The undergraduate major change or declaration process can be cumbersome for students who find themselves in unknown territories when making decisions or seeking help during this transition. One of the most challenging groups of students to assist through this transition are those who are denied access to their intended program of study. These students are often pursuing selective degree programs with limited enrollment and competitive admission requirements. Research on students pursuing selective degree programs is largely outdated, with most studies being older than ten years. The purpose of this qualitative study was to explore how undergraduate students experience leaving selective health profession interest areas in dental hygiene, nursing, and radiologic sciences at a public research university located in Tennessee. This qualitative study included the experiences of 12 third and fourth-year college students at one institution who applied for a selective degree program, were not accepted, and remained enrolled at the institution. It included semi-structured, open-ended individual interviews to investigate these undergraduate students’ experiences when undergoing an undergraduate major change away from a selective degree program. The results aligned with the theoretical framework of Schlossberg’s transition theory (Schlossberg, 1981; Schlossberg, 1991; Schlossberg et al., 1995). The students leaving selective health profession interest areas in dental hygiene, nursing, and radiologic sciences placed importance on college and career choice, experienced change of major difficulties, used campus and other support resources, and developed new strategies for success throughout the change of major process. Recommendations for further study include expanding the sample size and adding other selective degree programs to gain a more holistic picture, developing studies at multiple institutions that follow students throughout the entirety of their undergraduate careers, and investigating students’ coping strategies to identify ways to foster resiliency.

Nous connaissons depuis plus d’un siècle des bouleversements climatiques, socio-économiques et sociétaux de plus en plus fréquents et intenses. L’adaptation à ce contexte incertain, pour envisager l’avenir de façon durable, est un défi particulièrement important. L’agriculture est au cœur de ce défi et de la réflexion sur les modes d’adaptation. Les anthropologues ont récemment identifié deux types de changements de l’agriculteur: le changement mineur (en accord avec le comportement normatif de référence), et le changement majeur (changement profond, remise en cause des normes majoritaires permettant l’adoption de comportements innovants). Ces deux types de changement sont très proches de l’adaptation incrémentale et de l’adaptation transformationnelle qui sont définis tant pour des individus que pour des institutions locales, nationales ou internationales … Nous proposons un modèle individu-centré de l’adaptation des agriculteurs qui intègre dynamiquement changements mineurs et majeurs, en nous focalisant sur la dimension psycho-sociale de ces changements. Nous appliquons notre modèle à la question, de la conversion à l’agriculture biologique des éleveurs laitiers français. Cette transition a en effet été généralement caractérisée comme un changement majeur, ou une adaptation transformationnelle, et s’avère donc pertinente pour tester notre modèle. Le modèle d’agriculteur est en général dans un régime stable durant lequel seuls des changements mineurs sont opérés. Ces changements sont menés en imitant des comportements adoptés par les agriculteurs les plus crédibles. La crédibilité d’un agriculteur pour un autre est d’autant plus forte que son volume produit est supérieur à celui de cet agriculteur. Ces changements se traduisent concrètement par des modifications des volumes produits qui correspondent à des choix de pratiques plus ou moins intensifs.Le modèle peut passer d’un régime stable à un autre en transitant par un changement majeur impliquant de changer la hiérarchie des importances, accordées aux dimensions « productiviste » et « environnementale », qui pondèrent son évaluation des résultats de son mode de production (par exemple : conventionnel ou biologique). Le calcul de son évaluation utilise la théorie de l’action raisonnée. Il permet à l’agriculteur de déterminer sa satisfaction, à partir de ses résultats précédents, et de ses résultats comparés à ceux de ses pairs crédibles, en tenant compte de l’importance accordées à chaque dimension d’évaluation. Lorsqu’un agriculteur est insatisfait de son mode de production courant, il évalue sa satisfaction potentielle pour un autre mode de production, et adopte ce dernier si son gain de satisfaction est supérieur à un seuil. Il change alors la hiérarchie des importances accordées à ses dimensions d’évaluation pour être en accord avec le mode adopté. Un agriculteur biologique accordera ainsi par exemple une importance plus forte à la dimension environnementale qu’à la dimension productiviste. Ce changement implique alors une réévaluation tant de la crédibilité de ses pairs que de leurs pratiques. (...) / For more than a century, climatic, socio-economic and societal changes are more and more frequent and intense. Adapting to this uncertain context to envisage a sustainable future is a particularly important challenge. Agriculture is at the heart of this challenge and the reflection on the modes of adaptation. Anthropologists have recently identified two types of farmer changes: minor change (consistent with normative behavior), and major change (deep change, challenge the majority norms allowing adoption of innovative behaviors). These two types of change are very close to the incremental adaptation and the transformational adaptation that are defined for individuals as well as for local, national or international institutions.We propose an individual-based model to study farmers’ adaptations that dynamically integrates minor and major changes. We focus on the social-psychological dimension of these changes. Our model is applied to the question of French dairy farmers’ conversions to organic farming. This transition has been characterized as a major change, or a transformational adaptation, and is therefore relevant to test our model.A farmer stays generally in a stable regime doing only minor changes. These changes are carried out by imitating the practices of the most credible farmers. The credibility of one farmer given to another is larger if his (her) produced volume is greater than that of this farmer. These changes are shown by concrete changes of produced volumes, which correspond to more or less intensive choices of practice.In the model, a farmer passes from one stable regime to another through a major change involving a change of his (her) hierarchy of importance over the "productivist" and "environmental" evaluative dimensions. The importance weights his (her) evaluation of the results according to the mode of production (for example: conventional or organic). The computation of the evaluation is based on the theory of reasoned action. This evaluation shows a farmer’s satisfaction that is based on his (her) previous results and his (her) results compared to those of his (her) credible peers, taking into account the importance given to each dimension of evaluation. When a farmer is dissatisfied with his (her) current mode of production, he (she) evaluates his (her) potential satisfaction with another mode of production, and adopts the latter if his (her) satisfaction gain is above a threshold. He (she) then changes the importance hierarchy given to the evaluation dimensions to be in agreement with the adopted mode. For example, an organic farmer will given more importance to the environmental dimension than to the productivist dimension. This change implies a reassessment of both the credibility given to his (her) peers and their practices. (...)