academic

Academic Entitlement: Exploring Definitions and
Dimensions of Entitled Students
Jill A. Singleton-Jackson, University of Windsor, Ontario, Canada
Dennis L. Jackson, University of Windsor, Ontario, Canada
Jeffrey Reinhardt, University of Windsor, Ontario, Canada
Abstract: Academic entitlement as an area of study is gaining momentum in educational research The
research described in this paper attempts to promote an understanding of academic/student entitlement
that can lend itself to increased understanding of student entitlement that will allow educators and
students to be successful and achieve their individual and common goals. Both qualitative and quantitative
data are provided. Additionally, understanding student entitlement by considering the impact
on higher education of both Millennials and the corporatization of universities is explored. The need
for researchers to clearly define the construct of academic entitlement while arguing that the definition
of academic entitlement should be consistent with the definitions of psychological entitlement is addressed.
This article proposes a definition and suggests that different research teams working in the
area should communicate with the intent of developing a common definition of academic entitlement.
Four dimensions of student entitlement are proposed (accommodation, reward for effort, control, and
product value) and the correlations between student entitlement and learning orientation are presented.
Keywords: Academic Entitlement, Student Entitlement, Higher Education, Millennials
An Encounter with a Student Consumer
IBECAME INTERESTED in studying student entitlement as a result of an experience
with a student. 1 After I began to study this area, I found that my colleagues, too, often
had stories of encounters with “entitled” students. My particular interaction with an entitled
student occurred not at the university but, instead, at the mall. One Saturday
evening my husband and I left our twins with a sitter and went out for the evening. We
stopped at the mall to run an errand. While there at the mall I was approached by a young
woman who asked, “Are you the writing teacher?” I am, indeed “the writing teacher.” What
that means is that I coordinate the required first-year academic writing courses required of
all the arts and social sciences and engineering majors at our university. This course enrolls
2400 students per term and is delivered on-line. I do appear to my students in video streams,
but other than that they only see glimpses of me at the live exams. This is why the student
in the mall recognized me, but needed to make sure that I really was her teacher.
Once she ascertained that I was her teacher she began to complain to me about the timing
of the due dates of the assignments. She went on for 10 minutes about her issues with the
due dates and how they were “inconvenient for her” as she had “four other classes” and work
to deal with. When probed she admitted that no, she had never emailed me or come to my
1 All information discussed in first person singular should be attributed to the first author.
The International Journal of Interdisciplinary Social Sciences
Volume 5, Number 9, 2011, http://www.SocialSciences-Journal.com, ISSN 1833-1882
© Common Ground, Jill A. Singleton-Jackson, Dennis L. Jackson, Jeffrey Reinhardt, All Rights Reserved,
Permissions: cg-support@commongroundpublishing.com

THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF INTERDISCIPLINARY SOCIAL SCIENCES
weekly office hours to discuss her issues. And no, she had never gone to see her teaching
assistant. And no, she didn’t really understand why, with 400 other students in her section
of the course, I could not just change the due dates on her peer review writing assignments
so that it would work better for her schedule. I finally had to rather abruptly end our conversation
as it became clear that she was prepared to argue her point until I saw it her way.
When I told this story to some colleagues, thinking it must be an anomaly, I found out that
everyone I spoke to had a story of dealing with a “customer” student also.
Historical Perspective and Current Interpretation of Academic
Entitlement
Academic entitlement as an area of study is gaining momentum in educational research.
However, it is not a new topic. An early discussion of students exhibiting entitled behaviour
is found in Morrow’s (1994) article discussing achievement in education within the context
of Apartheid. However, his conclusions are relevant regardless of the context. He explored
the idea of a cultural shift affecting education wherein the focus of education shifts away
from the values of education and toward a more achievement awarded focus. Morrow asks
educators to consider the impact of awarding degrees based on entitlement as opposed to
awarding them based on valid achievement. He further charges educators to consider their
role in the emergence of an educational system driven by entitlement. Morrow stated,
The culture of entitlement, and its enthusiastic support, runs the serious risk of undermining
the very good which it is their objective to obtain. It is incoherent to “delegitimize”
or repudiate educational or academic achievements in the name of educational
entitlement. To take the citadel this way would be to destroy the treasure that it contained.
(p.46)
Following Morrow’s 1994 article, research on academic entitlement has continued and taken
many directions. Researchers have focused on psychological variables as well as demographic
and behavioural variables related to student entitlement (e.g., Achacoso,2002; Campbell,
Bonacci, Shelton, Exline, & Bushman, 2004; Ciani, Summers, & Easter, 2008; Chowning
& Campbell, 2009; Foster, Campbell, & Twenge, 2003; Greenberger, Lessard, Chen, &
Farruggia, 2008; Hoover, 2007; & Twenge, 2006). The current research covers analysis of
personality, parenting, motivation, and gender. While these studies have all contributed in
different ways to an understanding of academic entitlement, there is still much more unknown
than known about the origins and impact of student entitlement.
Singleton-Jackson, et al. (2010) added a current socio-cultural twist to the understanding
of student entitlement by considering the impact of the Millennials on higher education and
the observation of entitled behaviours among students. Millennials are those individuals
born between 1982 and 2002. Millennials started arriving in university classrooms in 2002
and will be part of our student bodies until 2020. At a count of 100 million, “Millennials are
the largest generational cohort in history” (Rickes, 2009, p.8). Howe and Strauss (2007) indicate
that the Millennials will impact higher education as significantly as the Boomers did
in the 1960 though in a different way.
Choice and control paired with a bent toward immediate gratification are often cited in
the literature describing the key characteristics of Millennials. These characteristics neces-
230

JILL A. SINGLETON-JACKSON, DENNIS L. JACKSON, JEFFREY REINHARDT
sarily affect students’ approach to learning when played out in the university setting.
Singleton-Jackson, et al. (2010) assert that not considering these factors within the context
of studying student entitlement will limit understanding of the phenomenon.
To further evaluate student entitlement within a socio-cultural context it is necessary to
consider the increasing corporatization of higher education. As institutions increase sales
and marketing, students’ perceptions of themselves as customers increase. While economic
realities may force colleges and universities to compete for students, this complicates students’
roles: are they scholars or customers? When prospective students are treated as customers
this brings about a level of entitlement that then follows the students into the classroom.
Students may feel confused. Consumers are justified in feeling a certain level of entitlement
with regard to purchased goods and services. However, once a student has purchased higher
education in the form of tuition and books, a significant portion of the responsibility for
learning and success lies with the buyer instead of the seller.
It is clear from the historical and current research on student entitlement that there are
many avenues and perspectives to consider when attempting to arrive at an understanding
of this issue that is currently affecting higher education.
Defining Academic Entitlement
Academic entitlement can be said to have its roots in the literature on psychological entitlement
(Campbell, et al., 2004). Campbell et al. define psychological entitlement as “…a stable
and pervasive sense that one deserves more and is entitled to more than others” (p. 31). A
similar but slightly different definition is offered by Harvey and Martinko (2009), who indicate
that “psychological entitlement refers to the phenomenon in which individuals consistently
believe that they deserve preferential rewards and treatment, often with little consideration
of actual qualities or performance levels” (p. 459). Jackson, Singleton-Jackson,
and Frey (2010) reviewed definitions associated with academic entitlement and found some
consistencies as well as differences with respect to how researchers described the construct.
For instance, some researchers emphasized entitlement relative to actual academic performance
(Singleton-Jackson, Jackson, & Reinhardt, 2010) while others emphasized personal
responsibility (Chowning & Campbell, 2009). Furthermore, some authors did not provide
a formal definition of academic entitlement but relied on behavioral examples to convey the
meaning of the construct (Greenberger, et al., 2008).
Empirical work in the area of academic entitlement is relatively new. The first instance
of empirical work we located was a dissertation by Achacoso (2002). Subsequent to that
there have been only a few studies published (e.g., Chowning & Campbell, 2009; Ciani et
al., 2008; Greenberger et al., 2008; Singleton-Jackson et al., 2010). Given this fact, we feel
it is important for researchers to clearly define the construct of academic entitlement and,
to the extent possible, arrive at a common definition. Different measures developed with
different notions of academic entitlement puts this research area at risk of developing different
and perhaps contradictory findings.
Toward this end of a common definition, Jackson et al. (2010) proposed a definition and
suggested that different research teams working in the area should communicate with the
intent of developing a common definition of academic entitlement. We argue in this paper
that the definition of academic entitlement should be consistent with the definitions of psychological
entitlement. A literature search on the keyword academic entitlement produced
231

THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF INTERDISCIPLINARY SOCIAL SCIENCES
four manuscripts and two unique definitions. Examining the definitions of psychological
entitlement (provided above) suggests that the construct is a relatively stable trait and has
the following facets: 1) a sense of deserving more than others (or preferential treatment);
and, 2) with (often) little consideration of one’s qualities or performance.
Jackson et al. (2010) suggested that a definition of academic entitlement contain the following
facets: a) a belief that some reward is deserved that is not justified based on one’s
actual academic achievement; 2) that a high academic entitlement disposition implies a diminished
role for personal responsibility in actual academic achievement; and, 3) that a high
academic entitlement disposition also implies expectations about the role of instructors that
are above and beyond their obligation of providing educational opportunities and effective,
quality instruction.
More work needs to be done in the area of developing and validating academic entitlement
measures. While promising measures do exist (e.g., Chowning & Campbell, 2009), the work
in validation has been limited and rests on the assumption that the construct of academic
entitlement has been adequately defined.
A Phenomenological Exploration of Academic Entitlement
While the previously noted studies have added a great deal to the understanding of the phenomenon
of academic entitlement, there remains the challenge of reaching not only a common
working definition but also a common understanding of this issue. Singleton-Jackson, et al.
(2010) studied the construct of academic entitlement as described by students. Their study
aimed to understand the experience of entitlement by those who express feelings and engage
in behaviours indicative of entitlement in the academic environment. They used a qualitative
approach to gain information regarding the attitudes, expectations, and ideas held by students
regarding higher education and to attempt to understand how academic entitlement fits into
the students’ understanding of higher education both as a process and as a personal experience.
Singleton-Jackson, et al. (2010) collected data by conducting semi-structured interviews
with focus groups. Fifty-two undergraduates were interviewed in groups ranging in size
from 7 to 10 students. Six main themes and an underlying consistent thread found in all the
themes emerged from the interview data. These six themes and the consistent factor are
shown in Table 1.
Table 1: Six Main Themes with a Consistent Underlying Thread of Control
Product Value of Education
Social Promotion
Role of Professors
Role of Teaching Assistants
Role of Administrators
Shoppers or Scholars
Product value of education was indicative of students’ financial investment emphasis with
regard to their expectations of what they will get for their money if they “purchase” an education.
Students frequently spoke of jobs and careers with regard to this theme. Social pro-
232

JILL A. SINGLETON-JACKSON, DENNIS L. JACKSON, JEFFREY REINHARDT
motion, as indicated by the students in this study, referenced a belief in credit being given
for social reasons or reasons outside of academic performance. Examples of this theme include
students’ feeling that just showing up for class or doing the readings should result in a passing
mark regardless of performance on assignments or exams. Role of professors refers to students’
perceptions of what professors do and what they should do as part of their service
obligation to the students. Accessibility and attention colored the majority of responses coded
into this theme. Students indicated that they had paid for an expert and thus expected a level
of service commensurate with this relationship. When asked about their teaching assistants,
students relayed fairly pragmatic expectations such as consistent marking between lab sections
and language proficiency. The administrators theme was derived from students’ discussion
of their view of the role of administrators. Their comments on this theme were fairly limited
and pertained mainly to evaluation of administrative salaries. Singleton-Jackson, et al. (2010)
also asked students direct questions pertaining to the students’ perceptions of their own role
as “consumers” of higher education. Students in this study indicated that they feel they are
marketed to and treated as customers and thus see themselves in this role. An important
implication of this theme is that higher education, the institution specifically, could be
playing a role in creating student entitlement by encouraging shoppers as opposed to scholars.
Finally, control was found to be an aspect of the previous six themes. Students expressed
confident opinions and a desire to control nearly every aspect of their educational experience
ranging from parking lots to exam schedules.
Validation of Academic Entitlement Construct
There is good reason to view entitlement in the context of education (i.e., academic entitlement)
as a potentially important construct. Psychological entitlement is viewed as a component
of narcissism (Campbell et al. 2004) and has been shown to relate indirectly to relationship
conflict and hostility (Moeller, Crocker & Bushman, 2008) as well as physical aggression
(Reidy, Zeichner, Foster, & Martinez, 2008). In general, entitlement is considered to be a
maladaptive component of narcissism (Reidy, et al.).
From this brief synopsis of the correlates of psychological entitlement, one would suspect
also that academic entitlement has the potential to be associated with maladaptive learning
styles and behaviors in general. Indeed, Greenberger et al. (2008) found their measure of
academic entitlement correlated positively with exploitive attitudes toward others and negatively
with work orientation. Chowning and Campbell (2009) presented data that suggest
that academic entitlement might relate to student incivility, and Nordstrom, Bartels and Bucy
(2009) conducted a study in which they found that consumer orientation of students (and
narcissism) related to ratings of appropriateness of uncivil classroom behavior as well as
actual uncivil behavior.
Jackson et al. (2010) examined a preliminary measure of academic entitlement, one including
four dimensions, and analyzed the relationship of the measure to learning orientation.
Three learning orientation scales were used (see Midgley et al. 1998). Mastery orientation
measures the extent to which students wish to master the material for the sake of learning,
performance orientation reflects the extent to which students wish to perform well, and
performance avoidance orientation reflects the extent to which students want to avoid performing
poorly. The ideal student, from the faculty member’s perspective, is the student
high in mastery orientation since this student is presumably interested in learning more than
233

THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF INTERDISCIPLINARY SOCIAL SCIENCES
just achieving a particular grade. An undesirable student, from the faculty member’s perspective,
is the student who is low on mastery orientation and high on performance orientation.
This student is overly focused on his or her grade and perhaps spends more time trying to
pin the instructor down on the particulars of the educational assessments used in class, at
the expense of learning the material. Table 2 shows the correlations between the various
academic entitlement scales. Of note is the finding that participants who feel the instructor
should make special accommodations for them tended to have lower levels of mastery orientation
and higher levels of performance and performance avoidance orientation. Furthermore,
students who felt they should be rewarded for effort and not just actual performance
were more likely to score higher on performance and performance avoidance orientation.
Table 2: Correlations Between Academic Entitlement Scales and Learning Orientation
Learning Orientation Accommodation Reward for Effort Control
Mastery
Performance
Performance Avoidance
-.26
.24
.30
-.01
.31
.36
-.11
.08
.15
Product Value
Note: Correlations are based on N=159 participants. Italicized values indicate significance
at the p < .05 level.
Thus findings to date support the proposition that academic entitlement, like psychological
entitlement, is maladaptive. Results thus far suggest that students who are high in academic
entitlement are more likely to engage in classroom incivility (Chowning & Campbell, 2009;
Nordstrom et al., 2009) and may adopt less effective learning orientation styles (Jackson et
al., 2010). Furthermore, it seems quite possible that future research will find evidence that
students high in academic entitlement will be more likely to encounter social conflict (Moeller
et al., 2008), and perhaps they will be more likely to exploit fellow students for their own
gain due to the relationship between academic entitlement and exploitative attitudes toward
others (Greenberger, et al. 2008).
-.07
.20
.08
Conclusion
Morrow (1994) warns us that the core values of higher education are at stake if entitlement
trumps achievement at our colleges and universities. He questioned the motivation of entitled
students by asking “If you don’t accept the value of academic practices, why have you gone
to the expense and the trouble of registering as a student in the university?” (p. 43). This is
still a fair question today that lies in the minds of many who are daily facing the challenge
of teaching and evaluating student “customers.” Thus while considering the economic realities
of institutional budgets and the unique characteristics of Millennials, educators need to
keep in the mind the impact of student entitlement on the values and objectives of higher
education. While researchers in this area are currently working with a multi-facted and dynamic
concept, there is agreement that student entitlement is real and that it is impacting
individuals and institutions. Academic entitlement has the potential to change the significance
of what it means to hold a university degree.
234

JILL A. SINGLETON-JACKSON, DENNIS L. JACKSON, JEFFREY REINHARDT
Student entitlement is a very real challenge for higher education. And while educators’
first reaction might be to reject accommodating any aspect of entitlement, there is a more
balanced view that should be recognized. Students as scholars, not customers, are justifiably
entitled or deserving of certain educational “products.” Students are entitled to quality educational
experiences and opportunities for growth and success; they are not, however, entitled
to guaranteed success or unrealistic customer service (Lombardi, 2007). Administrators,
faculty, teaching assistants, and students are responsible for learning and achievement.
Educators should neither uncritically reject nor embrace accommodations for entitlement.
Let us not throw up our hands in defeat and hand out As indiscriminately due to student
pressure or stubbornly refuse to allow that some things that seem “entitled” are actually
valid student requests. As educators we need to find a way to maintain the integrity of
teaching and learning while working with an entitled culture. As Morrow states, “[t]he benevolence
of the teacher must be shaped by standards of achievement in the relevant practice”
(p.42).
References
Achacoso, M. V. (2002). “What do you mean my grade is not an A?” An investigation of academic
entitlement, causal attributions, and self-regulation in college students. Unpublished Doctoral
Dissertation.
Campbell, W. K., Bonacci, A. M., Shelton, J., Exline, J. J., Bushman, B. J., (2004). Psychological entitlement:
Interpersonal consequences and validation of a self-report measure. Journal of
Personality Assessment, 83, 29-45.
Ciani, K. D., Summers, J. J., & Easter, M. A. (2008). Gender differences in academic entitlement
among college students. The Journal of Genetic Psychology, 169, 332-344.
Chowning, K. & Campbell, N. J. (2009). Development and validation of a measure of academic entitlement:
Individual differences in students’ externalized responsibility and entitlement expectations.
Journal of Educational Psychology, 101, 982-997.
Foster, J.D., Campbell, W.K., & Twenge, J.M. (2003). Individual differences in narcissism: Inflated
self-views across the lifespan and around the world. Journal of Research in Personality, 37,
469-486.
Greenberger, E., Lessard, J., Chen, C., & Farruggia, S. P. (2008). Self-entitled college students: Contributions
of personality, parenting, and motivational factors. Journal of Youth and Adolescence,
37, 1193-1204.
Harvey, P. & Martinko, M. J. (2009). An empirical examination of the role of attributions in psychological
entitlement and its outcomes. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 30, 459-476.
Hoover, E. (2007, March 9). Here’s looking at you, kid: Study says many students are narcissists.
Chronicle of Higher Education, p. 53.
Howe, N. & Strauss, W. (2007). Millennials go to college (2 nd ed.). Great Falls, VA: LifeCourse Associates.
Jackson, D. L., Singleton-Jackson, J. A., & Frey, M. P. (2010). Report of a Measure of Academic
Entitlement. Manuscript submitted for publication.
Lombardi, J.V. (2007, September 26). The academic success entitlement. Inside Higher Ed. Retrieved
May 10, 2010 from http://www.insidehighered.com/blogs/reality_check/the_academic_success_entitlement
Midgley, C., Kaplan, A., Middleton, M., Maehr, M. L., Urdan, T., Anderman, L. H., Anderman, E.,
& Roeser, R. (1998). The development and validation of scales assessing students’
achievement goal orientations. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 23, 113-131.
Moeller, S. J., Crocker, J., & Bushman, B. J. (2008). Creating hostility and conflict: Effects of entitlement
and self-image goals. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 45, 448-452.
235

THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF INTERDISCIPLINARY SOCIAL SCIENCES
Morrow, W. (1994). Entitlement and achievement in education. Studies in Philosophy and Education,
13, 33-47.
Nordstrom, C. R., Bartels, L. K., & Bucy, J. (2009). Predicting and curbing classroom incivility in
higher education. College Student Journal, 43, 74-85.
Reidy, D. E., Zeichner, A., Foster, J. D., & Martinez, M. A. (2008). Effects of narcissistic entitlement
and exploitativeness on human physical aggression. Personality and Individual Differences,
44, 865-875.
Rickes, P.C. (2009). Make way for millennials! How today’s students are shaping higher education
space. Planning for Higher education, 37, 7-17.
Singleton-Jackson, J. A., Jackson, D. L., & Reinhardt, J. (2010). Students as consumers of knowledge:
Are they buying what we’re selling? Innovative Higher Education, 35 (5), 343-358.
Twenge, J.M. (2006). Generation me: Why today’s young Americans are more confident, assertive,
entitled—and more miserable than ever before. New York, NY: Free Press.
About the Authors
Dr. Jill A. Singleton-Jackson
Jill Singleton-Jackson received her Ph.D. in Higher Education from the University of North
Texas. She is an Assistant Professor in the Department of Psychology at the University of
Windsor in Windsor, Ontario, Canada. She teaches psychology courses and is also the developer
and coordinator of the Foundations of Academic Writing courses, which enroll over
2000 students per term, for the Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences and Engineering at the
University of Windsor. Her research interests include student writing proficiency and academic
entitlement.
Dr. Dennis L. Jackson
University of Windsor, Canada
Jeffrey Reinhardt
University of Windsor, Canada
236

Copyright of International Journal of Interdisciplinary Social Sciences is the property of Common Ground
Publishing and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the
copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for
individual use.