU West is a four-year urban campus
that offers undergraduate and graduate-level courses leading to
38 degree programs, plus professional certificates.
 ASU West prides itself on addressing the needs of a diverse
group of students, who balance academics with the multiple
demands of work and family. As ASU West has grown, its
commitment to learner-centered education has deepened. The
campus is dedicated to serving the evolving needs of high
school graduates, working adults, returning and continuing
students.
 ASU West’s innovative programs include learning communities
for freshmen, in which groups of approximately 30 students take
two or more linked classes and work with an instructional team.
Other innovations are our Learning Enhancement Center, which
offers an integrated approach to writing and tutoring support,
and the West Campus Advising Center, which assists students
with transferring, registering for courses, and identifying the right
major.
Introduction
 Every year, college students begin their
freshman year with a set of ideas and
expectations about what college has in store
for them.
 In some cases, these ideas are unrealistic
and are often unmet by institutions.
 Research indicates that student satisfaction is
important for persistence in the university and
may influence students’ academic
performance (Tinto, 1987; Pascarella &
Terenzini, 1991; Austin, 1993).
Research Questions
1. What is the relationship between
demographic variables and expectations?
2. How are expectations related to retention
and academic performance?
3. What role does expectation violations play in
retention and academic performance?
4. What is the value of gathering expectation
and perception data?
Sample Characteristics – Fall 2001
 Seventy percent female; 30% male
 36% minority students; 64% Caucasian
students
 Average High School GPA – 3.33
 Average SAT/ACT score – 1020/21
 Fifty percent first-generation college students
 Ninety-four percent report working while
attending college; 47% report working 1-20
hours; 47% report working 21-40+ hours
Sample Characteristics – Fall 2002
 Seventy percent female; 30% male
 28% minority students; 72% Caucasian
students
 Average High School GPA – 3.30
 Average SAT/ACT score – 1020/21
 Fifty-six percent first-generation college
students
 Ninety percent report working while attending
college; 41% report working 1-20 hours; 49%
report working 21-40+ hours
Comparing Samples Mean G.P.A and Percent Retention
Fall 01
(N=247)
Fall 02
(N=313)
After first semester (fall)
2.96
2.86
After second semester (spring)
2.86
2.90
After first year
2.85
2.85
183
74.1%
227*
73.7%
Retention into sophomore year
* This figure is accurate as of June 15, 2003. Students are still enrolling for the fall semester.
Number of Students
Participating in the Surveys
Fall 2001
(N=247)*
Fall 2002
(N=313)*
CSXQ
112
154
CSEQ
14
8
Both CSXQ and
CSEQ
10
79
Neither
111
72
•These numbers reflect the number of surveys that could be traced through
id numbers to students. The actual number of surveys administered
differs.
CSXQ/CSEQ Questions










Library and Information Technology (i.e.: “I expect to use the library as a
quiet place to read or study”)
Experiences with Faculty (i.e.: “I expect to discuss ideas for a term paper or
other class project with a faculty member”)
Course Learning (i.e.: “ I expect to take detailed notes during class”)
Writing (i.e.: “I expect to write a major report for a class”)
Campus Facilities (i.e.: I expect to use a campus lounge to relax or study by
myself”)
Clubs, Organizations, Service Projects (i.e.: “I expect to attend a meeting of a
campus club, organization, or student government group”)
Student Acquaintances (i.e.: “I expect to make friends with students whose
family background is different from mine.”)
Scientific and Quantitative Experiences (i.e.: “I expect to memorize formulas,
definitions, technical terms and concepts.”)
Conversation Topics (i.e.: “I expect to discuss current events in news.”)
Conversation Information (i.e.: “I expect to refer to something one of my
instructors said about a topic or issue.”)
Freshman Expectations
CSXQ Pretest - Fall 2001
Pretest
Mean
Score
Pretest
compared
to other
MA-I
colleges
Pretest
compared
to other BA
Lib
colleges
.71
2.78
2.78
2.76
7
.85
2.56
2.45
2.49
Course Learning
9
.82
3.15
3.09
3.15
Writing
5
.71
2.80
2.66
2.71
Campus Facilities
9
.80
2.43
2.59
2.43
Clubs, Organizations, Service Projects
5
.88
2.19
2.07
2.06
Student Acquaintances
7
.90
3.02
2.89
2.79
Scientific and Quantitative Experiences
5
.83
2.14
2.37
2.20
Conversation Topics
10
.89
2.53
2.39
2.48
Conversation Information
6
.85
2.66
2.59
2.68
Number
of
Pretest
Items
Alpha
Score for
Pretest
Factors
Library and Information Technology
9
Experiences with Faculty
Factor Items
(Based on a 4pt. Scale:
1=never, 4= very often)
Freshman Expectations
CSEQ Posttest – Spring 2002
Pretest
Mean
Score
Pretest
compared
to other
MA-I
colleges
Pretest
compared
to other BA
Lib
colleges
.82
2.92
2.03
2.22
7
.82
2.19
2.04
2.19
Course Learning
9
.86
2.91
2.79
2.97
Writing
5
.51
2.72
2.62
2.65
Campus Facilities
9
.43
1.85
2.18
2.47
Clubs, Organizations, Service Projects
5
.85
1.36
1.56
1.81
Student Acquaintances
7
.90
2.61
2.53
2.82
Scientific and Quantitative Experiences
5
.82
2.63
2.06
2.16
Conversation Topics
10
.81
2.52
2.24
2.49
Conversation Information
6
.84
2.72
2.42
2.61
Number
of
Pretest
Items
Alpha
Score for
Pretest
Factors
Library and Information Technology
9
Experiences with Faculty
Factor Items
(Based on a 4pt. Scale:
1=never, 4= very often)
Expectations and Experiences
Compared - Fall 2001 Sample
Pretest
Mean
Score
Posttest
Mean
Score
Difference
Score
Difference
Significance
Library and Information Technology
2.78
2.92
.14
.139
Experiences with Faculty
2.56
2.19
-.37
.862
Course Learning
3.15
2.91
-.24
.641
Writing
2.80
2.72
-.08
.091
Campus Facilities
2.43
1.85
-.63
.236
Clubs, Organizations, Service Projects
2.19
1.36
-.83
.070
Student Acquaintances
3.02
2.61
-.42
.165
Scientific and Quantitative Experiences
2.14
2.63
.49
.090
Conversation Topics
2.53
2.52
-.01
.888
Conversation Information
2.66
2.72
.06
.375
Factor Items
Freshman Expectations
CSXQ Pretest - Fall 2002
Pretest
Mean
Score
Pretest
compared
to other
MA-I
colleges
Pretest
compared
to other BA
Lib
colleges
.72
2.83
2.78
2.76
7
.84
2.58
2.45
2.49
Course Learning
9
.83
3.24
3.09
3.15
Writing
5
.63
2.88
2.66
2.71
Campus Facilities
9
.78
2.42
2.59
2.43
Clubs, Organizations, Service Projects
5
.87
2.17
2.07
2.06
Student Acquaintances
7
.90
3.07
2.89
2.79
Scientific and Quantitative Experiences
5
.86
2.76
2.37
2.20
Conversation Topics
10
.87
2.62
2.39
2.48
Conversation Information
6
.79
2.84
2.59
2.68
Number
of
Pretest
Items
Alpha
Score for
Pretest
Factors
Library and Information Technology
9
Experiences with Faculty
Factor Items
(Based on a 4pt. Scale:
1=never, 4= very often)
Freshman Expectations
CSEQ Posttest – Spring 2003
Pretest
Mean
Score
Pretest
compared
to other
MA-I
colleges
Pretest
compared
to other BA
Lib
colleges
.72
2.81
2.03
2.22
7
.84
2.40
2.04
2.19
Course Learning
9
.83
2.95
2.79
2.97
Writing
5
.63
2.51
2.62
2.65
Campus Facilities
9
.78
1.83
2.18
2.47
Clubs, Organizations, Service Projects
5
.86
1.53
1.56
1.81
Student Acquaintances
7
.90
2.59
2.53
2.82
Scientific and Quantitative Experiences
5
.86
2.33
2.06
2.16
Conversation Topics
10
.74
2.46
2.24
2.49
Conversation Information
6
.82
2.56
2.42
2.61
Number
of
Pretest
Items
Alpha
Score for
Pretest
Factors
Library and Information Technology
9
Experiences with Faculty
Factor Items
(Based on a 4pt. Scale:
1=never, 4= very often)
Expectations and Experiences
Compared - Fall 2002 Sample
Pretest
Mean
Score
Posttest
Mean
Score
Difference
Score
Difference
Significance
Library and Information Technology
2.83
2.81
-.02
.851
Experiences with Faculty
2.58
2.40
-.13
.103
Course Learning
3.24
2.95
-.29
.000
Writing
2.88
2.51
-.37
.000
Campus Facilities
2.42
1.83
-.59
.000
Clubs, Organizations, Service Projects
2.17
1.53
-.64
.000
Student Acquaintances
3.07
2.59
-.48
.000
Scientific and Quantitative Experiences
2.76
2.33
-.43
.000
Conversation Topics
2.62
2.46
-.16
.020
Conversation Information
2.84
2.56
-.28
.000
Factor Items
RQ 1 – Relationship between
Demographic Variables & Expectations
Ethnicity
Gender
SAT
Score
ACT
Score
Sum of
Library and
Information
Technology
Sum of
Experiences
with Faculty
Sum of
Course
Learning
Sum of
Writing
Sum of
Campus
Facilities
Correlation
-.028
-.014
.052
-.005
.021
Significance
.535
.741
.261
.907
.637
Correlation
.009
-.025
.050
.079
-.022
Significance
.872
.635
.351
.141
.684
Correlation
-.052
-.117*
-.002
-.174**
-.031
Significance
.422
.034
.979
.006
.632
Correlation
-.127
-.253**
-.015
-.096
-.179*
Significance
.103
.001
.848
.211
.020
*= Significance at .05 level
** = Significance at .01 level
RQ 1 – Relationship between
Demographic Variables & Expectations
Ethnicity
Gender
SAT
Score
ACT
Score
Sum of
Clubs,
Orgs.,
Service
Projects
Sum of
Student
Acquaintances
Sum of
Scientific
and
Quantitative
Experiences
Sum of
Conversation
Topics
Sum of
Conversati
on
Information
Correlation
-.070
-.021
-.02
.016
-.071
Significance
.087
.618
.583
.715
.104
Correlation
.148**
.111*
-.079
-.005
.021
Significance
.005
.038
.139
.922
.700
Correlation
-.042
.005
.064
-.047
-.051
Significance
.506
.935
.312
.465
.426
Correlation
-.171*
-.094
.077
.062
.016
Significance
.026
.226
.319
.434
.839
*= Significance at .05 level
** = Significance at .01 level
RQ 1 – Relationship between
Demographic Variables & Expectations
Sum of
Library and
Information
Technology
Sum of
Experiences
with Faculty
Sum of
Course
Learning
Sum of
Writing
Sum of
Campus
Facilities
Parents
Graduating
from
College
Correlation
.037
.066
-.008
-.054
-.018
Significance
.500
.216
.878
.316
.741
Hours
working on
Campus
Correlation
.064
.210**
.041
.141*
.139*
Significance
.294
.001
.530
.032
.025
Hours
working
off
Campus
Correlation
-.071
070
.059
.040
.002
Significance
.105
.118
.182
.348
.995
High
School
GPA
Correlation
-.033
-.048
-.047
-.069
-.029
Significance
.959
.375
.383
.198
.585
*= Significance at .05 level
** = Significance at .01 level
RQ 1 – Relationship between
Demographic Variables & Expectations
Sum of
Clubs,
Orgs.,
Service
Projects
Sum of
Student
Acquaintance
Sum of
Scientific
and
Quantitative
Experiences
Sum of
Conversation
Topics
Sum of
Conversation
Information
-.109*
-.033
-.071
-.066
-.078
.046
.540
.105
.225
.148
Parents
Graduating
from
College
Correlation
Hours
working on
Campus
Correlation
.109
.098
-.084
.064
.049
Significance
.092
.123
.152
.307
.449
Hours
working
off
Campus
Correlation
.003
.063
.051
.092*
.070
.940
.124
.246
.036
.130
High
School
GPA
Correlation
-.033
-.078
-.060
-.051
-.069
.959
.146
.264
.347
.199
Significance
Significance
Significance
*= Significance at .05 level
** = Significance at .01 level
RQ 2 – Expectations related to
Retention & Academic Performance
Sum of Library and
Information Technology
Sum of Experiences with
Faculty
Sum of Course Learning
Correlation
Significance
Correlation
Significance
Correlation
Significance
Sum of Writing
Correlation
Significance
Sum of Campus Facilities
Correlation
Significance
*= Significance at .05 level
** = Significance at .01
level
Fall
GPA
Spring
GPA
First
Year
GPA
Retention to
Sophomore
-.089
-.023
-.061
.077
.100
.681
.261
.153
-.131*
-.068
-.105*
-.027
.014
.226
.050
.612
-.069
-.011
-.043
-.061
.200
.844
.423
.258
.063
.062
.090
.033
.235
.267
.091
.543
-.009
-.052
-.021
-.049
.865
.358
.703
.361
RQ 2 – Expectations related to
Retention & Academic Performance
Sum of Clubs,
Organizations, Service
Projects
Correlation
Sum of Student
Acquaintances
Correlation
Sum of Scientific and
Quantitative Experiences
Sum of Conversation Topics
Significance
Significance
Correlation
Significance
Correlation
Significance
Sum of Conversation
Information
*= Significance at .05 level
** = Significance at .01 level
Correlation
Significance
Fall GPA
Spring
GPA
First
Year
GPA
Retention to
Sophomore
.064
.049
.059
.008
.231
.380
.265
.099
-.107*
-.030
-.073
.069
.044
.593
.170
.197
.001
.067
.028
.093
.984
.234
.598
.080
-.044
.056
-.020
.045
.416
.326
.713
.405
-.095
.064
-.041
.034
.077
.261
.451
.535
RQ 3 – Expectation Violation and
Retention and Academic Performance
Fall
GPA
Spring
GPA
First
Year
GPA
Retention to
Sophomore
Violation of Library and
Information Technology
Expectations
Correlation
.003
.165
.088
.077
Significance
.490
.100
.248
.153
Violation of Experiences
with Faculty Expectations
Correlation
-.002
.026.
-.082
-.027
Significance
.495
.421
.264
.612
Correlation
.118
.304*
.189
-.061
Significance
.180
.008
.070
.258
Correlation
-.180
-.079
-197
.033
Significance
.081
.270
.062
.543
Correlation
.012
.214*
.095
-.049
.464
.047
.232
.361
Violation of Course
Learning Expectations
Violation of Writing
Expectations
Violation of Campus
Facilities Expectations
*= Significance at .05 level
** = Significance at .01 level
Significance
RQ 3 – Expectation Violation and
Retention and Academic Performance
Fall GPA
Spring
GPA
First
Year
GPA
Retention to
Sophomore
Violation of Clubs,
Organizations, Service
Projects Expectations
Correlation
-.024
-.164
-.140
.088
Significance
.426
.101
.139
.099
Violation of Student
Acquaintances Expectations
Correlation
.107
.130
.104
.069
Significance
.204
.157
.211
.197
Violation of Scientific and
Quantitative Experiences
Expectations
Correlation
.023
.088
.016
.093
Significance
.430
.247
.451
.080
Violation of Conversation
Topics Expectations
Correlation
.011
-.164
.087
.045
Significance
.490
.159
.251
.405
Correlation
.021
.130
.035
.034
.436
.204
.395
.535
Violation of Conversation
Information Expectations
*= Significance at .05 level
** = Significance at .01 level
Significance
Conclusion – The Value of
Gathering Expectation Data
 Since the difference between pre and post
test means were not that different and
violations were not large (this is a national
trend) should expectation data be gathered?
 Since this sample has a relatively small size
would a larger scale study be beneficial?
 If so, since it is extremely difficult to gather
pretest/posttest data, are there other methods
of collection that could be utilized?