Student Support Systems in American Higher Education
This paper examines the role of student support systems in American higher education institutions, focusing on the challenges faced by an increasingly diverse student body. It discusses two major categories of student need—health problems (including issues stemming from drug use and sexual activity) and disabilities (physical, sensory, and learning)—and analyzes how campus support services such as student affairs offices, disability services, and faculty engagement address these challenges. The paper also highlights the critical importance of self-advocacy skills in enabling students to access available resources. Drawing on research spanning two decades, the paper argues that effective support systems are essential to improving retention and academic success, particularly for students from underrepresented groups.
- Introduction: Diversity and Student Support in Higher Education: Overview of diverse student body and origins of student affairs
- Key Terms Defined: Definitions of health, disability, support, and self-advocacy
- Health Issues Affecting Student Success: Drug use, sexual activity, and uninsured students as barriers
- Students with Disabilities in Higher Education: Growth of disabled student enrollment and ongoing gaps
- How Campus Support Systems Work: Self-advocacy, campus offices, faculty role, and family support
- Conclusion: Summary of challenges and importance of campus support services
✍️ How to write this paper — guide, tools & examples ▾
What makes this paper effective
- The paper opens with a clear contextual framing of why student support systems matter, grounding its argument in the reality of a diverse American higher education landscape.
- It defines key terms before the main discussion, helping readers understand how specific concepts like "self-advocacy" and "disability" are used throughout the analysis.
- The paper draws on a range of empirical studies and institutional sources to support each major claim, lending credibility to its argument about support system effectiveness.
Key academic technique demonstrated
The paper demonstrates effective use of synthesis across multiple sources to build a coherent argument. Rather than summarizing each study in isolation, the author connects findings from different researchers to show converging evidence—for example, linking self-efficacy theory (Bandura) to studies on learning disabilities and self-advocacy outcomes to explain why some students fail to seek help even when services exist.
Structure breakdown
The paper opens with a broad overview of student diversity in higher education before narrowing to specific challenges. It then defines terms, examines health and disability issues in turn, and pivots to analyzing how support systems function—including both student and institutional roles. The conclusion synthesizes the discussion and acknowledges scope limitations. This funnel structure moves logically from context to problem to solution.
Introduction: Diversity and Student Support in Higher Education
American higher education is unique in the construction of its student body, which is highly diverse today. Students from various ethnic, social, and racial backgrounds form an integral part of the college environment. But beyond ethnicity and race, what makes the higher education student body even more diverse is the presence of older students, students with disabilities, and the greater participation of women in educational pursuit. This has given a unique character to the student body in American higher education institutions, rendering it a complex mix of challenges, opportunities, and excitement.
This complexity also spurred the growth of support units on college campuses to help students make an easier transition to college life. With the passage of time, a new department of student affairs or student services emerged to handle all problems, opportunities, and challenges related to a student's experience on campus. This included personal security, disability issues, race relations, and student involvement in a variety of extracurricular activities.
Student support systems are needed because American higher education institutions have become a true melting pot of diverse backgrounds. Despite the presence of diverse ethnicities on campus, it is a grim reality that some minority groups continue to lag behind in enrollment and completion. Beginning in the mid-1980s, a trend of declining enrollment rates and increased attrition rates was noticed for some minority groups, including Latinos (Fisher, 1992). Student support systems within institutions work together to remedy this situation, and over the past three decades, colleges and universities have consistently developed strategies to minimize attrition rates. Student affairs and student services departments are now present in almost all colleges and universities, including community colleges. They focus on retention of students, with a primary emphasis on helping students succeed—especially those with disabilities or those coming from underrepresented groups. The National Association of Student Personnel Administrators (1989) highlighted the problems faced by students on campus that lead to early withdrawal from courses and poor grades: "Physical disability, financial hardship, family circumstances, medical and psychological problems, and inadequate academic skills are examples of situations that often affect learning" (p. 10).
Key Terms Defined
The following definitions clarify how key terms are used throughout this paper:
Health problems: Non-disability-related issues such as sexually transmitted diseases and health problems arising from drug use.
Disability: Physical impairments as well as learning problems (LD).
Support system: All kinds of support services available on campus, operating under different names.
Self-advocacy: The ability to articulate the challenges being faced by a student in a way that helps in effectively obtaining support.
References
Anctil, T. M., Ishikawa, M. E., & Scott, A. T. (2008). Academic identity development through self-determination: Successful college students with learning disabilities. Career Development for Exceptional Individuals, 31(3), 164–174.
Bandura, A. (1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavior change. Psychological Review, 84(2), 191–215.
Biscaro, M. (2004, December). Self-efficacy, alcohol expectancy and problem solving appraisal as predictors of alcohol use in college students. College Student Journal, 38(4), 541–551.
Dowrick, P. W., Anderson, J., Heyer, K., & Acosta, J. (2005). Postsecondary education across the U.S.A.: Experiences of adults with disabilities. Journal of Vocational Rehabilitation, 22(1), 41–47.
Fisher, S. (1992). From margin to mainstream: The social progress of Black Americans (2nd ed.). Lanham, MD: Rowan & Littlefield.
Horn, L., & Nevill, S. (2006). Profile of undergraduates in U.S. postsecondary education institutions: 2003–04, with a special analysis of community college students. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.
Janiga, S. J., & Costenbader, V. (2002). The transition from high school to postsecondary education for students with learning disabilities: A survey of college service coordinators. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 35, 463–470.
Lackaye, T. D., & Margalit, M. (2006). Comparisons of achievement, effort, and self-perceptions among students with learning disabilities and their peers from different achievement groups. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 39, 432–446.
Luquis, R. R., Garcia, E., & Ashford, D. (2003, Spring/Summer). A qualitative assessment of college students' perceptions of health behaviors. American Journal of Health Studies, 18(2/3), 156–164.
Mull, C., Sitlington, P. L., & Alper, S. (2001). Postsecondary education for students with learning disabilities: A synthesis of the literature. Exceptional Children, 68(1), 97–118.
National Association of Student Personnel Administrators. (1989).
Newman, L., Wagner, M., Cameto, R., & Knokey, A.-M. (2009). The post-high school outcomes of youth with disabilities up to 4 years after high school: A report of findings from the National Longitudinal Transition Study-2 (NLTS2). Menlo Park, CA: SRI International. Retrieved from http://www.nlts2.org/reports/2009_04/nlts2_report_2009_04_complete.pdf
Otrompke, J. (2004, December). Public health dilemma or opportunity? University Business, 7(17), 41–45.
Create your account
Always verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.