INTERNATIONAL BURCH UNIVERSITY

FACULTY OF ENGINEERING AND NATURAL SCIENCES

DEPARTMENT OF ARCHITECTURE
ARC 572 METHODOLOGY OF CONDUCTING A SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH

HOW STUDENT ACCOMMODATION

FACILITIES AFFECT STUDENT GPA

MENTOR: Assist. Prof. Dr. Ahmed El Sayed STUDENT: Amina Talić

Table of Contents

ABSTRACT .................................................................................................................................... 2
INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................................... 3
LITERATURE BACKGROUND ................................................................................................... 4
METHODOLOGY ......................................................................................................................... 8
QUESTIONNAIRE SURVEY ................................................................................................. 8
RESULTS ....................................................................................................................................... 9
DEMOGRAPHIC CHARACTERISTICS .............................................................................. 9
ACCOMMODATION FACILITY ........................................................................................ 10
DISCUSSION ............................................................................................................................... 12
CONCLUSION ............................................................................................................................. 12
REFERENCES ............................................................................................................................. 13
APPENDIX ................................................................................................................................... 15

1|Page
ABSTRACT

Student performance is the main focus and subject of study for most universities. Students, their
parents, as well as professors seek to find the optimal conditions for students to achieve the best
academic results possible. Several factors affecting the development and learning of college
students have been studied over the years, mostly including the improvement of university
setting and extracurricular activities. One aspect that has been neglected for a long time,
however, is the student accommodation itself. The purpose of this research was to explore the
relation of student residence to academic performance. Focus was on the city of Sarajevo and
University of Sarajevo (UNSA). Quantitative research method was used to determine how the
place of residence affected the students’ performance. On-going students and recent graduates of
UNSA have been questioned about their experiences and how their environment has influenced
their performance at University. The results showed that the group of students living in
dormitories did not academically exceed the students residing at home or in private housing. The
conclusion is that residence slightly affects student performance, and even though they provide
most of the resources required for student life, dormitories do not show additional positive
effects on the students’ academic achievements.

Research hypothesis: Students of UNSA living in dormitories have a greater GPA than students
living in private housing.

Keywords: Student performance, dormitory, Grade Point Average (GPA), education, private
housing

2|Page
INTRODUCTION

Attending college does not simply mean going to classes, for there are so many other activities
students are required to perform during their studies. Most of them are carried out apart from
university, at student dormitories and private housing facilities. Since those are the places
students actually spend most of their time at, their impact on the students’ lives should not be
neglected or underestimated. The importance of student residential environment has been pointed
out by many researchers (e.g. Holland, 2014, Hountras, P., & Brandt, K. 1970) since they have
realized that there are also other influences on student performance besides the university and
university-related activities.
College student development, according to Chickering (1993), can be influenced by six major
institutional factors of a college or university, including residence hall arrangements (others
include clarity and consistency of institutional objectives; institutional size; curriculum, teaching,
and evaluation; faculty and administration; and student culture). Through these institutional
factors, students are aided in their development along seven vectors, namely achieving
competence, managing emotions, becoming autonomous, establishing identity, freeing
interpersonal relationships, clarifying purposes, and developing integrity. (Rinn, 2004)

Student dormitories, or residence halls carry many opportunities for additional social as well as
academic education of their residents. Peer-to-peer teaching and mentorship help represents great
help for freshman to fit into the college experience and improve their grades. Having a classmate
in the close environment can boost confidence and motivation for studying as shown in the
results of the research of De Araujo and Murray (2011). Moreover it has also proven to be a
great solution for the lack of persistence and retention among college students to finish their
studies and earn a degree (Erb, N., Sinclair, M., & Braxton, J. 2015).

A similar opinion is held also by Astin (1977), as well as Lundgren and Scwab (1979) who
believe that living in conventional residence halls likely contributes to persistence and eventual
graduation from college, leads to increases in social adjustment, provides a sense of community,
decreases feelings of isolation, and generally results in a greater satisfaction with the university
experience (Rinn, 2004)

3|Page
LITERATURE BACKGROUND

The research of Ashley Holland (2014) touches upon the topic on how student accommodation
might be linked to student performance. Holland analyzed the results of first year and senior year
students’ grades according to three variables: age, transfer status and residence. The result of the
analysis of grades in relation to residency showed that the students living on-campus earned the
highest grades, while commuter students ranked second, followed by students living in private
accommodation facilities. Holland also concluded that students living in dormitories on-campus
tend to be more focused on their studies and their active involvement in the college experience
translates into higher grades.

Another similar investigation was done in Cyprus by student Ilker Etikan (2017). In his work,
Etikan mostly focused on the effect of residence halls as accommodation factor on student
performance. He went on to find out whether age and gender factors in any way influenced the
choice of accommodation. Etikan finally concluded that here was no significant difference in the
grades of students living in residence halls or elsewhere, still, age and gender played an
important role when choosing whether to live in residence halls or in some other type of
individual or private housing.

Does living near classmates help introductory students get better grades is examined by Jeffrey
Parker (2012) in his research under the same title. He made the hypothesis that freshman students
in introductory courses get better grades if they have other students in their residential unit who
are either taking the same course or who have taken the course in the past. Parker's results
provide little support for the hypothesis, yet prove that having classmates in a student's dorm
positively affect the student's performance.

Pedro de Araujo and James Murray (2010) were intrigued by the fact that many universities
specifically require their students to live in dormitories, so they went on to find out the real
impact dormitory living has on student performance. Their results showed that living on campus
might increase the student’s performance in a great amount, but is still a matter of whether the
student has chosen the accommodation personally, or whether it was forced upon by parents or
other external factors. De Araujo and Murray also pointed out that living in dormitory, if
personally chosen, provides long term benefits even after students subsequently move off
campus.

In 2011, De Araujo and Murray continued their research and published another article on the
same topic. They expanded their analysis and went on to explain why exactly students that live
on campus perform better. By analyzing all the possible channels that could lead to improved
performance, they point out two main channels: utilization of university-provided resources and
peer influences and interactions. They quickly came to the conclusion that additional university
resources provided in dormitories had less, and insignificant effect on the student performance.

4|Page
However, peer-effect channels have proven to be the ones having a lasting effect on the student
academic performances.

Not only students, but professors are also very concerned about this topic, which has lead a team
of professors from Saginaw Valley State University to conduct a research at their University
(2016). As the number of commuter students had increased at their University, and previous
research had suggested that it did not positively affect the student’s performance, the professors
have studied this phenomenon. After conducting the research, they have concluded that the bare
fact that commuter students have to use transportation means to get to University does not affect
their grades, yet they suggest that an in depth analysis should be performed considering different
variables.

Mildred V. Jones (2013), alumni of Old Dominion University (ODU), believes that
understanding why students do not persist to degree is a major element in understanding
retention at institutions of higher education. In her master thesis research on the topic she
considered the factor of living arrangement as method to increase retention and ultimately
persistence to degree among students of ODU. Her results have shown that student living off-
campus had overall better grades in the past years than students living on-campus.

The differences in GPA of on-campus and off-campus students was a topic of discussion for a
few decades already. One of the earlier examples of statistical comparison on this topic is also
the work Robert L. Bowman and Kenneth E. Partin (1993). They have done a research on 80
students living off-campus or in university dormitories and at that time did not find any
significant differences between GPAs of on-campus and off-campus students. They concluded
that the academic ability finally did not depend on the living arrangement of the student.
The purpose of the investigation of Peter T. Hountras and Kenneth R (1970). Brandt was to
explore the relation of student residence to academic achievement. The comparison was done
using the GPA (general point average) and ACT (American college test) of students in five
colleges of an upper Midwest university. The results showed that the combined group of students
residing in residence halls had higher mean grade point averages (GPA’S) than did students
residing at home or off-campus.

Blimling, G., & Hample, D.(1979) have studied the effect of a structured study environment in
residence halls on the grade performance of undergraduate students at all levels of academic
performance. Their work shows that living on a study floor is likely to raise the GPA by at least
.05 for the quarter grades.

Anne Rinn (2004) went a step further in the research of residence hall impact on students in
social and academic field by including honors residence halls in the investigation. In her work,
she addresses the social aspect of the honors residence living arrangement. Even though the
academic benefits are present in honors residence halls almost to the same amount as in

5|Page
convenient dormitories, the social aspect is quite different, and according to Rinn, needs to be a
topic of in depth analysis.

Michael Delucchi (2004) has investigated academic performance among college students in three
different residential environments: dormitory, apartment housing and commuters. Contradictory
to the later work of Holland (2014), he found that commuter students were more successful than
students living adjacent to campus. They concluded that not only residency, yet age and
educational objectives played an important role in determining the success rate of students, and
therefore suggested further research in that direction.

Although previous research suggests that living on campus promotes a variety of desirable
academic outcomes by enhancing students’ involvement and engagement with their institutions,
research on academic performance frequently ignores the possibility that different groups of
students are differentially affected by their living environments, as stated by López Turley, R., &
Wodtke (2010), They also emphasize the need to consider the department of study, since their
results have clearly shown that students of arts feel more comfortable and perform better when
living in residence halls, whilst this is not the case with students from other departments.

Nowack, K., and Hanson, A. (2015) believe that the impact of on-campus housing on academic
achievement represents a very complex relationship that is not easily explored and clarified.
They also give great importance to the usually neglected self-selection factor, mentioned also in
the research of De Araujo and Murray. Nowack and Hanson imply that this topic must be
observed from many perspectives and include other variables besides solely the living
accommodation.

Comparing the traits and achievements of students in various living groups is also the main topic
in Leonard L. Baird's (1969) early work. The study found that students in fraternities and
sororities were more socially oriented and students in off-campus rooms or at home were less
socially oriented. The students' pre-college scores, however, did not have any impact on
choosing the housing type, their self-rating or life goals.

According to Moos, R., and Lee, E. (1979), college living settings influences differential student
change and those “effects” occur because students tend to select and create settings which help
them to maintain their preferred personal characteristics. The authors compared the social
environment of dormitories and independent apartments and houses. The results show that
students who stayed at residence halls were more conservative and traditional, but showed higher
educational aspirations and performed better academically.

J. Paul Grayson (1997) argues that the place of residents has little impact on students’ marks. He
states that students living with their parents in the first year of study are at no disadvantage
compared to students living on-campus. Grayson does, however, admit that living in residence
halls affects intellectual development and persistence to get a degree.

6|Page
The work of Erb, N., Sinclair, M., and Braxton, J. (2015) discusses the importance of the sense
of community within residence halls. They believe that the key to growing ambitious and
successful young generations lies in the residence community. Their results show that students
who are able to identify with their residence hall community and interact with peers in this
community experience an increased sense of communal potential.

Another research with focus on student residence experience was done by Clare Holdsworth
(2006). Holdsworth wanted to know why so many students rather choose to stay with their
parents during studies instead of living on their own, or in dormitories on campus. She studied
also how exactly students benefit from living in communities, and showed through research that
residence halls were a great way of making the students feel more of the student life, better fit
into university and participate in non-academic activities.

Academic performance of students living in residence halls can be improved by the help of their
peers, as well as dormitory staff. Murrell, S., Denzine, G., and Murrell, P. (1998) point out the
great change that residence life staff can bring into students’ lives. Through the results of their
research, they have shown that staff influence is largely underestimated and should be
reexamined as it may lead to great positive impacts on student lives.

7|Page
METHODOLOGY

In this study, quantitative research method was applied using data retrieved from the survey
performed among students of University of Sarajevo. The survey was developed specifically for
the needs of this research, taking into account variables, scales and questions used in similar and
closely related studies. The data contained answers from totally 88 respondents, among them
freshmen students, on-going and master students, as well as recent graduates. The participants
were asked for their personal experience of college life in the city of Sarajevo with regard to the
accommodation facility they have chosen to stay at during their studies. The personal experience
involved questions on their level of satisfaction with the living environment, study resources
supply degree, and feeling of direct effect of the environment on their academic performance.
The dependent variable used in this study were the student’s grades, used as measure of their
academic performance. In the questionnaire, the last question on the survey asks “What have
most of your grades been up to during studying and living in the chosen residence?” This
question gives direct data in relation to overall grades. The responses are divided up according to
grades 6 (satisfactory of minimum criteria) to 7 (good with significant disadvantages), 7 to 8
(average with small mistakes), 8 to 9 (above average), and 9 to 10 (excellent achievement).
Finally, the research analyzed the relationship of the students’ chosen living accommodation and
academic performance. Four most chosen types of accommodation were closely analyzed in
terms of the students’ personal satisfaction and academic achievements. The ultimate results
show the direct relation of accommodation to level of success at college, and additionally
provide the personal feelings of the students on whether they felt that the chosen accommodation
could have impacted their academic achievement and at what degree. In order to get more
accurate results, the study also took into account whether the students were well equipped for
studying regardless on which type of housing they were staying at.

QUESTIONNAIRE SURVEY

The students were questioned in person and in online form. All together 50 students answered
the questionnaire, among them freshman, on-going students, master students and recent
graduates. The respondents were informed about the purpose of the study, namely, to find out
how much the environment students live in during their studies affects their academic
achievement.In the demographic characteristics part of the survey, the students were asked for
their gender, age and current status of education so that the responses could be classified
accordingly. The crucial information for the study was the living facility the students have
chosen to stay at during their studies. Followed by the general satisfaction of the environment
they lived in, the students were asked about their personal opinion on how much this
environment has had effect on their academic performance.

8|Page
Besides getting to know where the respondents have lived and how they felt about that during
their student life, it was important to acquire the information on whether they had all the
necessary resources for studying and fulfilling university requirements in their student
residence.The last question finally asked about the academic achievement of the students during
living at the mentioned residence. The matching point of the students was the general point
average (GPA) for the previous years of study.

RESULTS

Overall 88 students, masters, and recent graduates responded to the questionnaire online or in
person (paper-pencil method).

DEMOGRAPHIC CHARACTERISTICS

63,7% of the total number (n=88) of students questioned were female (n=56) and 36,3% were
male (n=32). Most of the respondents (70,5%) were between 18 and 22 years old. Majority of the
respondents 36,4% (n=32) were on-going students, while 34,1%(n=30) were recent graduates,
20,5% (n=18) were freshmen, and 9,1% (n=8) of the respondents had a master degree.(Table 1)

Percentage Number

Gender

Female 63,7% 56

Male 36,3% 32

Age

18-22 70,5% 62

23-25 29,5% 26

Current status

Freshman 20,5% 18

On-going student 36,4% 32

Graduate 34,1% 30

Master 9,1% 8

Table 1 Demographic characteristics

9|Page
ACCOMMODATION FACILITY

Most of the respondents 45,5% (n=40) have spent their student life in dormitories, followed by
20,5% (n=18) students sharing flats with one or two roommates. 18,2% (n=16) preferred to live
alone in private housing, and the minority 15,9%( n=14) stayed with parents or family. The
groups were further on observed individually, in order to acquire final results for direct
comparison.

Percentage Number

Which accommodation did you choose to live in during your student life?

Home with parents/family 15,9% 14

Student dormitory 45,5% 40

Individual private 18,2% 16

residence

Collective private residence 20,5% 18

Table 2 Student accommodation choice

STUDENTS LIVING IN DORMITORIES

Students who lived in dormitory 40% (n=16) were generally the thought that their environment
affected their academic performance very much. Most of them 45 % (n=18) were neither
satisfied nor unsatisfied with their surroundings, yet the majority 55% (n=22) claimed they had
most of the resources they needed at hand. Coming to the GPA, which was quite equally
distributed: 25% (n=10) had the average grades 6-7, 25% (n=10) had the average grades 7-8,
30% (n=12) had the average grades 8-9 and finally 20% (n=8) had the average grades 9-10.

STUDENTS LIVING WITH ROOMMATES

Students living in private housing with one or two roommates 33, 33% (n=6) also majorly
believed that their residence setting affected their academic performance significantly. Most of
them 55,55% (n=10) thought that they have all the resources they need for student life. They
44,44 % (n=8) were personally satisfied with the environment and majorly 33,33% (n=6)
performing very well at university with the average 9-10. 22,22% (n=4) were having a GPA of 8-
9;33,33 % (n=6) had the average 7-8 and just 11,11% (n=2) had the lowest 6-7.

10 | P a g e
STUDENTS LIVING ON THEIR OWN

Students living alone in private housing facilities 37, 5% (n=6) were mostly indifferent towards
the environment their lived in during studies, they did not have an opinion whether it affected
their academic achievement at all. On the other hand they 75% (n=12) claimed to have all the
resources they needed They 37,5% (n=6) were personally satisfied with the environment and
majorly 37,5% (n=6) performing well at university with the average 8-9. 12,5% (n=3) were
having a GPA of 9-10; 37,5% (n=6) had the average 7-8 and just 12,5% (n=2) had the average
grade 6-7.

STUDENTS STAYING WITH PARENTS OR FAMILY

Students staying at home or with extended family 57,1% (n=8) had the opinion that their
environment did affect their academic performance but not significantly. Majority 57,1% (n=8)
claimed to have most of the resources they needed for university. They 42,8% (n=6) were
personally very satisfied with the environment and majorly 42,8% (n=6) presented good at
university with the average 7-8. 28,5% (n=4) were having a GPA of 8-9; 14,2% (n=2) had the
average 6-7, same as 14,2% (n=2) with the average 9-10.

11 | P a g e
DISCUSSION

After collecting and analyzing all the data, it is clear that the students' GPA does not have any
direct relationship to the students' residence. The initial hypothesis that students living in
dormitories have higher GPA than their colleagues living in other accommodation facilities is
thereby rejected. Interestingly, the results have shown that most students believe their living
environment made a significant impact on their academic achievement. In this study, however,
no concrete conclusion could be made on this matter. Several other factors should be included in
future investigations in order to confirm and clearly state the belief held by most respondents.
Moreover, many similar studies have managed to prove the same hypothesis true (Holland 2014,
De Araujo and Murray 2010). Yet, there are also works that, could not confirm the connection of
accommodation and student GPA (Etikan 2017, Parker 2012). Another explanation for Holland’s
(2014) and many other confirmations of these kind of hypothesis lays in the fact that most of the
dormitories studied were located on-campus, whilst this is not the case for the University of
Sarajevo dormitories. Lastly, considering the availability of resources for studying, most of the
students said they had all or most of the resources at disposal, and they were all quite satisfied
with the environment they lived in during their studies.

CONCLUSION

This study, which aimed to prove that living in dormitories positively affects student academic
performance, has in fact proven the opposite. Living arrangements might in some amount affect
the academic achievements, as the students themselves also claim, yet it could not be proven that
the dormitories had an overall positive effect. What could be concluded, is that students
generally believe they are well equipped for university and that resources did not affect their
performance in that sense. Student dormitories are still the most preferred accommodation
facilities, not because of the positive learning environment, but most probably for the affordable
and convenient arrangement. The world literature has split opinions on this topic as well. One is
clear, that student performance does depend on many factors (among them location and living
accommodation), still it remains a personal experience. What works for one type of students does
not work for the other, simply, the opinions are bound to the type of personality to a greater
extent than to the general external influences. Therefore, the suggestion is to include a group of
psychologists in the further in depth analysis and prepare a measurement scale that would give
more specific results for accurate conclusions.

12 | P a g e
REFERENCES

Holland, A. (2014). How Residency Affects the Grades of Undergraduate Students. Master's
Teses and Honors Projects. The College at Brockport.

Etikan, İ. (2017). Influence of Residential Setting on Student Outcome. Biometrics &

Biostatistics International Journal, 6(4 - 2017).

Parker, J. (2012). Does Living Near Classmates Help Introductory Economics Students Get
Better Grades?. The Journal of Economic Education, 43(2), pp.149-164.

De Araujo, P. and Murray, J. (2010). Estimating the Effects of Dormitory Living on Student
Performance. SSRN Electronic Journal.

Araujo, P., & Murray, J. (2011). Channels for Improved Performance From Living On
Campus. American Journal Of Business Education (AJBE), 3(12).
http://dx.doi.org/10.19030/ajbe.v3i12.965
Nelson, D., Misra, K., Sype, G. and Mackie, W. (2016). An Analysis Of The Relationship
Between Distance From Campus And Gpa Of Commuter Students. Journal of International
Education Research (JIER), 12(1), p.37.

Jones, M. (2013). College Freshmen Living Arrangement as a Predictor of Retention and

Persistence to Graduation. OTS Master's Level Projects & Papers. Old Dominion University.

Bowman, R., & Partin, K. (1993). The Relationship between Living in Residence Halls and
Academic Achievement. College Student Affairs Journal, 13(1).

Hountras, P., & Brandt, K. (1970). Relation of Student Residence to Academic Performance in
College. The Journal Of Educational Research, 63(8), 351-354.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00220671.1970.10884029

Blimling, G., & Hample, D. (1979). Structuring the Peer Environment in Residence Halls to
Increase Academic Performance in Average-Ability Students. Journal Of College Student
Personnel, 20, 310-16.
Rinn, A. (2004). Academic and Social Effects of Living in Honors Residence Halls. Journal Of
The National Collegiate Honors Council.
Delucchi, M. (2004). Academic performance in College Town. Loras College-Department Of
Sociology.
López Turley, R., & Wodtke, G. (2010). College Residence and Academic Performance: Who
Benefits From Living on Campus?. Urban Education, 45(4), 506-532.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0042085910372351

13 | P a g e
Nowack, K., & Hanson, A. (2015). Academic Achievement of Freshmen as a Function of
Residence Hall Housing, 22-28. Retrieved from
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/00220973.1985.11071923?journalCode=uarp19
Baird, L. (1969). The Effects of College Residence Groups On Students' Self-Concepts, Goals,
and Achievements. The Personnel And Guidance Journal, 47(10), 1015-1021.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/j.2164-4918.1969.tb02892.x
Moos, R., & Lee, E. (1979). Comparing residence hall and independent living settings. Research
In Higher Education, 11(3), 207-221. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/bf00975125
Grayson, J. (1997). Place of Residence, Student Involvement, and First Year Marks. The
Canadian Journal of Higher Education, 27(1). Retrieved from
http://journals.sfu.ca/cjhe/index.php/cjhe/article/view/183293

Erb, N., Sinclair, M., & Braxton, J. (2015). Fostering a Sense of Community in Residence Halls:
A Role for Housing and Residential Professionals in Increasing College Student
Persistence. Strategic Enrollment Management Quarterly, 3(2), 84-108.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/sem3.20063

Holdsworth, C. (2006). ‘Don't you Think you're Missing Out, Living at Home?’ Student
Experiences and Residential Transitions. The Sociological Review, 54(3), 495-519.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-954x.2006.00627.x

Murrell, S., Denzine, G., & Murrell, P. (1998). COMMUNITY COLLEGE RESIDENCE
HALLS: A HIDDEN TREASURE. Community College Journal Of Research And
Practice, 22(7), 663-674.http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1066892980220704

Chickering, A., & Reisser, L. (1993). Education and identity. San Francisco, Calif.: Jossey-Bass
Publishers.

14 | P a g e
APPENDIX
Student life in Sarajevo questionnaire
(Developed for the purpose of this study, derived after analysis of several studies on the similar
topic)

Gender
choose one
() male
() female

Age
choose one
() 18-22
() 23-25

Current (student) status

choose one
() Freshman
() On-going student
() Graduate
() Master

Which accommodation did you choose to live in during your student life?
choose one
() Home with parents/family
() Student dormitory/residence hall
() Individually in private residence
() Collective private residence (1-2 roommates)

According to your opinion, how much has the environment you have lived in affected your
performance at university?
choose one
() Very little/insignificant effect
() little effect
() neither little nor significant
() significant effect
() very significant effect

During your time at the student accommodation, did you have all the resources needed for
studying and fulfilling university requirements at disposal?
choose one
() Yes, I had everything at disposal
() Most of my needs were met

15 | P a g e
() Just the essential necessities were present
() I did not event have the basic conditions fulfilled

What was your personal level of satisfaction with the environment you were living in during
your studies?
choose one
() completely unsatisfied
() not satisfied
() neither satisfied nor unsatisfied
() satisfied
() completely satisfied

What have most of your grades been up to during studying and living in the chosen residence?
choose one
() 6-7
() 7-8
() 8-9
() 9-10

16 | P a g e