NotesFAQContact Us
Collection
Advanced
Search Tips
Back to results
ERIC Number: ED553000
Record Type: Non-Journal
Publication Date: 2013
Pages: 147
Abstractor: As Provided
ISBN: 978-1-3030-2724-6
ISSN: N/A
EISSN: N/A
An Examination of the Effects of Intrusive Advising and Support Services on Academically At-Risk Students
Jones, Earl A.
ProQuest LLC, Ed.D. Dissertation, Liberty University
This research study compared the effects of the intrusive form of developmental academic advising (IDAA) and the influence of additional academic support services on the mean cumulative Grade Point Averages (GPAs) of 4 randomly assembled groups of academically at-risk college students during 2 separate semesters. Academically at-risk students are defined as those students whose cumulative GPAs are below academic good standing at a university. The mean cumulative GPA of each student group was averaged prior to the beginning and at the end of the Spring 2012 and Fall 2012 semesters, respectively. All of these students were enrolled in a private university in the Mid-Atlantic region of the United States. The results of this study imply that using IDAA with a comprehensive offering of additional academic support services could provide greater academic improvement assistance to academically at-risk students than a less intrusive process. [The dissertation citations contained here are published with the permission of ProQuest LLC. Further reproduction is prohibited without permission. Copies of dissertations may be obtained by Telephone (800) 1-800-521-0600. Web page: http://www.proquest.com/en-US/products/dissertations/individuals.shtml.]
ProQuest LLC. 789 East Eisenhower Parkway, P.O. Box 1346, Ann Arbor, MI 48106. Tel: 800-521-0600; Web site: http://www.proquest.com/en-US/products/dissertations/individuals.shtml
Publication Type: Dissertations/Theses - Doctoral Dissertations
Education Level: Higher Education; Postsecondary Education
Audience: N/A
Language: English
Sponsor: N/A
Authoring Institution: N/A
Grant or Contract Numbers: N/A
What Works Clearinghouse Reviewed: Does Not Meet Evidence Standards