Donaldson and Graham / MODEL

ADULT
OF EDUCATION
COLLEGE OUTCOMES
QUARTERLY / November 1999

A MODEL OF COLLEGE OUTCOMES

FOR ADULTS

JOE F. DONALDSON
University of Missouri–Columbia

STEVE GRAHAM
University of Missouri System

This article presents a model of college outcomes for adult undergraduate students to address
the key elements that affect their learning and to stimulate research and theory building about
adults’ experience in college. It provides a review of the literature and a comprehensive model
that considers the relationships between six major elements related to adults’ undergraduate
collegiate experiences: (a) prior experiences; (b) orienting frameworks such as motivation,
self-confidence, and value system; (c) adult’s cognition or the declarative, procedural, and self-
regulating knowledge structures and processes; (d) the “connecting classroom” as the central
avenue for social engagement and for negotiating meaning for learning; (e) the life-world envi-
ronment and the concurrent work, family, and community settings; and (f) the different types and
levels of learning outcomes experienced by adults.

Adults are now a powerful segment of the undergraduate population and are dra-
matically changing the nature of higher education today. They make up about 40%
to 45% of the students enrolled as undergraduates in higher education (The
National Center for Educational Statistics, 1996). They are enrolling part-time, tak-
ing courses through the Internet and other distance technologies, and demanding
creative ways to complete their education where they spend little or no time on cam-
pus. Despite these trends, most of the insights about the undergraduate experience
are drawn from the past two decades of research on young adults and their develop-
ment (Astin, 1977, 1993; Chickering & Gamson, 1987; Kuh, 1993; Pace, 1979;
Pascarella & Terenzini, 1991; Terenzini & Pascarella 1994) and are in many ways
limited in explaining how adults learn and develop in college. Puzzled college
administrators and faculty who work with adult undergraduate students are looking

JOE F. DONALDSON is an associate professor and chair in the Department of Educational Leadership
and Policy Analysis, University of Missouri–Columbia. STEVE GRAHAM is the director of the Presi-
dent’s Academic Leadership Institute for the University of Missouri System and an associate professor
in the Department of Educational Leadership and Policy Analysis at the University of Missouri–Colum-
bia campus. Authors’names are in alphabetical order; each contributed equally to the preparation of this
article.
ADULT EDUCATION QUARTERLY, Vol. 50 No. 1, November 1999 24-40
© 1999 American Association for Adult and Continuing Education

24
 Donaldson and Graham / MODEL OF COLLEGE OUTCOMES 25

for ways to understand how adults learn, what their college and life experiences are,
and how these elements influence both what they learn and how they do it.
Because most models explaining college outcomes address traditional-age stu-
dents, they may not fully capture the essence of the experience for adults in higher
education. To help explain the nature of the undergraduate experience for adults, we
offer a Model of College Outcomes for Adults that pulls together the literature and
research on the adults’ undergraduate experience in higher education. The model
attempts to take into consideration the complex nature of adults’ lives and explain
the key components affecting their undergraduate experiences. It considers the pre-
existing conditions and motives, adults’ cognition, ways the adult learners engage
the classroom to foster learning, adults’ learning in context of their current life-
world experiences, and the outcomes adults observe as a result of their college
experiences.
The model also argues that due to the adults’ lifestyles, they engage the class-
room and their student peers in novel ways to accommodate for their lack of time on
campus and in traditional out-of-class activities. Furthermore, due to their rich per-
sonal experiences, adults can link new knowledge to an existing complex schema
that in many cases allows them to make direct connections between new knowledge
and its use.

REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE

There is ample research demonstrating that college has a significant impact on
the students who enroll. Furthermore, the effects are more pronounced for students
who actively participate in the college environment. Almost four decades ago, San-
ford (1962) reported the profound effects college had on the personal and cognitive
development of college men. Since that time, probably the most comprehensive
work in this area was done by Pascarella and Terenzini (1991), who analyzed the
results of more than 2,500 studies to provide an overall picture of the impact of col-
lege. From their extensive analyses, they found that college attendance was associ-
ated with significant and “net” increases in several domains, including verbal,
quantitative, cognitive growth, self-concept, self-esteem, moral development, atti-
tude, and value changes. Their research also pointed out the significant role of the
college culture and the nature of the students’ personal experiences. In fact, they
suggested that the students’ experiences during college have more impact on the
students than the nature of the colleges or universities themselves (Pascarella &
Terenzini, 1991; Terenzini & Pascarella, 1994).
Astin’s (1993) research efforts in this area provided evidence on the significance
of the students’ level of involvement in college and the nature of their interactions
with the college culture. Popular measures of academic program quality such as
educational expenditures per student, faculty/student ratios, faculty salaries, and
research productivity alone had little or no direct effect on student development.
Instead, learning, academic performance, and retention all were associated with the
26 ADULT EDUCATION QUARTERLY / November 1999

students’ interactions with their peers, with faculty, with involvement in out-of-
class activities, and with their leadership roles on campus. Terenzini, Pascarella,
and Blimling (1996) have further documented the importance of out-of-class expe-
riences as well as the nature of the college culture and climate. Kuh (1992) noted
several conditions that enhance the impact of college, such as their involvement in
social and academic life, their interactions with peers whose values match those of
the institution, and how they were connected to the campus environment.
In these and other studies, involvement was defined in traditional ways for
traditional-age students who interacted in a peer culture that shaped their values,
habits, and knowledge. These students often participated in campus social activities
(e.g., in campus sponsored events and clubs) and interacted frequently and in high
quality ways with faculty (especially outside class) and with their student peers
(Levine, 1994; Pascarella, 1985).
Although there is considerable evidence of the benefits of involvement and the
value of both the student-student and the faculty-student interactions for
traditional-age students, it is often difficult to involve adult learners in the campus
environment due to their conflicting life roles. Adults often enroll in college to
address work or life transitions, reasons that are different than those of traditional-
age students. Frequently, adults report rusty study skills, low self-confidence, or
fears about returning to college (Cupp; 1991; Kasworm, 1995, 1997; Shere, 1988).
Yet somehow, adults generally compensate for this lack of campus engagement.
Kasworm (1990b) reviewed more than 300 studies and found that adult students did
as well or better than traditional-age students in higher education settings based on
grades and aptitude/content test performance measures. Kuh (1993) found adults
reported benefits similar to those articulated by traditional-age college students.
Numerous other studies found that adults report outcomes similar to younger col-
lege students across a wide array of areas (Graham, 1998; Graham & Donaldson,
1996, 1999; Graham & Long, 1998).

A MODEL OF COLLEGE OUTCOMES

Despite a lack of certain types of campus involvement and recent academic
experience, adult students apparently learn and grow as much or more as younger
students during their undergraduate collegiate experiences. This implies that adults
may be using different skills, techniques, settings, or interactions with faculty, fel-
low students, and others to achieve their desired results. As a way to further discus-
sion and research on how adults might compensate for the different type of under-
graduate experience, their different academic backgrounds, and their busy adult
lifestyles, we offer a Model of College Outcomes for Adult Students. The model
draws on research about adults in postsecondary settings as well as insights from
the theoretical literature on learning. We present the model in the spirit of offering a
framework for discussion and as a guide for future research on adult learners. We
 Donaldson and Graham / MODEL OF COLLEGE OUTCOMES 27

raise specific questions about the factors that might influence adults’undergraduate
experiences to stimulate debate about these issues and their implications for educa-
tional policy.
There are several theories developed from previous research that might explain
why despite lower levels of campus involvement, rusty academic skills, and busy
lifestyles, adults report significant progress from their academic endeavors. First,
adults have complex and rich mental schemas that might make learning more per-
sonally meaningful for them. According to the work of several researchers (Cer-
vero, 1988; Kasworm, 1997; Kasworm & Blowers, 1994; Merriam & Caffarella
1991, 1999), adults integrate new learning by making connections to existing
knowledge schema. They reflect on rich, personal experiences and draw on their
previous knowledge and wisdom to make meaning of new material and to under-
stand it in a way that transforms their own previous understandings. Second, in
many instances, adults make connections to other real-life activities in various adult
roles and then apply this learning immediately in real-life contexts (Hughes & Gra-
ham, 1990; Kasworm, 1997). As a result, adults achieve a new, more “authentic
involvement” that addresses their comprehensive community and life roles and is
not limited to the classroom or to experiences in college clubs or organizations
(Graham & Donaldson, 1996; Kasworm, 1995, 1997). Another plausible explana-
tion is that adults use the classroom differently than do traditional students. They
may use the classroom as a stage to intensify their learning and enhance their inter-
actions with peers and instructors to achieve additional benefits (Bean & Metzner,
1985; Donaldson, 1991; Kasworm, 1997; Kasworm & Blowers, 1994). Finally,
research by Cupp (1991), Frost (1991), and Kasworm (1995) suggests that adults
are more intent on learning, hope to gain something they can apply to their work,
approach their college experiences with a clearer purpose in mind, and take the
advice of instructors more seriously.
Looking at the various relationships between these possible explanations offers a
framework for understanding the college outcomes for adult learners (see Figure 1).
This model is based on the work of Kasworm (1995, 1997), Kasworm and Blowers
(1994), and several others (e.g., Cupp, 1991; Graham & Donaldson, 1996; Kuh, 1993)
who investigated adults’ experiences and the outcomes from undergraduate educa-
tion. The model is an open one and considers the impact of factors outside the colle-
giate environment that affect learning and college outcomes. It differs from conven-
tional college outcome models that focus primarily on the college environmental
factors, often assuming a “closed model” for outcomes (Kasworm, 1995). The model
is also influenced by the perspectives of constructivist and sociocultural theories of
learning (Cobb, 1994; Lave & Wenger, 1991; von Glaserfeld, 1992). It recognizes
that although learning is based on individually constructed cognitive schemas, it
often occurs as adults participate in a social learning community (Cobb, 1995).
The model takes into account the learner’s history and the interaction of various
processes over time that influence learning. It is both theoretical and practical and
28 ADULT EDUCATION QUARTERLY / November 1999

Figure 1. Model of College Outcomes for Adult Students

permits researchers and practitioners to “account for learning as it occurs in social

and cultural contexts by bringing one perspective or the other to the fore as the need
arises” (Cobb, 1995, p. 25). For example, instructors might use it as a way to under-
stand the learning issues of one or more students enrolled in their classes, whereas
researchers might use it to explore the dynamics of adults in a given class, during an
academic year, or for the entire collegiate experience. The model has been pre-
sented in a highly linear format for the sake of clarity but actually assumes a great
deal of interaction among the various components.
The model consists of six components: (a) prior experience and personal biogra-
phies; (b) psychosocial and value orientations; (c) adult cognition; (d) the connect-
ing classroom as the central avenue for social engagement on campus, for defining
the collegiate experience, and for negotiating meaning for learning; (e) life-world
environment—the different contexts in which adults live, defined by the roles they
occupy in their various work, family, and community settings, in which they learn
and develop knowledge structures that differ from the academic knowledge struc-
tures of the classroom; and (f) college outcomes—different types of outcomes such
as learning new content to finish a course, to really understand it, to apply it in
authentic settings, and to use it to improve the lives of others. The variations within
each of the components and the interactions among them highlight the important
dynamics associated with adult development in college. Each of the model’s com-
ponents is discussed in more detail below, along with the previous research that
supports it.
 Donaldson and Graham / MODEL OF COLLEGE OUTCOMES 29

Prior Experience and Personal Biographies

Adults come to the collegiate experience with rich personal biographies. These
personal biographies are influenced by prior experiences in the real world, ranging
from experiences with formal schooling, including those in college organizations
or internships from earlier college experiences, to the social and cultural contexts of
adult life in which adults participate as workers, family, and community members.
The learning experiences in these diverse settings run the entire gamut, ranging
from authentic, to simulated, to inauthentic learning. These experiences and their
assessment of their performance, as well as the assessment of others, influence the
adults’ initial interactions with the college environment as they return to college
(Kasworm, 1995, 1997; Merriam & Caffarella, 1999). These prior experiences and
personal biographies influence the knowledge structures or the adult cognition
component, including those related to self, education, and the classroom. They also
influence learners’ motivations, self-esteem, self-confidence, responsibility, and
intent, as well as the value systems or the psychosocial and value orientations com-
ponent with which learners approach their education. Finally, they establish the
stage for how adults will experience, evaluate, and use their surroundings or the
life-world environments component to help make meaning of their experiences in
college.

Psychosocial and Value Orientations

Prior experience leads adults to evaluate themselves across a number of social
and psychological dimensions that affect their collegiate experiences. These social,
psychological, and value dimensions are the various social conditions, the values,
and the psychological motivations that influence adults’ abilities to learn and
remain in college. As one example, adults’ evaluations of themselves as learners
influence their participation behaviors (Cross, 1981). Other psychosocial elements
such as concerns associated with a “fear of being too old” and a lack of confidence
in academic abilities have also been reported by adult undergraduates as they begin
or reinitiate their college careers (Carp, Peterson, & Roelfs, 1974; Chartrand, 1990;
Novak & Thacker, 1991). Another value dimension that influences persistence and
achievement in college is the extent of the adults’ commitment to the student role
(Cross, 1981). This is especially important given the competing life roles with
which most adults must contend. The absence of psychological distress, achieved
through having supportive family and friends, possessing adequate study skills, and
having clear purposes for participation, has also been connected with the nature of
adults’ collegiate experience and their retention (Chartrand, 1992; Dill & Henley,
1998).
Nonetheless, the role expectations of adults can also serve to make them more
serious students, interested in achieving direct benefits from college and seeking as
30 ADULT EDUCATION QUARTERLY / November 1999

much as possible from the experience. There is evidence that adult learners com-
pensate for any initial lack in confidence or rusty skills by working harder than the
traditional-age students (Cupp, 1991; Donohue & Wong, 1997; Nunn, 1994; Shee-
han, McMenamin, & McDevitt, 1992), by attending college with a clear purpose in
mind, or by taking the advice of their professors or advisers more seriously than the
younger students (Frost, 1991; Kasworm, 1995). Other research has demonstrated
that adult students are more concerned than younger students with the cognitive and
quality aspects of their education, whereas younger students tend to value the social
aspects of college more than adults (Kasworm & Blowers, 1994; Okun, Kardash, &
Janiga, 1986; Wolfgang & Dowling, 1981).

The Connecting Classroom

The connecting classroom component addresses the ways that adults use the
classroom and their interactions with students and faculty as a springboard for their
learning. Because adults generally spend less time on campus, they may be forced
to find ways to use the classroom as the focal point for their learning experiences.
For example, Cupp (1991) reported that adult learners were much less involved in
extracurricular activities on campus, often citing a lack of time or money as the
cause. Frost (1991), Kasworm (1995), and Quinnan (1997) described how adult
students express concerns about how they relate to the traditional-age students in
their classes and are often less involved with campus social activities. Graham and
Donaldson (1996, 1999) and Kuh (1993) have demonstrated that adult students are
much less involved in campus extracurricular activities than their traditional-age
counterparts, owing to time constraints and the multiple life roles they must exer-
cise. Graham and Long (1998) examined four different types of student involve-
ment (i.e., course and other related learning, college organizations and activities,
on-campus and off-campus work, and off-campus community or cultural activities)
and evaluated their relationship to intellectual, problem-solving, scientific reason-
ing, and career development outcomes. Adult learners did as well as or better than
traditional-age students across all four measures of the intellectual and academic
outcomes, despite different patterns of involvement both on-campus and off-campus.
Kasworm and Blowers (1994) found that part-time students attribute the rela-
tionships they develop with faculty members and their in-class learning experi-
ences as more meaningful to them than for their traditional-age peers. Additionally,
research on adults’ perceptions of exemplary collegiate instruction for adults sug-
gests that the social aspects of instruction (i.e., development of a community of
learners within classes and having a respectful and caring instructor) are critical
factors for adult students (Donaldson, 1991; Donaldson, Flannery, & Ross-Gordon,
1993). Graham and Long (1998) reported that the adult students’ overall satisfac-
tion with the college’s academic climate (e.g., faculty concern for students, faculty
accessibility, quality of instruction) played a more significant role in the students’
 Donaldson and Graham / MODEL OF COLLEGE OUTCOMES 31

learning outcomes than did their involvement, suggesting the centrality of the class-
room in these adult students’ experience.
A number of other researchers have also offered evidence that for adults, the
classroom is the center stage for their learning (Bean & Metzner, 1985; Dill & Hen-
ley, 1998; Donaldson, 1991; Kasworm, 1997; Kasworm & Blowers, 1994). For
example, Kasworm (1997) found that adults perceived the classroom as the “main
stage for the creation and negotiation of meaning for learning, for being a student
and for defining the collegiate experience” (p. 7). According to her analysis, the
classroom was used by adult students either to (a) maintain a division between aca-
demic and personal life-world knowledge structures or schemata, (b) use the aca-
demic knowledge structures to illuminate and elaborate existing life-world knowl-
edge structures, or (c) transform both academic and life-world knowledge
structures into new, integrative structures and meaning (Kasworm, 1997).
One explanation of how adults compensate for their time restrictions is that their
class-related learning and their relationships with faculty and other students
become the most powerful influences on their campus experiences. Furthermore, if
adults have limited interactions with the college community, they may instead gain
support from sources outside the college such as family, friends, and coworkers or
the life-world environment component. This is in contrast with traditional-age stu-
dents in which the primary impact comes from their involvement with peers and in
peer-related activities—primarily outside of class (Bean & Metzner, 1985; Kas-
worm, 1990a, 1995; Kasworm & Blowers, 1994; Kasworm & Pike, 1994).
In our model, the classroom is seen as the fulcrum of the collegiate experience
for adults, mediating the psychosocial and value orientations, the life-world envi-
ronment, the adult cognition, and the outcomes components involved in the colle-
giate experience. The classroom connects adults with their instructors and student
peers and provides a context to socially construct, for themselves and others, what it
means to be a college student. Both the instructor and the instructional strategies
employed create or fail to create the climate in which in-class and out-of-class
learning and knowledge structures (both prior and concurrent) can become con-
nected. Likewise, through social engagement and instructional activities and out-
comes, the classroom influences the learners’ psychosocial and value orientations
component. As an illustration of this, their success in learning likely reinforces their
motivations and offers evidence for positive self-evaluation of their role as student.

Adult Cognition

The adult cognition component of the model focuses on the knowledge struc-
tures and learning processes adults bring to college (prior experience and personal
biographies) as well as those they develop concurrently in their in-class (connect-
ing classroom) and out-of-class experiences (life-world environment). The adult
cognition component encompasses three discrete forms of cognition: (a)
32 ADULT EDUCATION QUARTERLY / November 1999

declarative and procedural knowledge structures, (b) metacognitive or self-

regulatory processes, and (c) cognitive operations (e.g., accretion, transformation)
through which knowledge structures develop (Anderson, 1993; Bruer, 1993; Rum-
melhart & Norman, 1978). In brief, adults have complex cognitive schema, rich
with previous knowledge and experience. This generally allows them to connect
new information to something they have already experienced. Furthermore,
through life experiences and their previous successes and failures, adult have devel-
oped metacognitive skills that allow them to monitor their learning approaches,
study habits, motivation levels, and personal resources. Finally, adults make con-
crete connections to the real world, often seeing new knowledge in the context of
how it can be used.
Recognizing the importance of the context for learning (Lave & Wenger, 1991),
this component also refers to the in-class and out-of-class social contexts, lan-
guage, and other learning tools. All of them contribute to the knowledge structures
and processes, as adults adapt to multiple communities of practice, for example,
communities of learners, family members, and workers, community citizens
(Brown & Duguid, 1991; Wilson, 1993). This component of the model, like the
connecting classroom and life-world environment components, contributes to the
outcomes learners experience in college.
The knowledge structures developed as a result of prior experience relate to con-
ceptions (i.e., declarative structures) of self, education, and the classroom, as well
as the know-how (i.e., procedural knowledge) learners employ in their study habits
and work responsibilities. For example, as beliefs, these knowledge structures
influence how learners use the classroom as a venue for negotiating and making
meaning. Furthermore, they affect their social and psychological relationships with
instructors that range from viewing instructors as authorities to viewing them as
colearners and peers (Kasworm, 1997). Research has also demonstrated that as a
consequence of prior experiences, adults often make better use of time manage-
ment strategies than do traditional-age students (Kasworm, 1997; Trueman &
Hartley, 1996) and have developed study skills as adequate as those of traditional-
age learners (Richardson & King, 1998). They often take a serious approach to
studying and learning and attempt to comprehend the meaning of material rather
than taking a superficial approach of merely being able to reproduce material for
purposes of academic assessment (Harper & Kember, 1986; Kasworm, 1997; Mar-
ton, Hounsell, & Entwistle, 1984; Richardson, 1994, 1995). Adult learners also
employ complex metacognitive decisions about their approaches to study, learning,
and balancing the many demands on their time (Kasworm, 1997).
Once adults begin their collegiate careers, interactions between the life-world
environment and connecting classroom components of the model influence their
cognition. Kasworm and Blowers (1994) found that the adult life context both
influenced learning and served as an avenue for adults to express their learning.
This involved the interaction among the roles of family member, worker, and stu-
dent while adults attended college.
 Donaldson and Graham / MODEL OF COLLEGE OUTCOMES 33

Furthermore, Kasworm and Blowers’s (1994) findings suggested that adult stu-
dents made clear distinctions between the academic world and real world and the
knowledge and learning strategies needed for each. For example, adults suggested
that they learned expert knowledge by using either a hierarchical building block or a
networking approach to connect the existing knowledge to the unfamiliar new
knowledge. Kasworm and Blowers also found that in some instances, adults used
real-life experiences to forge meaningful learning connections to link academic
and real-world knowledge, whereas in other situations, they memorized class-
based expert knowledge that did not connect to their life experiences.
The adult learner’s cognitive framework, rich with prior experience and knowl-
edge, serves as a structure for knowledge that remains intact or is either elaborated
or transformed as a consequence of their collegiate learning. This prior experience
also provides them with practical know-how about how to manage their time and
study methods. They often employ metacognitive processes to monitor and regu-
late their work, learning, and personal life roles as well as complex strategies and
beliefs about how to combine their study methods, their interactions with instruc-
tors, and their classroom experiences. Once in college, they struggle to connect
their present and emerging life-world knowledge structures to their academic
knowledge structures. The extent to which they are able to make these connections
influences the value of their college experiences.

Life-World Environment
As noted above, the life-world environment component refers to the different
contexts in which adults work and live and are defined by the roles they occupy in
their various work, family, and community settings. This component includes the
social settings outside the collegiate environment and the people adults depend on
for support for their collegiate learning activities. It includes such aspects as their
family, their work, and their communities in which they participate as citizens and
leaders. The concept of setting is used here as sociocultural theorists use the term to
depict a subjectively perceived context in which adults participate with others to
frame and develop communities of practice (Brown & Duguid, 1991; Lave & Wen-
ger, 1991; Wilson, 1993). This setting also provides the context in which adults
learn through experience and construct what Kasworm (1997) labeled “life-world
knowledge structures.” These settings serve as out-of-class contexts for learning
and act as alternative avenues for conventional campus involvement (e.g., social
clubs, campus activities, work-study experiences). These settings offer places
where adults construct meaning for what they are learning in their classrooms. For
example, Kasworm (1995) noted that involvement in cocurricular activities for
adults means engagement in work, family, and “self-directed learning projects out-
side the confines of the college setting and beyond particular course assignments”
(p. 24). This perspective then suggests that involvement for adults occurs across the
34 ADULT EDUCATION QUARTERLY / November 1999

worlds of college, work, and family and is not limited to the collegiate environment
(Kasworm, 1995).
Another element of the life-world environment component is the reinforcing
agents, or individuals within the out-of-class social settings that support adults’
return to higher education. These reinforcing agents include family members,
coworkers, supervisors, and community members with whom adults interact on a
consistent basis. These individuals either provide psychological and social support
for adults to return to pursue their collegiate studies or undermine their efforts (e.g.,
Apps, 1981; Chartrand, 1992; Ross, 1989; Schlossberg, 1987). In addition, Mer-
riam and Heuer (1996) found that support from others can help adults foster mean-
ing from their experiences as part of their continued development. Therefore, sup-
port not only is needed to return to higher education and persist in it but also is
required for adults to make meaning from their concurrent experiences in school
and out. In addition, these varying levels of support either enhance or detract from
elements of the psychosocial and value orientations component when adults
engage in their collegiate experiences.

College Outcomes for Adults

The final component of the model focuses on the outcomes derived from the col-
lege experience. Most studies of college outcomes focus on measures that tap the
traditional academic definitions of expected outcomes from college, such as cogni-
tive, intellectual, and emotional development. However, this model suggests that
adults may really be seeking, and in many cases achieving, different levels of out-
comes related to their college experiences and learning. For example, some
research suggests that adults differentiate between learning that (a) is required to
pass an academic test; (b) actually increases their knowledge and understanding of
the world; (c) can be applied directly at work, in their families, or in other life situa-
tions; or (d) can be used to help the larger community or for the benefit of society
(Donaldson, Graham, Martindill, & Long, 1999; Kasworm, 1995, 1997)
Research in the arena of college outcomes has demonstrated that using conven-
tional measures, adults experience equal or greater outcomes as those achieved by
traditional-age students. For example, using a national sample of 28,000 under-
graduate students, Graham and Donaldson (1999) found that adults reported
slightly higher levels of growth than did the younger students on most academic and
intellectual items, even though they were much less involved in campus activities
and much more involved in caring for their families. Graham (1998) evaluated the
effects of the colleges’ “educational ethos” on academic and intellectual develop-
ment of adults and reported similar levels of development to that of the younger stu-
dents. In addition, the greater the satisfaction with the colleges’climate for learning
or educational ethos, the greater the reported growth on outcomes for both adults
and traditional-age students. Thus, regardless of age, students profited when they
felt they were supported by the educational ethos of college.
 Donaldson and Graham / MODEL OF COLLEGE OUTCOMES 35

Cupp (1991) reported that postsecondary education served as a stimulus for

changes in attitudes and values among adults. For many, it stimulated new aspira-
tions and interests and helped them realize these increased goals. These adults also
reported an overwhelming support for the liberal arts curriculum, yet some feared
acquiring a “shallow knowledge base” in this respect. In another study of 9,400
undergraduate students, Graham and Donaldson (1996) created an index to meas-
ure “personal growth attributed to college attendance” and reported that colleges
had a “tangible impact” on 29 of the 36 personal and social areas. Additionally, the
adults’ reported growth was comparable to that of the younger students.
As noted above, these conventional definitions of outcomes are recognized in
the model. However, the model also acknowledges different forms and levels of
outcomes as defined by adult learners themselves that go beyond those defined by
the academic community. For example, Kasworm (1995, 1997) found that tradi-
tional academic outcomes were not freestanding but instead were related to the
adults’ perceptions of how they integrated academic and life-world knowledge
structures. Types of outcomes identified by Kasworm included (a) separate and dis-
tinct academic and life-world knowledge structures, where learners maintained a
distinction between what they were learning in class and in their life-world environ-
ments; (b) elaborated life-world knowledge structures, where students used what
they had learned in college to elaborate on what they knew as a result of their learn-
ing in their life-world environments; and (c) integrated and transformed life-world
and academic knowledge structures, where adults were able to integrate what they
had learned across the various life-world and collegiate contexts in which they were
engaged.
By expanding the definitions of potential college outcomes, this component of
the model addresses a number of issues. For example, it draws into question the
relationship between different forms of involvement in adults’ life-world environ-
ments versus the conventional forms of on-campus involvement and the possibility
of different outcomes. It also questions whether adults distinguish between success
in their learning and success in college (e.g., getting good grades, playing the “aca-
demic game,” getting a degree) that is predicated on achieving outcomes defined by
the institution and its faculty, a possibility suggested by Kasworm’s findings. Also,
the model considers outcomes influenced by multiple factors, such as the collegiate
experience, life-world experiences, and adult cognitive processes, and not simply
what learners experience on campus.

CONCLUSION
The Model of College Outcomes for Adult Students and its various components
suggest that adults may engage the new knowledge obtained in college in different
and perhaps more immediately useful ways than do traditional-age students. As it
is, adults often make tough choices about how to spend their time. In interviews
conducted by Kasworm and Blowers (1994), adults reported that even while
36 ADULT EDUCATION QUARTERLY / November 1999

enrolled in school, their highest priority often remained work. Personal and family
time often were sacrificed to provide time for their other roles, indicating that
attempts to involve adult students in campus activities will not be successful due to
the multiple conflicts and time constraints they face. To compensate for this lack of
time to devote to campus and their peers, adults may draw on their previous per-
sonal experiences, their wisdom from years of experience, their friends and family,
and their instructors to make meaning out of the new knowledge they have
acquired. To do this, they use different skills and strategies that compensate for the
lack of attention they can give to out-of-class activities.
This model suggests that some of the skills that adults put to use in achieving
outcomes from college are based on their prior and current life-world experiences.
It addresses the key components that influence adult learning in college and
attempts to develop an alternative model of college outcomes for adults. It suggests
that adults compensate for their lack of time by having clearer purposes in mind
about their participation in college and different value systems related to their ori-
entation to work as well as to the student role. Adults may also use sophisticated
procedural and metacognitive knowledge and skills they have developed in their
out-of-school experiences that they can bring to bear in their studies and to monitor
and manage their approaches to learning. However, although the literature suggests
that these factors help explain adult success in college, additional research is
required to determine if these are indeed the factors at work, and if they are, how
they assist adults achieve various outcomes from college.
The model has been presented in part as a way to explain how adults do as well in
college as traditional-age students, despite the unique ways they engage in higher
education. But it does not assume that there is homogeneity in the level of outcomes
experienced by adults. Rather, the level of outcomes achieved varies for adults, as it
does for traditional-age students. Therefore, the model, by providing multiple com-
ponents composed of several different variables, also helps explain the variations in
experiences for adults. For example, it suggests ways to explore how variations in
metacognitive processes, in life-world experiences, and in the quality of the class-
room interactions and instruction may explain variation in outcomes. As noted ear-
lier, the model also draws attention to the need to explore alternate definitions of
outcomes for adult learners rather than assuming that those identified for
traditional-age students naturally apply equally well to adults (Kasworm, 1997).
Traditional-age students continue to change their nature of engagement with insti-
tutions of higher education by attending part-time more, working more while in
school, and engaging in life-world activities with other adult learners. As such, the
model may serve as a better way to explain the experiences of all students than the
models historically used to explore the college experience of the traditional college
population.
The model points to several other issues that have not been fully answered in pre-
vious research that could be addressed to enhance our understanding of adult under-
graduate students: (a) What conditions or experiences can compensate for their
 Donaldson and Graham / MODEL OF COLLEGE OUTCOMES 37

lack of involvement in traditional campus activities? (b) What are the barriers to
involvement in campus activities, and are they worth eliminating for adults with
multiple family and work roles? (c) To what extent and how do adults make the con-
nections between their new learning and real life in obtaining transformational
change? and (d) What do adults see as the most powerful influences on their learn-
ing? All of these questions suggest areas ripe for future research.
The model also raises the issue of whether colleges should accommodate adults’
lifestyles and their talents for attacking problems associated with learning and with
limited time. In fact, colleges may need to design classrooms to enhance learning
by using action research in real-world settings, addressing real-world problems or
practices associated with work or family life, problem-based learning applications,
opportunities for peer teaching, and chances to create learning that will benefit the
community.
The model raises questions that confirm a need for alternative strategies to
evaluate the adult collegiate experience that move beyond studying time commit-
ments to campus activities and traditional relationships with peers and academic
faculty. It also suggests that developmental outcomes defined through the young
adult maturational theories and conventional models used to explain learner out-
comes and retention may not suffice. There is a need to consider sociopsychologi-
cal theories of perceptual beliefs and commitments, psychological theories of life-
span development and adult world involvement, and learning theories of contextual
embeddedness. All of these issues also point to the need for increased use of various
research methods to explore college outcomes and the process leading to their
attainment. It may well be the time for additional qualitative research to inquire into
the dynamics suggested by our model in an effort to uncover details needed for a
more thorough study of these dynamics through other quantitative means.
The nature of college participants and their experience in and out of college have
been changing in the past two decades. Yet, our thinking and research has generally
not kept pace with these changes. The model proposed is an effort to help us catch
up with the changes and to more comprehensively and accurately address the expe-
rience of adults on our campuses.

REFERENCES
Anderson, J. R. (1993). Rules of the mind. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Apps, J. W. (1981). The adult learner on campus: A guide for instructors and administrators. New York:
Cambridge.
Astin, A. (1977). Four critical years: Effects of college on beliefs, attitudes, and knowledge. San Fran-
cisco: Jossey-Bass.
Astin, A. (1993). What matters in college: Four critical years revisited. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Bean, J. P., & Metzner, B. S. (1985). A conceptual model of nontraditional undergraduate student attri-
tion. Review of Educational Research, 55, 485-540.
38 ADULT EDUCATION QUARTERLY / November 1999

Brown, J. S., & Duguid, P. (1991). Organizational learning and communities-of-practice: Toward a uni-
fied view of working, learning, and innovation. Organization Science, 2(1), 40-57.
Bruer, J. T. (1993). Schools for thought: A science of learning in the classroom. Cambridge, MA: MIT
Press.
Carp, A., Peterson, R., & Roelfs, P. (1974). Adult learning interests and experiences. In K. P. Cross & J.
R. Valley (Eds.), Planning non-traditional programs: An analysis of the issues for postsecondary
education (pp. 11-52). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Cervero, R. M. (1988). Effective continuing education for professionals. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Chartrand, J. M. (1990). A causal analysis to predict the personal and academic adjustment of nontradi-
tional students. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 37(1), 65-73.
Chartrand, J. M. (1992). An empirical test of a model of nontraditional student adjustment. Journal of
Counseling Psychology, 39(2), 193-202.
Chickering, A., & Gamson, Z. (1987). Seven principles for good practice in undergraduate education.
AAHE Bulletin, 39(7), 3-7.
Cobb, P. (1994). Where is the mind? Constructivist and sociocultural perspectives on mathematical
development. Educational Researcher, 23(7), 13-20.
Cobb, P. (1995). Continuing the conversation: A response to Smith. Educational Researcher, 24(6),
25-27.
Cross, K. P. (1981). Adults as learners. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Cupp, L. (1991, October). Acquiring new perspectives: The impact of education on adult students in a
traditional university. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Association for Adult
and Continuing Education, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
Dill, P. L., & Henley, T. B. (1998). Stressors of college: A comparison of traditional and nontraditional
students. Journal of Psychology Interdisciplinary and Applied, 132(1), 25-32.
Donaldson, J. F. (1991). An examination of similarities and differences among adults’ perceptions of
instructional excellence in off-campus credit course programming. Innovative Higher Education,
16(1), 59-78.
Donaldson, J. F., Flannery, D., & Ross-Gordon, J. (1993). A triangulated study comparing adult college
students’ perceptions of effective teaching with those of traditional students. Continuing Higher
Education Review, 57(3), 147-165.
Donaldson, J. F., Graham, S., Martindill, W., & Long, S. (1999, April). Adult undergraduate students:
How do they define success? Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational
Research Association, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
Donohue, T., & Wong, E. (1997). Achievement motivation and college satisfaction in traditional and
nontraditional students. Education, 118(2), 237-243.
Frost, S. (1991). Academic advising for student success: A system of shared responsibility (ASHE-ERIC
Higher Education Reports No. 3). Washington, DC: The George Washington University, School of
Education and Human Development.
Graham, S. (1998). Looking at adult growth in college: Examining the effects of age and educational
ethos. Journal of College Student Development, 39(3), 239-250.
Graham, S., & Donaldson, J. (1996). Assessing the personal growth for adults enrolled in higher educa-
tion. Journal of Continuing Higher Education, 44(2), 7-22.
Graham, S., & Donaldson, J. (1999). Adult students’ academic and intellectual development in college.
Adult Education Quarterly, 49 (3), 147-161.
Graham, S., & Long, S. (1998, April). The role of college involvement for adult undergraduate students.
Paper presented at the American Education Research Association National Conference, San Diego,
CA.
Harper, G., & Kember, D. (1986). Approaches to study of distance education students. British Journal of
Educational Technology, 17, 212-222.
Hughes, J., & Graham, S. (1990). Adult life roles: A new approach to adult development. Journal of
Continuing Higher Education, 38(2), 2-8.
 Donaldson and Graham / MODEL OF COLLEGE OUTCOMES 39

Kasworm, C. (1990a). Adult students in higher education: Myths and realities. Community/Junior Col-
lege Research Quarterly, 14, 155-175.
Kasworm, C. (1990b). Adult undergraduates in higher education: A review of past research perspec-
tives. Review of Educational Research, 60(3), 345-372.
Kasworm, C. (1995, November). Outcome assessment of adult undergraduates. Paper presented at the
American Association of Adult and Continuing Education Conference, Kansas City, MO.
Kasworm, C. (1997, March). Adult meaning making in the undergraduate classroom. Paper presented at
the American Education Research Association Conference, Chicago.
Kasworm, C., & Blowers, S. (1994, June). Adult undergraduate students: Patterns of involvement (Final
research report to U.S. Department of Education). Knoxville: College of Education, University of
Tennessee.
Kasworm, C., & Pike, G. (1994). Adult undergraduate students: Evaluating the appropriateness of a tra-
ditional model of academic performance. Research in Higher Education, 35(6), 689-710.
Kuh, G. (1992). What do we do now? Implications for educators of “How college affects students.”
Review of Higher Education, 15(3), 349-363.
Kuh, G. (1993). In their own words: What students learn outside the classroom. American Educational
Research Journal, 30(2), 277-304.
Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. New York: Cam-
bridge University Press.
Levine, A. (1994). Guerrilla education in residential life. In C. C. Schroeder & P. Mable (Eds.), Realiz-
ing the educational potential of residence halls (pp. 93-106). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Marton, F., Hounsell, D., & Entwistle, N. (Eds.). (1984). The experience of learning. Edinburgh, UK:
Scottish Academic Press.
Merriam, S., & Caffarella, R. (1991). Learning in adulthood. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Merriam, S. B., & Caffarella, R. S. (1999). Learning in adulthood: A comprehensive guide (2nd ed.). San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Merriam, S. B., & Heuer, B. (1996). Meaning-making, adult learning, and development: A model with
implications for practice. International Journal of Lifelong Education, 15(4), 243-255.
The National Center for Educational Statistics. (1996). Table 172—Total fall enrollment in institutions
of higher education, by level, sex, age, and attendance status of student: 1993. In Digest of Education
Statistics 1996 [Online]. Retrieved October 20, 1997: http://nces.ed.gov/pubs/d96/D96T172.html
Novak, M., & Thacker, C. (1991). Satisfaction and strain among middle-aged women who return to
school: Replication and extension of findings in a Canadian context. Educational Gerontology,
17(4), 323-342.
Nunn, G. (1994). Adult learners’ locus of control, self-evaluation and learning temperament as a func-
tion of age an gender. Journal of Instructional Psychology, 21(3), 260-264.
Okun, M. A., Kardash, C. A., & Janiga, J. M. (1986). Age differences in college values and perceived
quality of college life. Educational Gerontology, 12, 409-416.
Pace, C. (1979). Measuring outcomes of college: Fifty years of findings and recommendations for the
future. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Pascarella, E. (1985). Students’ affective development within the college environment. Journal of
Higher Education, 56(6), 640-663.
Pascarella, E., & Terenzini, P. (1991). How college affects students: Findings and insights from twenty
years of research. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Quinnan, T. W. (1997). Adult students “at-risk”: Culture bias in higher education. Westport, CT: Bergin
& Garvey.
Richardson, J.T.E. (1994). Mature students in higher education: Academic performance and intellectual
ability. Higher Education, 28, 373-386.
Richardson, J.T.E. (1995). Mature students in higher education: An investigation of approaches to
studying and academic performance. Studies in Higher Education, 20, 5-17.
40 ADULT EDUCATION QUARTERLY / November 1999

Richardson, J.T.E., & King, E. (1998). Adult students in higher education: Burden or boon? Journal of
Higher Education, 69(1), 65-88.
Ross, J. M. (1989). Recruiting and retaining adult students in higher education. In P. S. Cookson (Ed.),
Recruiting and retaining adult students, New Directions for Continuing Education, No. 41 (pp. 49-62).
San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Rummelhart, D. E., & Norman, D. (1978). Accretion, tuning, and restructuring: Three models of learn-
ing. In J. W. Cotton & R. L. Klatzky (Eds.), Semantic factors in cognition. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence
Erlbaum.
Sanford, N. (1962). The American college: A psychological and social interpretation of the higher
learning. New York: John Wiley.
Schlossberg, N. K. (1987). Taking the mystery out of change. Psychology Today, 21(5), 74-75.
Sheehan, E. P., McMenamin, N., & McDevitt, T. M. (1992). Learning styles of traditional and nontradi-
tional university students. College Student Journal, 26(4), 486-490.
Shere, C. (1988). Who is the adult learner? Journal of College Admissions, 121, 18-27.
Terenzini, P., & Pascarella, E. (1994). Living with myths: Undergraduate education in America.
Change, 26(1), 28-32.
Terenzini, P., Pascarella, E., & Blimling, G. (1996). Students’ out-of-class experiences and their influ-
ence on learning and cognitive development: A literature review. Journal of College Student Devel-
opment, 37(2), 149-162.
Trueman, M., & Hartley, J. (1996). A comparison between the time-management skills and academic
performance of mature and traditional-entry university students. Higher Education, 32, 199-215.
von Glaserfeld, E. (1992). Constructivism reconstructed: A reply to Suchting. Science and Education, 1,
379-384.
Wilson, A. L. (1993). The promise of situated cognition. In S. B. Merriam (Ed.), An update on adult
learning theory, New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education, No. 57 (pp. 71-79). San Fran-
cisco: Jossey-Bass.
Wolfgang, M. E., & Dowling, W. D. (1981). Differences in motivation of adult and younger undergradu-
ates. Journal of Higher Education, 52(6), 640-648.