market research report

Comparing the Student Experience: Dorming Versus Commuting

May 3rd, 2019

Running head: Comparing the Student Experience: Dorming Versus Commuting 1

Table of Contents

1. Letter of Authorization 2

2. Letter of Transmittal 3

3. Executive Summary 4

4. Introduction 5

4.1 Overview or Organization 5

4.2 Problem Definition 6

5. Research Objectives 7

5.1 Research Questions 7

5.2 Research Objectives 7

5.2 Hypotheses 8

6. Research Design 9

6.1 Type of Research 9

6.2 Data Collection 9

6.3 Key Questions 11

6.4 Data Analysis 11

7. Findings 12

7.1 General Findings 12

7.2 Dorming Findings 13

7.3 Commuting Findings 14

7.4 Dorm versus Commute: Experience 15

7.5 Dorm versus Commute: GPA 16

7.6 Dorm versus Commute in Relation to Gender 17

7.7 Experience by Gender 18

7.8 GPA by Gender 19

8. Conclusion 22

9. Recommendations 23

10. Limitation and Caveats 26

11. Appendices 27

11.1 Appendix A: Survey 27

Running head: Comparing the Student Experience: Dorming Versus Commuting 2

1. Letter of Authorization

Running head: Comparing the Student Experience: Dorming Versus Commuting 3

2. Letter of Transmittal

Running head: Comparing the Student Experience: Dorming Versus Commuting 4

3. Executive Summary When attending college students have two living options: either live on campus or live off

campus. Dorming on campus puts students ; however, it is typically very costly. Those who live

off campus either live in an apartment/house or live at home with their parents. This selection is

typically much cheaper than dorming but students must commute to campus and have to deal

with parking. Those who live on campus were classified as a dormer and those who live off

campus or commute were classified as a commuter.

The purpose of this market research project was to analyze students’ college experience at

Montclair State University. This report will present the collected data and summarize the

findings of this project. It will also include recommendations for Montclair State University and

Montclair State Residence Life to implement into their policies and procedures.

The main objective of this project was to determine how the experience of a commuter differed,

if any, from a commuter. To understand the relationship, the hours of involvement, experience

rating and GPA of the two groups were compared.

Sub-objectives were determine dormers attitudes towards dorming and commuters attitudes

towards commuting. Dormers were also asked questions related to the dorms and the cost of

living on campus. Commuters were asked questions to gauge whether or not they are satisfied

with commuting. The GPA and hours of involvement of males versus females were also

compared.

To analyze students’ experience, a survey was created to collect data. 48 respondents

participated in the survey. It was open to all Montclair State students: any gender, year, and both

commuters and dormers. From there the data was cleaned and analyzed. Qualtrics, Excel and

SPSS were used to perform the necessary analyses.

The data revealed that those who dorm are significantly more satisfied with their college

experience than those who commute. It also showed that there is no significance between a

student’s involvement and whether or not he or she dorms or commutes. A majority of those who

dorm do not believe that housing is worth what they pay. A majority of those who commute

believe that they are missing out on the college student and are not as engaged because they

commute. Those who commute perform better academically than those who commute.

Montclair State University must implement programs to involve and engage commuters. These

programs would engage commuters and will increase their satisfaction. This in turn would

improve their overall college experience. Montclair State should implement study programs in

the residence halls. Doing so would increase the GPAs of dormers.

Running head: Comparing the Student Experience: Dorming Versus Commuting 5

4. Introduction

4.1 Overview of Organization

Montclair State University is home to approximately 21,000 students. Located in Montclair, NJ

this university offers many opportunities for students all over New Jersey, as well as those from

out of state. Its proximity to New York City also brings in students from across the Hudson

River. Being that it is located in northern New Jersey, the university offers thousands of students

near the area the comfort of living at home, while still getting an education. Commuting is not

the only option for students at Montclair. There are also 10 residence halls offered to students

who live too far to commute. Many high school students are reluctant to go far away from home

for school, because the cost of out-of-state tuition can be almost double the price of in-state

tuition price. Montclair’s location is an ideal placement for South Jersey residents. Right on the

border of Pennsylvania, students can get as far away from home as they want, and still pay the

in-state tuition price. Now, that the students are committed to Montclair, there are other problems

that lie within. Of the 21,000 students that attend Montclair State University, roughly 30% live in

on-campus housing; the remaining 70% are located off campus.

on-campus housing can add around an extra $9,000 to a student’s tuition bill. If you reside

further away from the school, where commuting is not an option, on-campus housing is where

you would most likely stay. To involve these residents, the school has formed a team of student

Resident Assistants to create a smooth transition from home to college. The RA’s are required to

hold events each month, and weekly check ups on their residents to ensure their safety and

comfortability. They are trained for crisis management and a number of other scenarios, as their

residents are their number one priority. Many students also take up the opportunity to live near

the college but in off-campus housing that is not affiliated with the school. These residents also

fall under the commuting student umbrella.

Montclair State University also offers roughly 120 student organizations to engage all of its

students. These organizations not only keep students busy, but also help them set up their future,

and build amazing social and life skills that they will hold with them forever. These

organizations include, but are not limited to: The Student Government Association, Greek Life,

Honors Societies, Academic clubs, Religious clubs, and Political clubs.

4.2 Problem Definition

Montclair State University, as well as Montclair State Residence Life have recently received

negative feedback from the Montclair State student body. These complaints stem from both

commuters who live off campus as well as residents who dorm on campus.

Commuting students have voiced negative feelings towards parking, stating that the availability

of parking is not sufficient. Students spend a great deal of time searching for parking, and on

many occasions end up being late for class. Many people recommend to get to campus earlier to

find a spot, but many of these students work or have other obligations that limits their time.

Running head: Comparing the Student Experience: Dorming Versus Commuting 6

There are other times that students find parking that is no where near their destination. The lots at

MSU are largely spread out forcing commuting students to wait for the campus’s slow shuttles,

or walk to class from the far distances, both resulting in a tardy arrival. Commuters have also

mentioned that living off campus, limits their involvement and access to the on-campus

resources. After classes, it is very common for commuters to just walk back to their cars and

head home. This keeps them from engaging in the numerous activities that the university hosts.

Many people choose to live away at college to get the “full college experience” and many

commuters feel as if they are missing out on that as well.

On the other hand, there are complaints coming from the residents of Montclair State University.

As previously mentioned, there is the option to live on campus for students that live further away

from school. On campus residents have also voiced their opinions that the cost of living on

campus is very costly. Being that some of these residents don’t have an option to live at home if

they want to attend Montclair State, dorming is one of the few options they have. Throughout the

campus and the 10 separate dorming halls, there are many living arrangement options, such as

living in a traditional double, or a single. Students can also live in an apartment style complex.

As you explore these options it becomes very apparent that the prices vary vastly, becoming

more expensive depending on where you would prefer to reside.

“The full college experience” is something that many people talk about. Students live away at

school to fulfill this dream of being away from home carefree, at the expense neglecting one’s

studies and responsibilities. Many residents have mentioned that although they are thoroughly

enjoying their time making friends and having fun, they have noticed that it is a lot harder to stay

on task. In many scenarios, school work comes second when faced against the social scene. It is

very easily to get distracted from school work with the hundreds of events and activities being

put on if your priorities are not set straight. Coming straight from home, students think they

know it all and sometimes forget what they actually came to college to do. Study. Resulting in

students being less focused.

Lastly, within the past year or two, Montclair State has been addressing recent issues with their

residence halls. The campus is so old and as a result, some of the buildings require maintenance

and renovations, which can be costly. Mold, worn down or broken furniture, and dents/ holes in

the walls are just a few examples of why residents on campus have been complaining about the

dorms. Although the University is working their best to fix these issues, there are thousands of

them that will take time and a large amount of money to be completed.

Running head: Comparing the Student Experience: Dorming Versus Commuting 7

5. Research Objectives 5.1 Research Questions

As previously mentioned, Montclair State University has roughly 21,000 students and only about

30% of that number reside in on-campus housing. In a school that has such a big campus and

access to many methods of transportation to nearby shopping centers and grocery stores, it is

difficult to understand why many students are still commuters. People who live on campus

experience a different life than those of commuters. They are able to enjoy the many on-campus

activities offered by Montclair State University. on-campus living also creates an academic

environment, especially impactful on freshman, that is needed to concentrate on school work.

The first few research questions were aimed at establishing the demographics of the students we

surveyed. The questions pertained to a respondent’s gender, GPA, and year of study. The next

two questions were to see how involved students were on-campus with activities such as

on-campus jobs, clubs, sports or greek organizations. We then separated our two groups of

students: those who dorm and those who commute.

For those who dorm, the questions were focused on where the student lives and their reason for

picking their dorm whether it was because of price or living arrangement. The following asked to

rank how they felt about their college experience. They were also asked if they believed that they

were paying a fair price for their dorm and if they were more engaged on campus since they

dormed. It is believed that those who dorm performed better academically in school but that may

have not been the case hence why we asked students for the range of their GPAs.

If a student was a commuter a different set of questions would open up specifically for those who

did not live on campus. Their questioned were aimed to explain why they did not choose to dorm

whether it was because of price or some other external reason. The following questions were

guided to figure out their involvement on campus as commuters. If they were not as involved as

students who lived on campus were we wanted to figure out if they felt like they were not

obtaining the full college experience every college student hears about.

Overall, the research questions were aimed to provide deeper insight of those who form and

those who commute. This involved their experiences, GPAs and on-campus involvement with

clubs, sports and other activities.

5.2 Research Objectives

Research objectives were established to guide the study in proving our hypothesis. We wanted to

determine whether or not there is a difference in campus involvement depending on if a student

dorms versus if he or she commutes. As previously states, the easy accessibility to many clubs

and activities should be the reason a student that dorms is more involved on campus, but this

may not always be the case. We also wanted to determine how commuting versus dorming

affects a students’ overall satisfaction with his or her college experience. It is said that dorming

Running head: Comparing the Student Experience: Dorming Versus Commuting 8

creates a different environment that captures the true college experience but we wanted to see if

commuters felt the same way.

Our sub objectives were to determine if living on campus helps a student achieve a higher GPA.

With access to the library and an academic environment, it might be assumed that students who

dorm have better grades than those who commute. Our study also was focused on what factors

contribute to students’ decisions on whether or not to live on campus. If dorming was a better

academic path in the end, we wanted to figure out why commuters decided not to ultimately take

that path with their peers.

5.3 Hypotheses

Several hypotheses were formulated at the beginning of the study to try to explain the behavior

of students have. The first hypothesis was that students who live on campus are more engaged on

campus than those who commute. This entails that students interact more with what Montclair

State University has to offer since they have easy accessibility to campus in comparison to

commuters whose main focus is to get back home in a timely manner. Dormers have easy access

to campus and can enjoy the numerous the school has to offer. Auditoriums offer movie

screenings, plays and other multi media productions to be enjoyed by students. The student

recreation center is walking distance from on-campus living arrangements. Students can enjoy a

workout, a swim in the pool, or just sit back and play video games in the lounging area. In

addition to the the numerous clubs, academic and non academic, fraternities, sororities, and

athletic teams, on-campus housed students have a variety of activities to engage with.

The second hypothesis was that students who live on campus are more satisfied with their overall

college experience compared to those who commute. With all those easily accessible activities

available, especially to students who live on campus, it is easy to enjoy college life. Besides

studying, completing assignments, and working for a high gpa, college students want to make

long lasting connections and memories. During their spare time, students living on campus can

easily enjoy a meal with their roomate at the Chili’s in Blanton Hall. They can meet new people

at the student center and outdoor quad anytime of the day. New friendships and the memories

you make with them is what makes college enjoyable and relieves students from stressors

induced by the work of college.

Another hypothesis was that the cost of dorming is the main factor that determines whether or

not a student will dorm. At $3,500 to $6,000 a semester and $7,000 to $12,000 a year,

on-campus housing is not cheap on top of the already expensive tuition. It is uncommon for

students to have access to such a large amount of money every semester/year. Many students are

forced to rely on loans to cover the cost of housing.

Our final hypothesis was that students who commute perform better academically compared to

those who dorm. For many commuters, their life consists of only going to campus for class or

school work. When in that mindset, commuters do what they need to get done and leave. Some

use study rooms or the library in between classes to complete assignments on their down time.

An assumption we also made was that commuters had certain downtime at home where they

Running head: Comparing the Student Experience: Dorming Versus Commuting 9

could complete assignments and study properly for their exams and finals. Commuter “life”

allows commuters to avoid some of the on-campus living distractions that might affect student’s

studies. For example, students may have an annoying roommate making it hard to study,

concentrate, and get work done. Your dorm neighbors could be noisy causing a major

distraction. Some on-campus living students might be too caught up in hanging out with their

friends rather than focus on their studies. Therefore, commuters may have better studying habits

and environments rather than those who live on campus.

6. Research Design 6.1 Type of Research

There are two basic types of research design: exploratory and conclusive. The objective of

exploratory research is to provide insights and understandings. The information required is

loosely defined and the research process is flexible and unstructured. The objective of conclusive

research is to test hypotheses and examine relationships. The information required needs to be

clearly defined in order to have an understanding on the data. The research process is formal and

structured to ensure organization.

Under conclusive there is either descriptive research or causal research. Descriptive research

answers: who, what, when, where, or how much. This type of research is used to describe

characteristics of relevant groups. When it comes to descriptive research, one is aware of the

problem. Causal research analyzes causes and effects. The method for this type of research

design are experiments. Since we were not performing an experiment, nor comparing cause and

effects

For our project, we were comparing two different groups: commuters and dormers. We were

comparing the experience, involvement and GPA of the two different groups. We were also

looking at different aspects that determines whether or not a student dorms or commutes. Some

of these factors are: the cost of dorming, the type of dorm, the distance from one’s house to

campus. We were examining and determining these relationships. We knew what the problem

was but we were trying to better understand our sample; thus performing descriptive research.

There are two types of descriptive research: cross-sectional and longitudinal. Since the sample

was only measured once, this project was cross-sectional. Based on the the qualifications and

requirements noted above, the research design for this project was: descriptive,

cross-sectional, single research design.

6.2 Data Collection

In order to collect the necessary data, it was determined that a survey would be the most effective

way. When creating the survey, we took into consideration different aspects for respondents to

consider. Since we were surveying two groups, dormer and commuters, we needed to come up

Running head: Comparing the Student Experience: Dorming Versus Commuting 10

with questions tailored to each group. We asked participants who commute to school: why they

chose to do so and we asked students who dorm: why they chose to live on campus.

We also asked questions tailored to both groups.We asked participants, regardless of whether

they dorm or commute, to select their gender, the amount of years they have attended Montclair

State (class standing) and their GPA. This allowed us to categorize participants and run in-depth

analyses based on which group they belonged to. We also asked what extracurriculars students

were involved, if any, and how many hours a week they participated in them.

The “full college experience” was a major part of our research. To determine whether or not this

was impacted by a student dorming or commuting, each group was asked to rate their overall

college experience on a scale of 1 to 10. From those scores we were able to compare the means

of both dormers versus commuters as well as females versus males.

The survey was created using Qualtrics. We decided on an electronic survey, over the internet,

because it was both the easiest and fastest way to reach respondents. The results of the survey are

instantaneous. The survey was sent out via a link that directed participants to the survey. The link

was sent out on Canvas and shared with students and friends. Any undergraduate student at

Montclair State was able to participate in the survey. Students of all genders, class standing, and

campus involvement were encouraged to apply. Encouraging everyone to apply improves the

randomization of the data collected, further improving the validity of the project and the data

received.

The sample size for the project was 42 respondents. The following charts show a show

further breakdown of those 42 respondents.

As the chart above shows, the majority of respondents were seniors. Although having a wider

array of class standings would have been preferred, having a majority of seniors is beneficial.

Seniors have spent four years either living on campus, commuting, or a combination of the two.

Running head: Comparing the Student Experience: Dorming Versus Commuting 11

Upperclassmen have gained the most college experience. This experience is useful when

completing the survey.

6.3 Key Questions

Each person who takes the survey was asked:

● Gender

● Class Standing

● GPA

● What extracurriculars he or she is involved in (if any)

● How many hours her or she is involved in those extracurriculars

● Dorm or commute

● Rate his or her overall college experience on a scale of 0-10.

From there, a student receives questions based on whether he or she selected dorm or commute.

Below are key statements each section is asked to rate on a scale from strongly disagree to

strongly agree

Dorm

● Living on campus makes me more engaged

● I believe that I am getting the full college experience by dorming.

Commute

● I believe that I’m still engaged on campus even though I commute

● I believe that I’d be more engaged if I lived on campus

● I believe that I am missing out on the college experience by commuting.

6.4 Data Analysis

Once the data was collected, it was analyzed using several resources. Qualtrics has its own

analysis tools built into its website. This platform was used as the first step to analyze the results.

Qualtrics tallied that data, showing how many respondents picked each answer. It also calculated

the corresponding percentages. Qualtrics also compiled graphs and charts, several of which are

used as visuals throughout this report. From there, the data was exported to Excel. In Excel it

was further analyzed and cleaned, in order to prepare it for SPSS.

A majority of the data analysis was performed using SPSS. Through this application, descriptive

and cross-tabulation analyses were run. These analyses produced p-values. Using the p-values,

the significance, if any, between two factors was able to be determined. The p-values were also

used to either confirm or reject the proposed hypotheses.

Running head: Comparing the Student Experience: Dorming Versus Commuting 12

7. Findings 7.1 General Findings

71.43% of respondents were female. 26.19% were male and 2.38% preferred not to answer.

Refer to chart below.

A majority of respondents are seniors. 2.38% of respondents are freshmen, 4.76% are

sophomores, 7.15% are juniors and 85.71% are seniors.Refer to chart below.

Running head: Comparing the Student Experience: Dorming Versus Commuting 13

A majority of students are either involved 0-10 hours a week or not involved at all. 52.38% are

involved 0-10 hours/week, 7.14% are involved 11-20 hours/week, 9.52% are involved more than

20 hours a week and 30.95% are not involved at all. Refer to chart below.

61.90% of respondents commute and 38.10% dorm.

7.2 Dorming Findings

A majority of students choose their current dorm based its living arrangement. Living off campus

is higher due to the apartment style layout. However, the data shows that students are willing to

pay more this living arrangement. Refer to chart below.

Running head: Comparing the Student Experience: Dorming Versus Commuting 14

Dormers believe that living on campus makes them more engaged. Of the 16 who answered,

37.50% agreed and 50% strongly agreed. They also believe that they are getting the full college

experience by dorming. Of the 16 who answered, 50% agreed and 43.75% strongly agreed. Refer

to chart below.

7.3 Commuting Findings

One of the project’s main hypotheses was that 90% of those who commute do so because the

cost of housing is too high. However, the research revealed that 61.54% of those who answered

stated that their main reason for commuting was because they were close enough to commute.

However, the cost of dorms was the second most popular answer. 34.62% stated that they chose

to commute because the dorms are too expensive. Refer to chart below.

Running head: Comparing the Student Experience: Dorming Versus Commuting 15

Although the main reason commuters chose to commute was because of proximity rather than

cost, 30.77% agreed and 30.77% strongly agreed that they would live on campus if it were more

affordable. Refer to chart below.

The data also revealed that commuters believe that they’d be more engaged if they lived on

campus. 50% agreed and 26.92% strongly agreed with the statement. Refer to chart below.

46.15% of commuters agree that they are missing out on the college experience because they

commute rather than dorm. Refer to chart below.

7.4 Dorming versus Commuting Experience

One of the main objectives was to determine whether or not dorming or commuting affects a

student’s overall college experience. To gather the necessary data, students were asked to rate

their experience on a scale of 1 to 10, 10 being the best experience. Men are represented by 1,

women by 2, and those who prefer not to answer by 3. Refer to chart below.

Running head: Comparing the Student Experience: Dorming Versus Commuting 16

The mean rating of those who dorm was 7.69 whereas the mean rating of those who commute

was 6.23. The p-value was 0.063. Although higher than 0.05, it is still lower than 0.1, meaning

that it is marginally supported.

7.5 Dorm versus Commute: GPA

At the beginning of the survey, each student is asked to select a range in which his or her GPA

falls. Providing a range of GPAs takes off the pressure of providing a GPA.

The ranges are as follows:

1. 2.5 or less

2. Greater than 2.5 but less than a 3.0

3. Greater than a 3.0 but less than a 3.5

4. Greater than a 3.5 but less than a 3.8

5. More than a 3.8

The GPAs of dormers and commuters were then analyzed. Those who dorm are represented by 1

and those who commute are represented by 2. Refer to chart below.

The first red square reveals that two dormers have a GPA of 2.5 or less and the other two

dormers have higher than a 2.5 but less than a 3.0. The second red square shows that 11

commuters have a GPA higher than 3.5 but less than a 3.8 and the other 4 commuters have a 3.8

Running head: Comparing the Student Experience: Dorming Versus Commuting 17

or higher. The p-value was 0.096. Although lower than 0.5, it is still smaller than 0.1, meaning

that it is marginally supported.

7.6 Dorm versus Commute: Involvement

Students were given a list of on-campus activities and asked to select the ones that they are

involved in. If a student is not involved, he or she would select none. The next question asked

them to answer how many combined hours a week they were involved in the previous activities.

The hours were listed in a range format.

Hours of involvement:

1. 0-10

2. 11-20

3. More than 20

4. Not Involved

The hours of involvement of those who dorm was then compared to the hours of involvement of

those who commute. Those who dorm are represented by 1 and those who commute are

represented by 2. Refer to chart below.

Since the p-value was 0.201, higher than 0.05, there is no significance between a students’

involvement and whether or not he or she commutes or dorms.

Running head: Comparing the Student Experience: Dorming Versus Commuting 18

The hours of involvement were about the same for both those who dorm and those who

commute, with the exception of the second red box. The box shows that 11 dormers answered

that they are not involved. Since the hours of involvement were relatively the same, it makes

sense that the there is no significance between the two factors.

7.7 Experience by Gender

The ratings gathered earlier, to compare experience to dorm/commute, were used to determine

whether one gender had a better college experience versus the other. Men are represented by 1,

women by 2, and those who prefer not to answer by 3. Refer to chart below.

Men gave a mean rating of 6.27 whereas women gave a mean rating of 6.87. The closeness in

value shows that experience isn’t impacted by a certain gender. This is further supported when

analyzing the p-value. The p-value was 0.343, further proving that there is no significance

between the two factors.

Running head: Comparing the Student Experience: Dorming Versus Commuting 19

7.8 Dorm versus Commute in Relation to Gender

Those who dorm are represented by 1 and those who commute are represented by 2. Men are

represented by 1, women by 2, and those who prefer not to answer by 3. Refer to chart below.

The p-value of 0.339, which is higher than 0.05, reveals that there is no significance between

gender and whether or not a student commutes or dorms.

Running head: Comparing the Student Experience: Dorming Versus Commuting 20

7.9 GPA by Gender

There has long been a debate on who’s smarter: men or women. Although not a main objective,

it was interesting to see whether or not GPAs vary by gender. Refer to chart below.

GPA Range:

1. 2.5 or less

2. Greater than 2.5 but less than a 3.0

3. Greater than a 3.0 but less than a 3.5

4. Greater than a 3.5 but less than a 3.8

5. More than a 3.8

Men are represented by 1, women by 2, and those who prefer not to answer by 3.

The first red box shows that 1 male had a 2.5 or less and 1 male had higher than 2.5 but less than

a 3.0. Zero women have a GPA of 2.5 or less, meaning women have at least a 2.5 or higher. The

second red box shows that 11 women have GPAs, greater than a 3.0 but less than 3.5 and 15

women have GPA higher than a 3.5 but less than a 3.8. In comparison, only 7 men had higher

than a 3.0 and less than a 3.5 and 0 men had higher than a 3.5 but less than a 3.8.

The p-value of this analysis was 0.000, meaning that there is extremely strong significance

between gender and GPA.

Running head: Comparing the Student Experience: Dorming Versus Commuting 21

8. Conclusion

There were 42 responses to our survey, all from Montclair State University Students. 71.43% of

the responses were from females, 26.19% were from males, and 2.38% were from students that

prefer not to specify a gender. A majority of our audience were seniors. 85.17% of participants

were seniors, 7.14% were juniors, 4.76% were sophomores, and 2.38% were freshman.

As a result of this project, we were able to find many interesting conclusions from the data

analysis. Our first objective was to figure out whether or not there is a difference in campus

involvement depending on if a student dorms versus if he or she commutes. To much of our

surprise we found that involvement is not significant to whether or not a student dorms or

commutes. A student’s involvement is based on each person, and all are different. It does not

correlate with whether or not they are residents. Though, based on analyzing individual survey

answers, students that are involved with extracurriculars that dorm tend to have answered that

they contribute more hours weekly to their extracurriculars compared to those that commute.

According to our results, only 25% of the residents that dorm are not involved in any

extracurricular activities. The other 75% was in at least one club or organization. When asked

how many hours are spend weekly on extracurricular activities, 0-10 hours had a result of 45%

Running head: Comparing the Student Experience: Dorming Versus Commuting 22

for residents and 55% for commuters. For 11-20 hours, it resulted in 67% residents, and 33%

commuters. For more than 20 hours it resulted in 50% for those who dorm and 50% for those

who commute. For the option “not involved” it resulted in 15% of residents and 85% of those

who commute. This shows that by looking at the results on terms of weekly hourly involvement,

residents are way more involved than commuters.

Our second objective was to figure out how commuting versus dorming affects a student’s

overall satisfaction with his or her college experience. From these results, we found that there is

some significance between a student’s experience and whether or not they dorm. The mean

overall college experience rating on a scale of 1 to 10 with 10 being the most satisfying, resulted

in dorming students having a mean of 7.69 while the commuters have a mean of 6.23. This

shows that the residents overall experience mean is 1.46 higher than the commuters. So, overall

the students that dorm tend to be more satisfied with their college experience overall. When

students that dorm were asked to choose whether they agree or disagree with the statement: “I

believe that I’m getting the full college experience by dorming,” 43.75% chose “strongly agree,”

50% chose “agree,” and only 6.25% chose “strongly disagree.” This shows that almost all of the

students that dorm do believe that choosing to dorm is giving them the full college experience.

The first sub-objective we researched was to determine if living on campus helps a student

achieve a higher GPA. From our results, it indicated that there is some significance between a

student’s GPA and whether he or she commutes or dorms. We found that commuters achieved

higher GPAs than students that dorm. We concluded that this could be because people who

commute don’t spend a lot of time on campus so we assume they have more time to be able to go

home and study more. Also, student’s on campus do tend to be busier, more social, stay up later,

and more involved hourly each week so this could affect their time studying or lead to

procrastination. Furthermore, our data showed that there is strong significance between GPA and

gender. According to our survey results, women receive higher GPAs than men do. According to

our data, we can assume that the students with the highest GPAs are women that commute and

the students with the lowest GPAs are men that live on campus.

The second sub-objective was to look at what factors contribute to student’s decisions on

whether or not to live on campus. Our results did conclude that more students choose to

commute at MSU than dorm. 61.9% said that they commute while 38.10% said that they dorm.

Our participants that dorm are made up of those that live in Bohn, Dinallo, Hawks Crossing, and

The Village at Little Falls. 86.75% live in the village. When asked the main reason for choosing

that dorm building: price had 6.25%, location had 31.25% and living arrangement (apartment

versus traditional dorming) had 62.5%. It makes sense that the type of living arrangement plays

such a huge role in choosing which resident hall to live in considering such a huge majority of

our results are from residents that live in apartment complexes. When asking commuters what

Running head: Comparing the Student Experience: Dorming Versus Commuting 23

their main reason was for choosing to commute, the largest result was “live close enough to

commute” with 61.54% choosing this option. The next reason was that the “dorms are too

expensive,” with 34.62% choosing this option. The third reason was “wanted to live off

campus,” with only 3.85% choosing this option. This result really surprised us because we

thought that most students that commute do it because of the high price of housing. When the

students that reside on campus had to agree or disagree with the statement “Housing is not worth

what I pay,” we found that 25% strongly agreed, 37.5% agreed, 12.5% neither agreed or

disagreed, 18.75% disagreed, and 6.25% strongly disagreed. So, this shows that a majority of the

students that live on campus do not think that the price is worth it for residing and it is the second

biggest reason for commuting so it definitely plays a role in the decision. According to our

results, gender does not affect the decision to dorm or commute. The P-value for comparing

gender with the decision to live on campus or commute was 0.339 which is under 0.05 so there is

no significance between the two.

In conclusion, only two of the four hypotheses were supported. Our first hypothesis was

“Students who live on campus are more engaged on campus than those who commute.” This

hypothesis was not supported because according to our data, there is no significance between

whether living on a dorm makes you involved or not. Our second hypothesis was “Students who

live on campus are more satisfied with their college experience versus those who commute.”

This hypothesis was supported because we did find that overall residents are more satisfied. Our

third hypothesis was “The cost of dorming is the main factor that determines whether or not a

student will dorm.” This hypothesis was not supported because we found that the main factor

was students living close enough to commute rather than price. We also hypothesized that 90%

of students who choose to commute/live off campus is because the cost of dorming is too high.

Once again this is not supported because only 34.62% chose that dorms being too expensive was

their reason for living off campus. Our fourth hypothesis was “students who commute perform

better academically compared to those who dorm.” This hypothesis was supported because we

did find out that students that commute do have higher GPAs.

9. Recommendations

The following recommendations are based off all of the results and conclusions we have drawns

from our data from the survey’s answered. Do keep in mind that this is made up of a majority of

senior students at Montclair State, specifically a large quantity of females. We can use the results

and conclusions of this research to create overall recommendations for campus, assuming that

these results apply to the entire college community.

Running head: Comparing the Student Experience: Dorming Versus Commuting 24

Although there was no correlation between living arrangements and whether or not a student is

involved, we did find that residents that are involved do contribute more hourly each week to

their extra curriculars than commuters do. In order to get students that commute more involved

hourly each week, we recommend coming up with different campus programs that will keep

commuters on campus for longer. A lot of times commuters have a huge break between classes

and their extracurricular activity so they do not want to sit on campus for that long and end up

going home. In turn, they usually do not bother coming back to campus after. Putting on

different programs in the commuter lounge can help to keep commuters entertained and give

them something to do until they have their extracurricular meetings at night. This can result in

commuters spending more hours each week being involved. A great idea could even be to feed

commuters diner once a week on a day that there are a lot of extra curricular activities so that

they feel enticed to stay and contribute more.

The results showed us that there is a correlation between whether or not a student resides or

commutes and their overall satisfaction with their college experience. We found that residents

are more satisfied overall. The overall mean of the residents experience is 7.69. The overall mean

of the commuters experience is 6.23. This shows, that residents have a much higher mean for

their satisfaction with their college experience, so living on campus strongly contributes to

student’s satisfaction and experience. We recommend that MSU should focus on putting on

programs targeted towards commuters’ in order to increase engagement. Residents have many

different opportunities to attend programs and events that will increase their satisfaction. For

example, resident assistants put on events every month where residents can come and be social,

benefit academically, and receive free prizes or food. Residents also have the WAM program

which is “weekends at montclair.” They put on an assortment of different events that most

residents take part of because many commuters don’t come to campus on the weekend. We

would recommend that MSU could come up with a club, such as WAM, that can put on

programs specifically targeted towards commuter students and their overall satisfaction and

experience. Increasing their engagement will lead to an increase in overall satisfaction of their

experience. The more MSU can get them involved, the more that they will feel like they are

getting out of this school.

Commuters have better GPAs than residents do. We recommend that residents halls implement

study programs for residential students. If the school works on promoting higher academic

grades within the residence halls, it may lead to residents achieving higher grades and spending

more time on academics. Resident Assistants can do this by putting on social events that wrap in

academics as well, offer tutoring right in the residence halls for easy convenience, or even offer a

monthly price to the student with the highest GPA or test grade on the floor. Furthermore, they

should implement programs that target giving residents that are men even more help because

they are the students with the lowest GPAs. There is a strong significance between living

Running head: Comparing the Student Experience: Dorming Versus Commuting 25

arrangements and GPA so MSU should take advantage of this and use it to increase student’s

GPAs that live on campus.

After analyzing what factors contribute to whether or not students choose to live on campus, we

concluded that price and living arrangements (whether it is a traditional dorm or apartment

layout) plays a big role in the decision. Considering 86.75% of the residents that answered lived

in the Village, and 62.5% chose that their main reason for choosing that hall was the living

arrangements (apartments vs. traditional dorms), it is clear that the students at MSU strongly

prefer an apartment layout to a dorm. We would recommend building more apartment buildings

on campus or even turning sinatra into an apartment layout so that more students would want to

stay on campus because the apartments tend to run out very quickly. MSU could also offer

apartments to lower classman because right now there are regulations on how many credits

students need to live there.

When we asked commuters their main reason for choosing to commute, “live close enough to

commute” was the biggest reason chosen. Considering Montclair is in a prime location that

enables a lot of residents to be able to commute, we would recommend different ways of enticing

students that live close enough to commute to choose to stay. MSU could do that through

promoting how residing gives you a satisfying and full college experience, as well as offer other

perks to draw students into living on campus. Another huge reason for commuting was that the

“dorms are too expensive.” Many of the students thought that the price was way too high. A lot

of students strongly agreed with the phrase “If housing were cheaper I would live on campus.”

So, we recommend trying to cut the price down where it’s possible because that would definitely

entice more students to want to reside on campus, and would play a huge role in getting student’s

close enough to commute to decide to stay. Only one student chose the reason being “I wanted to

live off campus.” This just goes to show even further that if we made these changes to give

students the opportunity to be able to stay, they definitely would want to. When asked in the

survey if they agree with the statement “Housing is not worth what I pay,” more than half of the

students agreed rather than disagreeing. This concludes that even students that live on campus

feel for the most part that it is not worth what they are paying. So, we recommend lowering the

price.

By making all of these recommended changes, MSU could achieve getting more students to live

on campus. As well as increase commuters overall satisfaction, experience, and hours being

involved weekly. MSU could also help to raise the GPAs of residential students and help these

residential vs. commuter problems overall.

Running head: Comparing the Student Experience: Dorming Versus Commuting 26

10. Limitation and Caveats

A typical research project would occur over an extended period of time: 6 months to a year. This

project had a time frame of roughly 3 months. Due to the time constraints, the data collection and

analysis process was slightly rushed. More time would have allowed for more analyses to be run.

A longer time frame would have allowed for more accurate and detailed data.

The survey only received 48 respondents, a majority of which were seniors and female. If there

was a longer time frame for this project, more respondents could have answered and more data

could have been collected. The result would have been more diverse, and potentially, more

accurate data.

The data for this project was collected anonymously. This meant that answers could not be

matched to respondents. If it were not anonymous, respondents could have been further

questioned as to why they answered a certain way. This would have allowed for a more detailed,

in-depth analysis.

Respondents might have not answered truthfully. For example, when rating their college overall

experience on a scale of 1 to 10, respondents might have answered higher to make it seem as

though they enjoy college more than they actually do. A respondent might not want to admit that

he or she does not enjoy college as much as he or she could.

Running head: Comparing the Student Experience: Dorming Versus Commuting 27

11. Appendix

11.1 Appendix A: Survey

Q.1 What is your gender?

- Male

- Female

- Prefer not to answer

Q2. What is your class standing?

- Freshman

- Sophomore

- Junior

- Senior

Q.3 What is your GPA?

- 2.5 or Less

- Above a 2.5 but less than a 3.0

- Above a 3.0 but less than a 3.5

- Above a 3.5 but less than a 3.8

- Above a 3.8

Q4. Are you involved in any extracurriculars? Select all that apply

- Sports Team

- Club Sport

- On-campus Club

- Greek Organization

- Student Government

- On-campus Job

- Other

- None

Q.5 About how many hours per week are you involved in extracurricular activities

- 0-10 hours

- 11-20 hours

- More than 20 hours

- fNot involved in any

Q.6 Do you dorm or commute

- Dorm

- Commute

(If Dorm)

Running head: Comparing the Student Experience: Dorming Versus Commuting 28

Q7. What dorm do you live in?

- Bohn

- Blanton

- Freeman/Russ

- Machuga

- Dinallo

- Sinatra

- Hawks Crossing

- The Village

Q8. What was your main reason for choosing that specific dorm

- Price

- Location

- Living Arrangement (Apt vs traditional dorm)

Q9. Please answer the following:

Strongly

Disagree Disagree

Neither

agree nor

disagree Agree

Strongly

Agree

- Housing is not worth what I pay

- Living on campus makes me more

engaged

- I believe that I’m getting the full

college experience by living on

campus

Q10. Please rate your overall college experience on a scale from 1 to 10 (being the worst and 10

being the best)

(If Commute)

Q11. What was your main reason for choosing to commute

- The dorms are too expensive

- Wanted to live off campus

- Live close enough to commute

Q12. Please answer the following:

Strongly

Disagree Disagree

Neither

agree nor

disagree Agree

Strongly

Agree

Running head: Comparing the Student Experience: Dorming Versus Commuting 29

- If housing were cheaper I would live on campus

- I believe that I’m still engaged on campus even though I commute

- I believe that I’d be MORE engaged if I lived on campus

- I believe that I am missing out on the college experience by commuting

Q13. Please rate your overall college experience on a scale from 1 to 10 (being the worst and

10 being the best)

Running head: Comparing the Student Experience: Dorming Versus Commuting 30

Running head: Comparing the Student Experience: Dorming Versus Commuting 31

Q.4

Running head: Comparing the Student Experience: Dorming Versus Commuting 32