Student Worldview and Satisfaction Alignment in Postsecondary Education by David C. Martin ...

242 Pages·2016·1.14 MB·English

Student Worldview and Satisfaction Alignment
in Postsecondary Education
by
David C. Martin
Claremont Graduate University and San Diego State University
2016
© Copyright David C. Martin, 2016 All rights reserved.
APPROVAL OF THE DISSERTATION COMMITTEE
This dissertation has been duly read, reviewed, and critiqued by the Committee listed below,
which hereby approves the manuscript of David C. Martin as fulfilling the scope and quality
requirements for meriting the degree of Doctorate of Philosophy in Education.
Mary Poplin, Committee Co-Chair
Claremont Graduate University
Professor
Cristian Aquino-Sterling, Committee Co-Chair
San Diego State University
Assistant Professor
David Drew, Committee Member
Claremont Graduate University
Professor
Lisa Clement-Lamb, Committee Member
San Diego State University
Professor
ABSTRACT
Student Worldview and Satisfaction Alignment
in Postsecondary Education
by
David C. Martin
Claremont Graduate University and San Diego State University
2016
An individual’s worldview represents their cultural, ideological, and theological
conceptions. A worldview encases personal belief and value systems. Moreover, these values
precipitate an individual’s actions. The Worldview Satisfaction Measure is a new valid and
reliable survey instrument which assesses a student’s worldviews. The distribution resulted in a
sample of 410 sophomore and junior level students from a Southern California secular university.
Quantitative analysis shows that there is no apparent alignment between postsecondary
sophomore and junior student worldviews and university satisfaction or with a student’s choice
of major. Student overall satisfaction is moderate to very high at the examined institution. A
path analysis reflects that 40% of the variation in overall satisfaction is accounted for when
considering the following variables: (a) the degree to which a student perceives that their ideas
were taken seriously; (b) when students recognize that their family economic status is
upper-middle class; satisfaction with (c) opportunity to reflect spiritually and religiously;
(d) amount of interaction with other students; (e) relevance of coursework to the future;
(f) coursework in relation to life; and (g) with university counseling and advising services.
Development of satisfaction is not necessarily an indication of a quality education. Categorical
analysis reveals noteworthy variations between a student’s religious or secular identity and their
corresponding worldviews. Recommendations include the development of curriculum, which
assesses the coherence of thought, along with a neo-classical general education program with
evidence captured in capstone evaluations, minors, or other certifications. Faculty and student
development should be based in reflection of worldviews and personal values within broader
scientific, ideological, and theological frames.
Keywords: Worldviews, Student Satisfaction, Higher Education, Student Engagement,
Student Choice of Major, Religion, Spirituality, Social Constructionism.
DEDICATION
For Barbara
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
I first need to offer special thanks and acknowledgment to Mary Poplin. It is Mary’s fault
that I discovered worldviews. Through her generosity and sharing her unique understanding of
worldviews, I found a direction for my life’s study. Mary graciously shepherded me through this
journey with care and patience. I owe her more than I can could ever repay.
Cristian Aquino-Sterling showed me a commitment to justice and human thriving. You
contributed so much to me in terms of your own understanding of philosophy, social linguistics,
and social justice. Your being a sounding board and treatment as a colleague were equally
valuable.
I owe another special thanks to David Drew for suggesting Astin’s Input-
Environment-Output (I-E-O) model. The I-E-O is basis for the analytical framework, and you
provided directive critiques of the methodology used in the study. David’s guidance in
quantitative methods enlivened me and allowed me to engage with worldviews in a very different
way.
Lisa Clement Lamb kept me going with support when back spasms and my father’s
illness brought me low. I owe you a special debt of thanks for your encouragement, not only in
my study, but also for the gift of cataloging research questions. Through your research, you
showed me what scholarly study could be like.
For my family and friends who listened to me insistently ramble on about worldviews, it
could not have been easy. Thank you.
Lastly, to Barbara, you were my emotional and home support. You are the love of my
life. I love our life together. Thank you for honoring me by being my help and my wife.
vii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Chapter 1: Statement of Problem................................................. 1
Introduction. ............................................................. 1
Purpose of Study. ......................................................... 1
Theoretical Rationale....................................................... 2
Definition of Terms. ....................................................... 2
Chapter 2: Literature Review.................................................... 6
Student Inputs. ........................................................... 9
Worldview Analysis..................................................... 9
Roman Catholic Theistic Worldview........................................ 13
Scientific Materialism. .................................................. 25
Secular Humanism...................................................... 37
Marxism and Critical Theory........................................... 48
Posstructuralism and postmodern thought................................. 56
Religiousness in Unitarianism.......................................... 59
Eastern Pantheism. ..................................................... 60
Spiritualism. .......................................................... 66
African spirituality................................................... 68
Native American spiritualism. ......................................... 71
New Age spiritualism. ............................................... 75
Spiritism........................................................... 80
Student Beliefs and Values. .............................................. 83
Personal Religious Identification........................................... 86
viii
Environmental Variables.................................................... 86
Race and Ethnicity...................................................... 87
Social Class. .......................................................... 90
Gender. .............................................................. 92
Student Outputs. .......................................................... 98
Student Satisfaction..................................................... 98
Retention Rates. ....................................................... 98
Major Choice.......................................................... 99
Literature Summary........................................................101
Research Questions. .......................................................102
Chapter 3: Method............................................................103
Research Design...........................................................103
Description of Variables. ................................................103
Study Population and Data Collection.......................................104
Soundness of the Analytical Approach. .....................................105
Path analysis........................................................105
Factor analysis. .....................................................105
Structural Equation Modeling (SEM). ...................................105
Discriminant function analysis..........................................106
Decomposition of bivariate co-variation..................................106
Correlation analysis. .................................................106
Worldview Satisfaction Survey Construction. ...................................106
Outputs and Demographic Categories.......................................107
ix
Measurable Dimensions of Worldviews. ....................................108
Reality. ...........................................................109
The universe and origins. .............................................109
Miracles. ..........................................................110
The philosophy of the human person.....................................110
Teleology (Life’s Final Purpose)........................................111
Morals and ethics....................................................111
Epistemology.......................................................111
Suffering. .........................................................112
Human history. .....................................................112
College Environments. ..................................................113
Social Actions. ........................................................113
Overall Scoring Strategy. ................................................113
Respondent major. ..................................................113
Race. .............................................................113
Religious affiliation..................................................114
Worldview Scoring. ....................................................114
Chapter 4: Presentation of Findings...............................................118
Reliability and Validity. ....................................................118
Missing Data. .........................................................119
Demographics. ........................................................119
Religious Identification and Respondent Worldviews.................... . . . . . . . 120
Theist worldview....................................................120
x