Skip to main content
Log in

Adult learners and traditional age freshmen: Comparing the “new” pool with the “old” pool of students

  • Published:
Research in Higher Education Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

First year adult learners (23 years of age and older) from a residential campus and an urban commuter campus and traditional age (17–20 years of age) freshmen were compared on a variety of demographic variables. Many of the commonly held assumptions about older students visà-vis younger students were substantiated. In general, adult learners at the residential campus comprised a distinct group unlike commuter campus adult learners and traditional age freshmen. Implications and suggestions for additional research are discussed.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Astin, A. W.Preventing students from dropping out. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1976.

    Google Scholar 

  • Astin, A. W.Four critical years. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1977.

    Google Scholar 

  • Arbeiter, S. Profile of the adult learner.College Board Review 1976–1977,102 20–27.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brandenburg, J. B. The needs of women returning to school.Personnel and Guidance Journal 1974,53 11–18.

    Google Scholar 

  • Broschart, J.A synthesis of selected manuscripts about the education of adults in the United States. Washington, D.C.; U.S. Offices of Education, 1976.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carp, A., Peterson, R., & Roelfs, P. Adult learning, interests and experiences. In K. P. Cross, J. R. Valley and Associates (Eds.),Planning Non-traditional Programs. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1974.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chickering, A. W.Education and identity. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1969.

    Google Scholar 

  • Doty, B. A. Why do mature women return to college?Journal of the National Association of Women Deans and Counselors 1966,29 171–174.

    Google Scholar 

  • Durcholz, P., & O'Connor, J. Why women go back to college.Change 1973,5 52, 62.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guilford, D. M.The non-collegiate sector: Statistical snapshots of adult continuing education. Paper presented at the meeting of the American Association of Higher Education, March, 1974.

  • Harrington, F. H.The future of adult education. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1977.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hepker, W., & Cloyd, J. S. Role relationships and role performance: The male married student.Journal of Marriage and the Family 1974,36 688–696.

    Google Scholar 

  • Henderson, C.Changes in enrollment by 1985. Policy analysis service report. Washington, D.C.: ACE, 1977. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 140 766)

    Google Scholar 

  • Hodgkinson, H. Guess who's coming to college: New learners, new tasks.NASPA Journal 1976,14 2–14.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kimmel, E.The characteristics of adult learners. Princeton, N.J.: CEEB, 1976.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Advisory Council on Adult Education.A target population in education. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1974.

    Google Scholar 

  • National Center for Education Statistics.The condition of education. Washington, D.C.; U.S. Government Printing Office, 1976.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roach, R. M. “Honey, won't you please stay home.”Personnel and Guidance Journal 1976,55 86–89.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roelfs, P. Teaching and counseling older college students.Findings 1975,2 (1), 5–8.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ryan, J. D., Jr.A comparison of the academic achievement of adults and college-age junior college full-time day students. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Wayne State University, 1969.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Kuh, G.D., Ardaiolo, F.P. Adult learners and traditional age freshmen: Comparing the “new” pool with the “old” pool of students. Res High Educ 10, 207–219 (1979). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00976265

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00976265

Key words

Navigation