Enrollment Management Journal, Winter 2011 - TG

What Enrollment Management Structures Reveal about Institutional Priorities Scott Andrew Schulz, Jerome A. Lucido

Winter 2011

Volume 5 | Issue 4

Enrollment Management Journal:

How Does Money Help? Students’ Perceptions of the Effect of a Monetary Incentive on Completion of a Summer Bridge Program Heather D. Wathington, Joshua Pretlow, Claire Mitchell

International Graduate Students: How Do They Choose Academic Majors? Jia Ren, Linda Serra Hagedorn, Michael T. McGill Do Minority Students Ever Become Connected to Community Colleges? Elizabeth R. Przymus Establishing a Tribal College and University Pre-Engineering Partnership Heidi M. Sherick, Sheree J. Watson Access to College Education (ACE): Metropolitan Community College’s Intervention for At-Risk Students Cynthia K. Gooch

© 2011 Texas Guaranteed Student Loan Corporation To order additional copies, contact TG Communications at [email protected] 1107-53215

VOLUME 5 | ISSUE 4

A publication of TG and the University of Nebraska–Lincoln

Student Access, Finance, and Success in Higher Education

Enrollment Management Journal

Taking the Family to College: Understanding the Role of Family in the Resiliency of Hispanic Students at a Predominantly White Midwest University Monique Mendoza, Jeni Hart, Stephen Whitney

Winter 2011

VOLUME 5 | ISSUE 4

Enrollment Management Journal Student Access, Finance, and Success in Higher Education

Volume 5 | ISSUE 4

The Enrollment Management Journal (ISSN 1937–8610) is published quarterly by the Texas Guaranteed Student Loan Corporation (TG), 301 Sundance Parkway, Round Rock, TX 78681. Please contact the publisher at [email protected] for information or for questions about availability of back issues. Copyright © 2011 Texas Guaranteed Student Loan Corporation. All rights reserved.

Enrollment Management Journal: Student Access, Finance, and Success in Higher Education Editor Brent D. Cejda University of Nebraska–Lincoln

Production Editor Bryan Gilbert TG

Associate Editor Copy Editor Elizabeth H. Stanley Chuck Bradford TG TG

Managing Editor Natasha M. Billie University of Nebraska–Lincoln

Copy Editor Caroline Sweatt TG

Consulting Editor Barbara Y. LaCost University of Nebraska–Lincoln

Editorial Board Lynn Barnes Texas A&M University

Stephen G. Katsinas University of Alabama

Trudy Bers Oakton Community College

Laura I. Rendón University of Texas at San Antonio

Michelle Cooper Institute for Higher Education Policy

John F. Ryan University of Vermont

Jacob Fraire TG

Victor B. Sáenz University of Texas at Austin

Michael Heintze Texas State University

Editorial Policy: The Enrollment Management Journal: Student Access, Finance, and Success in Higher Education is a refereed, quarterly journal devoted to the issues of successful management of student enrollments, access, student financial aid, and its impact on students achieving their educational goals. The journal has been designed to help researchers and practitioners better understand the principles, concepts, and contexts for implementing sound practices that help American institutions of higher education recruit, enroll, retain, and graduate more students. The journal is unbiased, does not espouse any viewpoint or program, and is intended for the entire academic community regardless of affiliation. The views expressed by contributors to the journal are their own and not necessarily those of the journal itself, its editors, editorial board, or sponsoring entities. The Editorial Board’s decisions do not represent an endorsement of any particular program or policy. The content of the journal is comprised of articles, commentaries, book reviews, program highlights, and other short pieces that are germane to enrollment management and that provide unique insight into timely issues in the field. Contributors may use a range of theoretical and methodological approaches as they cover subject matters such as admissions standards, standardized entrance exams, tuition and financial aid policy, retention initiatives, new student enrollment programs, innovative uses of student data software, articulation agreements, residency policies, need-based and merit-based aid, and other issues as they pertain to effective enrollment management.

4

Enrollment Management Journal Winter 2011

Contents From the Publisher

7

From the Editors

8

Scholarship and Research What Enrollment Management Structures Reveal about Institutional Priorities 12 Scott Andrew Schulz, Jerome A. Lucido How Does Money Help? Students’ Perceptions of the Effect of a Monetary Incentive on Completion of a Summer Bridge Program Heather D. Wathington, Joshua Pretlow, Claire Mitchell Taking the Family to College: Understanding the Role of Family in the Resiliency of Hispanic Students at a Predominantly White Midwest University Monique Mendoza, Jeni Hart, Stephen Whitney International Graduate Students: How Do They Choose Academic Majors? Jia Ren, Linda Serra Hagedorn, Michael T. McGill

45

67 91

Do Minority Students Ever Become Connected to Community Colleges? 118 Elizabeth R. Przymus From the Field Establishing a Tribal College and University Pre-Engineering Partnership Heidi M. Sherick, Sheree J. Watson Access to College Education (ACE): Metropolitan Community College’s Intervention for At-Risk Students Cynthia K. Gooch Upcoming Issues

146

160

Future Issues of Enrollment Management Journal 170

From the Publisher TG has been the proud publisher of the Enrollment Management Journal: Student Access, Finance, and Success in Higher Education (EMJ) since the inaugural issue was printed in December 2007. Because of the work of a talented editorial and production staff, the direction of the EMJ Editorial Board, and the support of EMJ subscribers, EMJ was able to spread to 33 states and Canada. Subscribers hailed from secondary and postsecondary education in nonprofit and forprofit sectors as well as organizations representing the educational continuum. Chancellors, presidents, vice presidents, faculty members, deans, directors, and those outside of academe interested in student success have read EMJ and highly rated its relevance, quality, and timeliness of the content. Despite the success that EMJ has enjoyed, we sadly announce that with this issue of EMJ, Volume 5 Issue 4, TG will cease publication. Due to the changing nature of TG and the environment in which many educational organizations find themselves, TG can no longer sustain an initiative as labor intensive as a blind-refereed academic publication while simultaneously launching other initiatives focused on student success and degree completion. In conclusion, EMJ has published 60 scholarly, 30 practitioner, 13 legislative, and one narrative inquiry articles. TG will continue to host EMJ online (www.tgslc.org/emj) with all content available there. TG will also continue to conduct webinar series and other presentations focused on EMJ content and will store back issues to fulfill reader requests. Thank you for your subscription and readership. Best wishes to you as you continue your pursuit of student and institutional success.


7

From the Editors The final issue of the Enrollment Management Journal continues our practice of providing content that illustrates the breadth of the various components and issues of enrollment management. With each issue we have attempted to include contributions that represent the range of institutional types within higher education, aspects of diverse student populations, and the respective components that comprise the broader concept of comprehensive enrollment management.

Scholarship and Research In this section, we highlight empirical and conceptual submissions that have completed a blind, refereed appraisal. Scott Schulz and Jerome Lucido examine the centralization of enrollment systems and the potential effects of centralization on institutions of higher education. Washington, Pretlow, and Mitchell address the cost of college by investigating the impact of a monetary incentive on underprepared college students who participated in a summer bridge program. The postsecondary experience of historically underrepresented populations has been a common theme among enrollment management researchers. Mendoza, Hart, and Whitney contribute a study to help better understand the experiences of Latino students at a predominately White institution. International graduate students were the focus of the study by Ren, Hagedorn, and McGill, with a focus on the choice of the academic program selected by this population of students. Community colleges have a significantly lower retention rate than do their four-year counterparts. Elizabeth Przymus examines engagement and persistence among students of color to provide insight into the ways that minority students connect with community colleges.

From the Field The From the Field section focuses on activities and programs that reflect and inform practice in enrollment management. The pre-engineering partnership program at Montana State University facilitates the transfer and success of American Indian students who begin postsecondary education at a Tribal College. The Access to a College Education Program that was piloted at Metropolitan Community College (MCC) in Nebraska provided technical

8


From the Editors

assistance and information to economically challenged and underrepresented students and their families to increase awareness of college readiness requirements and opportunities for postsecondary participation.

An Ending Note We would be remiss if we did not express our gratitude to the authors and reviewers who have contributed to EMJ during the past five years. Without their efforts, support, and often their patience, EMJ would not have achieved the success that it did. Our gratitude also goes to TG and the University of Nebraska–Lincoln for providing the opportunity for us to engage in such a rich and worthwhile endeavor. We realize that work remains in order to provide access, success, and financial support to enable broad participation in postsecondary education and pledge continued support as we move to new responsibilities and initiatives.


9

Scholarship and Research

What Enrollment Management Structures Reveal about Institutional Priorities Scott Andrew Schulz, Ph.D. Saint Martin’s University

Jerome A. Lucido, Ph.D. University of Southern California

Abstract Why have some institutions chosen to centralize their enrollment systems more than others? What do these structural changes reveal about institutional priorities? What barriers stand in the way to centralization, especially when it is desired by enrollment professionals? This qualitative study utilizes a multidimensional theoretical framework to identify the rationale for the centralization of institutional enrollment systems by giving a voice to those administrators who are shaping and implementing these policies. By focusing on motivations for and barriers to organizational change, this research sheds light on institutional priorities and provides an important lens through which to view organizational behavior and its potential effects.

There was a time when enrollment management was simple and rather unnecessary. Prior to the baby boom and subsequent expansion of higher education following World War II, recruiting responsibilities fell to the president and faculty (Coomes, 2000), while the earliest admissions officer, the campus registrar, served as the principle institutional gatekeeper (Henderson, 2008). The admissions process was, by today’s standards, unsophisticated. Students generally applied to one nearby college and were usually admitted, with admissions decisions often immediate and made in person (Duffy & Goldberg, 1998). That was then. Following a tidal wave of students during the mid-twentieth century, when the number of applicants swelled beyond the number of available seats, a dramatic decline in high school graduation rates took place (Coomes, 2000). Consequently, a more competitive environment for students evolved and institutions began to more closely coordinate their enrollment efforts (Coomes,

12


What Enrollment Management Structures Reveal about Institutional Priorities

2000; Duffy & Goldberg, 1998; Hossler & Anderson, 2004; Huddleston, 2000). Competitiveness between institutions of all types has been further amplified by a steady decline in state support, leading public institutions to increasingly rely on alternative revenue sources, such as tuition (Cheslock & Gianneschi, 2007; Claar & Scott, 2003; Ehrenberg, 2003, 2006; McPherson & Schapiro, 1998; Serban & Burke, 1998). Finally, competitiveness has also been intensified by the emergence of college rankings by publications such as U.S. News & World Report that outline the institutional hierarchy and influence admissions outcomes and resource availability within institutions (Meredith, 2004; Monks & Ehrenberg, 1999). Ultimately, a new and more tactical approach has emerged within many institutions to ensure that critical areas for recruitment and retention such as admissions, records, financial aid, student research, and marketing are working together to create a comprehensive plan to enroll more students, to shape the composition of the class, to reduce attrition rates, and to develop appropriate publications, services, and electronic alternatives for interacting with the college or university. (Dungy, 2003) In short, institutions over the last few decades have increasingly acted to more strategically identify and recruit potential students and move them through their enrollment pipeline (Kroc & Hanson, 2003). According to Black (2004), the rise of enrollment management as a profession is very much “manifested in structural changes” (p. 7). Although institutions can choose from a variety of organizational models for enrollment management, ranging from enrollment management committees to more formal divisional structures, institutions usually need to evolve by centralizing their enrollment operations (Hossler & Anderson, 2004). Thus, colleges and universities with comprehensive enrollment divisions are more apt to succeed in their enrollment endeavors than are decentralized enrollment systems that may consist of fragmented silos. Evidence suggests that many institutions are centralizing their enrollment systems. From 1995 to 1999, a National Enrollment Management Survey (NEMS) conducted by Noel-Levitz, Inc., showed an increase in the percentage of institutions that reported having a chief enrollment officer at the vice presidential level. As of 2004, the last year the NEMS survey was conducted, most institutions reported having an individual responsible for enrollment management (Noel-Levitz, 2004). Enrollment Management Journal Winter 2011

13

Scott Andrew Schulz, Jerome A. Lucido

Purpose of the Study What remains to be seen is why some institutions have chosen to centralize their enrollment systems more than others. What is the motivation to centralize? What do these structural changes reveal about institutional priorities? What barriers stand in the way to centralization, especially when it is desired by enrollment professionals?1 This qualitative study seeks to identify the rationale for the centralization of institutional enrollment systems by giving a voice to those administrators who are shaping and implementing these policies. By focusing on motivations for and barriers to organizational change, this research sheds light on institutional priorities and provides an important lens through which to view organizational behavior and its potential effects.

Theoretical Framework This study is informed by a multidimensional theoretical framework. Drawing upon a nuanced use of resource dependency theory, academic capitalism theory, institutional theory, and literature regarding the power of organizational culture, this research seeks to understand the organizational behavior of institutions, specifically as it pertains to the structure of their enrollment systems. The following overview provides a concise summary of these theoretical constructs. Resource dependency theory is grounded in the idea that organizations must maintain access to resources from the surrounding environment in order to survive (Casciaro & Piskorski, 2005). The theory speaks, in part, to the ways organizational decision makers adapt to external pressures and manage dependence (Johnson, 1995). Organizations that face constrained resources may innovate in ways that allow them to compete for alternative resources (Sherer & Lee, 2002). If dependency relations are not institutionalized, structures may emerge to manage the flow of these alternative resources (Tolbert, 1985). Resource dependency theory has been applied to the study of health care service delivery innovation (Banaszak-Holl, Zinn, & Mor, 1996) and has served as a lens through which to understand the diversified revenue strategies employed by nonprofits to combat resource dependence (Froelich, 1999).

Consistent with our larger research agenda, the study from which this article is drawn identifies senior admission officers and senior enrollment officers as members of a larger group, “enrollment professionals,” which includes any institutional member who has a specific and dedicated role in the overall process of recruiting, enrolling, retaining, and graduating students.

1

14



While resource dependence theory asserts that the external environment may facilitate changes in organizational structures to maintain and manage resource access, academic capitalism theory is more grounded in the spirit of competition for resources rather than the management of them, thereby highlighting how structural changes take place to enhance an institution’s capacity to compete in the new knowledge-based economy and to embrace market and market-like behaviors (Rhoades & Slaughter, 2004). This movement to reorient institutions through the infusion of a market ideology is a response, in part, to a shift in the way higher education is viewed. The individual benefits of higher education are taking precedence over the social benefits (Hovey, 1999; Selingo, 2003), and the public virtues of higher education are surrendering to the view of higher education as industry (Gumport, 2000). Concurrently, efforts to deregulate and commercialize public entities, along with reductions in state support for higher education, have encouraged institutions and their internal actors to pursue external revenue streams—leading to a more competitive market for both public and private institutions (Slaughter, 2001). Evidence of academic capitalism includes institutional and faculty competition for external funds, for-profit activity including patenting and licensing agreements, changes in academic labor, and, most relevant to this study, the restructuring and reorientation of administrative units to pursue new market opportunities for external resources (Slaughter & Leslie, 1997). The propensity for universities to view students as consumers is further evidence of the infusion of corporate values into the educational arena (Slaughter, 2001). This study draws upon resource dependency theory and academic capitalism theory to reveal the extent to which changes in the external environment, competition for resources, and the infusion of market principles have led to the centralization of enrollment units and to explain what these structural changes say about institutions and their priorities. In addition, the theoretical foundation for this study is enhanced by the application of institutional theory. The major premise of institutional theory is that the primary goal of organizations is to become institutionalized and achieve external legitimacy, thereby maximizing access to resources (DiMaggio & Powell, 1983; Meyer & Rowan, 1977). In essence, institutionalization is an adaptive process that aims to promote stability with an eye on organizational perseverance (Scott, 1987). In the absence of a clear path to legitimacy, organizations may look to model their own structures in the image of


15


established, successful organizations through mimetic processes (DiMaggio & Powell, 1983; Haveman, 1993). As a result of efforts by organizations operating in the same environment to adapt to similar constraints found within that environment, isomorphic homogenization may take place (DiMaggio & Powell, 1991). This study uses the tenets of institutional theory to assess the extent to which institutions are centralizing their enrollment structures in response to isomorphic forces, and will examine the potential effects of such a trend. Finally, organizational change cannot be properly examined without incorporating literature referencing the power of organizational culture. Culture can be a unifying force, establishing collectively shared understandings through the internal institutionalization of an organizational saga (Clark, 1972); shaping institutional values (Tierney, 1991); or, in some cases, determining an institution’s ideology as a function of the identity shared among faculty and the surrounding community (Shaw & London, 2001). Organizational culture can also be a source for conflict. Culture can be used to socialize and impress professional or institutional values upon institutional actors, leading to tension (Kennedy, 1982) and/or to organized resistance (Rhoades & Rhoads, 2003). Organizations also contain many structural layers, some of which may withhold cooperation and tacitly challenge authority should they perceive their relative autonomy to be threatened by top-down administrative change agents (Newton, 2002). Literature related to organizational culture will be used to explain why efforts to centralize institutional enrollment systems are sometimes met with resistance and are ultimately unsuccessful.

Research Methods This study gathered interview participants by using data from a salary survey of human resource representatives conducted by the College and University Professional Association for Human Resources (CUPA-HR) at 3,800 institutions in 2007–2008. As part of the CUPA-HR survey, institutions identified themselves as having a designated chief admission officer (CAdO), a designated chief enrollment officer (CEnO), or both. The following definitions were used by CUPA-HR for each personnel category: Chief Enrollment Officer—Responsible for the development of marketing plans for recruitment and retention of students. Also coordinates institutional efforts in admissions, financial aid, records, registration, and advising. 16



Chief Admission Officer—Responsible for the admission of undergraduates. May also be responsible for recruitment and selection and for the admission of graduate and professional students or for scholarship administration or similar functions. Of the nearly 943 CUPA-HR survey respondents, 319 institutions reported having both a chief admission officer and a chief enrollment officer, while 423 institutions reported having only a chief admission officer. Two hundred and one institutions reported having a chief enrollment officer only, but these institutions were not included in our study because our definition of a chief enrollment officer includes management of a chief admission officer and the undergraduate admissions unit. Only the names of institutions were identified in CUPA-HR’s data. Names of and contact information for CEnOs were found by searching the 2008 Higher Education Directory published by Higher Education Publications, Inc., as well as institutional websites for the highest ranking figure with “enrollment” in their title. Names of and contact information for CAdOs were found by searching these resources for the highest ranking figure with “admission” in their title. Nine of the 319 institutions that had reported having both a CEnO and a CAdO were dropped from the list of institutions to be surveyed because of ambiguity as to whether the institutions actually had two distinct individuals serving as CEnOs and CAdOs. To gather interview volunteers for the study and descriptive data, a survey link was e-mailed to the remaining contacts. Due to missing or invalid e-mail addresses, the number of CEnOs surveyed decreased to a total of n = 182, the number of CAdOs at institutions with CEnOs surveyed decreased to a total of n = 177, and the number of CAdOs at institutions without CEnOs surveyed decreased to n = 285. When taking the survey, respondents had the option of volunteering to be interviewed at a later date by checking an appropriate box and entering contact information in a separate window online. The survey was completed on December 19, 2008. When examining the names of interview volunteers who had completed the survey, it became apparent that survey participants had inadvertently taken the survey more than once and, because data could not be linked to the identity of participants, the study’s principal investigators decided not to include the descriptive data collected in the final analysis, instead focusing exclusively on the study’s qualitative interview component. Enrollment Management Journal Winter 2011

17


Semistructured interviews of approximately one hour each were conducted by phone with the use of an interview protocol during the spring of 2009 with a total of 20 CEnOs, 17 CAdOs at institutions with CEnOs, and 18 CAdOs at institutions without CEnOs (total n = 55). As shown in Figure 1, 55 interviews were conducted with chief enrollment and admission officers representing a diverse group of institutions based upon their Carnegie classification (including two-year colleges) and public/private designation. figure 1 | Interviews by Institution Type

14 12 10 8

Public

6

Private

4 2 0

Assoc

Bacc

Mast

Res

These interviews were digitally recorded, transcribed, and coded using open coding and selective coding techniques that led to the identification of theoretical codes (Creswell, 2003). These theoretical codes were then collectively brought together and interpreted through the aforementioned theoretical lenses. To enhance the data’s validity, transcripts were read multiple times, leading to several analyses of the data (Bogden & Bilken, 1998; Marshall & Rossman, 1999). During data analysis, the study’s principal investigators determined that one of the CEnOs and two of the CAdOs at institutions without CEnOs did not fit the study’s definitions for each of these categories; data from each of these study participants was not included in the study’s findings. As such, this study’s findings are based on interview data from 19 CEnOs, 17 CAdOs at institutions with CEnOs, and 16 CAdOs at institutions without CEnOs (total n = 52). Two of the CAdOs at institutions with CEnOs served at institutions where the CEnOs were also participants. Thus, perspectives from enrollment professionals at 50 unique institutions are represented in this analysis. To protect the identity

18



of any participants quoted in the summary of findings, only their role as either a chief enrollment officer or chief admission officer and the type of institution at which they serve are provided.

Summary of Findings Because study participants identified a substantial number of themes, no particular finding was dominant. Of note, many participants stated more than one reason behind the centralization of enrollment units and/or resistance to such structural changes. That said, the themes that did emerge lend themselves toward better understanding important organizational trends taking place at America’s colleges and universities in the enrollment sector. Centralization in Pursuit of Resources Consistent with resource dependence theory, interview data revealed that nearly one quarter of the public institutions represented in the study were motivated to centralize their enrollment systems in response to declining state appropriations. Public institutions that have traditionally depended on state support are being encouraged to more effectively generate and manage tuition and fee revenue— resources that have not historically been institutionalized. This shift has resulted in a number of structural and procedural changes at some institutions. First, with cuts to state support becoming more common and demographic shifts on the horizon, officials at a select group of public institutions saw the need to centralize their enrollment operations behind a chief enrollment officer: I think [the chancellor] was well aware that state funding was more at risk and tuition funding was going to be more of a source of our operating revenue. And so he felt that it was time that we give more focused attention to enrollment issues. And this was nine, nine-and-a-half years ago. And so he then asked the Provost to create the [chief enrollment officer] position, which he did. And then secondly, the pattern of enrollment at [institution] as I said had been up and down, up and down. Generally, the trend line was going up but not always and sometimes there were pretty dramatic drops in enrollment due to varying reasons. I think, in the best interests of the institution, that erratic enrollment behavior needed to be modified and that could happen only with someone attending full time to those issues. (CEnO, public research institution) Enrollment Management Journal Winter 2011

19


So the new Provost is the person who really served as the catalyst for creating [the CEnO] position, with the view that [enrollment-related units] needed to be pulled together, both from a functional standpoint and from a strategic planning standpoint. . . . Like everybody else, we’re in the midst of a financial debacle right now at the state level. And, of course, a year-and-ahalf ago when this position started, that situation wasn’t quite so grave. But even then we knew that the demographics were shifting on us, particularly here in the Northeast. As a result of that, we had to think more holistically about our enrollment planning. And the current financial issues have just heightened the awareness around the need to think about all of this more holistically. (CEnO public master’s institution) Fearing a decrease in state support and a shifting demographic tide, senior officials pursued structural changes that shifted public institutions away from longestablished resource relations with the state toward a new, more uncertain, and more contested dependence on students and the revenue they provide through tuition dollars. Centralization was thought to more effectively manage these efforts. A handful of enrollment professionals at public institutions in our study also called attention to the practice of diverting resources to the admissions function to stabilize and ultimately increase student enrollment in pursuit of tuition revenue. Just as an example, just like you’re hearing all over the country, I’m sure, we’re absorbing budget cuts left and right. Our campus has lost about 20% of its funding from our state appropriation last June 30th or July 1st. Over this fiscal year, it’s been a tremendous challenge. But recruitment and marketing has been held relatively harmless. We’ve absorbed much less cuts than other departments and offices on campus. (CAdO, public baccalaureate institution) I think part of [why centralization seemed to be an appropriate response to a decline in enrollments]—and what accompanied the hiring of that [chief enrollment officer]—[was] a significant investment of resources—resources that enabled the Admission Office to for the first time work with an outside firm for its publications at that time; resources that allowed the office to engage a vendor in College Board search and fulfillment mailings, which had been done but on a much smaller scale and I think at a considerably lower degree of quality.

20



And if I were to be cynical about it, and that’s probably my tendency, I think it’s as much attributable to those investments in success as it was to sort of bringing in any particular sort of expertise. (CAdO, public research institution) A supply-side approach is clearly evident. Senior officials at these public institutions were guided by the principle that investments in revenue-generating units such as admissions and related recruitment and marketing areas will allow these units to operate more effectively and manage resources that are becoming increasingly central to the financial stability of public institutions. By centralizing enrollment operations behind chief enrollment officers and more heavily investing in admissions units to recruit students and their tuition dollars, some public institutions are redefining what it means to be public—and benefitting financially. For instance, one chief admission officer drew attention to the fact that her institution had doubled its tuition in the last four years in response to state cuts in funding, yet was attracting more students as a result because students associated cost with quality. Interestingly, a chief enrollment officer noted that his state actually increased appropriations for his public institution because the institution’s enrollment numbers had improved following the centralization of enrollment units primarily oriented toward student recruitment. In effect, data from this study suggests a shift in dependency relations is leading some public institutions to prioritize tuition revenue to a greater extent, much like private institutions, and reshape their structures and practices accordingly. Although resource dependence may be leading public universities to centralize their enrollment systems and manage new dependency relations, evidence from this study’s interview data also suggests that public and private institutions are moving to centralize their enrollment systems so as to engage an increasingly competitive and changing environment for external resources. Officials at one sixth of the institutions represented in the study reported structural changes for this particular reason. In accordance with academic capitalism theory, these institutions are restructuring to more closely align enrollment units such as admission and financial aid departments and act more strategically in pursuit of revenue. Well, I think the environment has changed dramatically. That was a very traditional—admissions did this. Financial aid did this. And we all know that the competition, that the external marketing environment, the families, the Enrollment Management Journal Winter 2011

21


expectation was different. So I think part of this [restructuring] had to do with external market, and I think part of it had to do with where the college was and where the aspirations were. (CEnO, private baccalaureate institution) [The restructuring] was three years ago. So let’s say the decision was coming down three-and-a-half, four years ago. The economy hadn’t tanked yet. The demographics were still, in terms of high school graduates, were still on the uptick. But with that being said, the competition, I think, was starting to send a message to [the institution] that you’re going to have to revisit how you market the institution, your admission practices, your financial aid strategy, because, as I say, there had been decline in yield rates to kind of a dangerously low level. (CEnO, private masters institution) I think [the reason for the restructuring] was as much external. . . . We weren’t necessarily responding as efficiently and effectively to how admission processes were changing and how students were needing to be recruited and how the competition was doing things. . . . And so we wanted to change the structure a little bit to make sure that we were looking at fresh new ideas and changing from admission to enrollment and getting admission and financial aid on similar pages. (CEnO, private baccalaureate institution)

As people saw the competition for the students increasing, then more emphasis, budget, responsibilities and so forth were elevated to meet that external challenge. (CEnO, private baccalaureate institution)

In effect, some institutions are evolving to more effectively recruit students and their tuition dollars within a constrained market, with a focus on maintaining and expanding market share. Admissions and financial aid units have been brought together toward this end, paving the way for practices such as tuition discounting and financial aid leveraging that allow institutions to more strategically compete for students and their tuition dollars. As institutions innovate through structural and operational changes in the face of resource constraints, made all the more salient by the influx of public institutions pursuing new revenue streams in response to a decline in state support, the nuanced interplay between resource dependency and academic capitalism becomes apparent. To compete for external resources, chief enrollment and chief admission officers at one fifth of the institutions represented stated their institutions have been motivated to centralize their enrollment units so as to internally maximize access 22



to institutional resources. As previously noted, some public institutions have begun more heavily committing resources to enrollment-related areas, namely admissions, recruitment, and marketing units. Although resource needs are certainly a reason behind this trend, interview data also point to structural changes as serving not only as a mechanism through which both public and private institutions pursue revenue, but also as a means through which chief enrollment officers have gained greater visibility and influence at their institution’s highest administrative levels—many chief enrollment officers having gained unfettered access to institutional decision makers who hold the power of the purse. And so the creation of this [chief enrollment officer] unit has allowed admission and aid to really be at the forefront of conversations at the table, in terms of the president’s cabinet. Our president says on a regular basis, “Right now there is nothing more important to me than admission.” . . . When we did our budgeting for next year, we asked office departments to actually cut their budgets by 5% so that we could reallocate funds to support the new strategic plan. So we asked them to cut, but we weren’t actually truly cutting budgets; we were just moving money around. And the great consensus in the cabinet was that admissions should get the resources that they had asked for before anything else happened. I think a lot of that comes from the fact that the president is a tireless advocate for admission and for financial aid. (CEnO, private baccalaureate institution) I think it’s not so much the resource attention but—well, maybe in an indirect way—but having someone who really understands the enrollment management process reporting to the president really enabled, I think, a better communication flow, a better understanding on the higher levels of what the needs are. (CAdO, private master’s institution) So then from there, [the chief enrollment officer] has been promoted and sits on the president’s cabinet, and I think that’s just as important [as having someone oversee all of the enrollment units] because then you have the president’s ear and you’re able to keep those enrollment issues and retention issues up-to-date and in front of the president. So that would help with supporting those units to make sure they have the funds needed to operate efficiently. (CAdO, public research institution) In effect, centralization has allowed chief enrollment officers to make the case that enrollment units are critical revenue-generating units and, as such, Enrollment Management Journal Winter 2011

23


encourage some institutions to take a supply-side approach and maximize their resource commitments to enrollment-related areas. The importance of having an advocate at the senior level is all the more recognizable when analyzing the diminished capacity of many chief admission officers in more decentralized enrollment structures to advocate for internal resources. When asked whether the availability of internal resources had been problematic due to the lack of a chief enrollment officer, the chief admission officer at an institution without a chief enrollment officer responded: Yes, because there are some things that I think it would be beneficial to have a stronger voice on cabinet to really champion the needs that we have as opposed to [the vice president of student services that oversees admissions] who certainly tries to do his best but he has a number of different responsibilities. (CAdO, public associate institution) Another chief admission officer in a decentralized structure that operates without a chief enrollment officer echoed this theme, noting: I think that how we operate and the resources that we need within this area to take us to the next level is so important that I think the cabinet needs to get involved. I think the other vice presidents need to be more keenly aware of the issues that our office is facing with regards to technology, trying to keep up with the competition, and so on and so forth. . . . You always have to put trust in your boss, that he’s looking out for your best interest, but I’m not so sure that—I would appreciate the opportunity to directly address some of the issues at that level. (CAdO, public master’s institution) If the lifeblood of an effective enrollment unit is access to resources within an institution, the criticality of having an advocate at the senior level cannot be understated. Interestingly enough, structural shifts toward centralization have not only led to the creation of the chief enrollment officer position, but have also allowed some chief enrollment officers to reinforce their positions of power by lobbying for and securing resources on behalf of enrollment units. Finally, when describing the movement to centralize enrollment operations, a few enrollment professionals did not shy away from highlighting the need to control efforts to enhance “customer service” and “sell students” en route to 24



generating external revenue. Terms such as “efficiency,” “consumer,” and “niche” were frequently used, as these enrollment professionals characterized enrollment management as the “business” of “selling education.” Part of any successful business model is structuring the organization to best serve the customer, consistently identified by enrollment professionals as the students who attend institutions of higher education. According to some enrollment professionals, coordination of enrollment units leads to superior service. And as we know in enrollment management, by definition you are actually putting together a systematic way of managing enrollment. And that means coordinating efforts from different groups on campus so that in the end we are able to extend superior service to our students. (CAdO, private research institution) One chief admission officer underscored the need to consistently encourage enrollment-related units such as registrars and academic advising units to put the customer first. And so a lot of it is trying to impart on other departments, “How do you do what you need to do in your department, but how do you also serve the customer?” (CAdO, private master’s institution) Failure to centrally manage enrollment units can threaten an institution’s capacity to meet student expectations and brand itself in a positive light. As noted in the following quote, such a direction can sometimes facilitate centralization in an effort to reign in problematic units that fail to meet service expectations for students. It was a customer service issue. There were times when our financial aid office wouldn’t answer the phone because all they could do was package. They didn’t have time to answer the phone. We used to have an incredibly high turnover rate—absenteeism—in financial aid and the bursar’s office. We used to have—three years running, the editor of the school paper would say, “It must be fall because I got my bill and it’s wrong.” And she was right. It was wrong. We weren’t able to get students packaged before bills went out, which meant we had to redo bills; so all of that was an impetus to fix the system. (CEnO, private research institution)


25


An institutional focus on customer service can best be described as a means to an end. Consistent with the market ideology that appears to govern the practice of enrollment management at many institutions, customer service is ultimately meant to produce financial gains. By moving to consolidate enrollment units beneath a centralized reporting structure, institutions seek to more effectively offer a desirable educational product that will lead to enrollment growth and more tuition revenue. Statements from the small number of institutions that centralized in an effort to enhance their capacity to more comprehensively meet student needs en route to revenue gains reflect this philosophy. When asked to describe the extent to which financial motivations were at the center of institutional efforts to centralize their enrollment operations, these participants responded: Well, I wouldn’t say there wasn’t a thought to financial, because if you give better service—our belief was that if we could serve our students better we could keep them longer, they would complete more degrees, and we would attract more students. . . . Our theory was you provide the best service you can, and we weren’t providing the best service you can because we had some disconnected—we didn’t have a connected enrollment team that really was able to work together and plan in a comprehensive way. . . . I think if you have happier students you’re going to keep them and they’re going to talk to other people and you’re going to have more students. (CEnO, public associate institution) I’ve seen students are better served. Their satisfaction rates are higher. . . . We’ve continued to grow, so yes. Ultimately, we’ve continued to grow, which financially impacts the university. I know at the undergraduate level we’ve grown faster than was the original enrollment goals, that we’ve had a faster rate of growth. (CAdO, public research institution) In summary, consistent with the tenets of academic capitalism theory, interview data revealed that a market ideology is clearly present and influencing institutional priorities at some institutions. Competition for resources is facilitating a small but noteworthy movement whereby enrollment units at both public and private institutions of all levels are being restructured and recast less as academic support units and more as revenue generating units, the long-term implications of which are unknown.

26



Centralization for Legitimacy Data from this study suggests the movement to centralize enrollment operations may at times be disconnected from the functioning needs of institutions and, in many ways, grounded in a pursuit for legitimacy. As noted by institutional theorists, during times of uncertainty institutions may look to model themselves after what appear to be successfully evolving organizations as they seek to maintain access to resources and ensure that the organization endures. As such, institutional leaders may look to one another for guidance. The movement to centralize enrollment units appears, in some respects, to have been promulgated by institutional senior leaders looking to mimic institutional structures and practices that appear to be gaining traction within professional circles, thereby normalizing this trend to an even greater extent. This was reportedly the motivation for such structural change at one fifth of the institutions represented in our study. I think there was certainly, on the part of the president and the provost, an understanding of what the structures were elsewhere. And certainly, it’s pretty clear that sort of the concept of enrollment management or the concept of many of these offices being administered this way, they knew about that. (CEnO, private research institution) I think [the president] also looks at, and he had been the—there’s the [state independent colleges and universities group], and one of the institution presidents is in charge of that. I believe it’s on a two-year rotating cycle. He had been head of the [state independent college and universities group], so part of [the reasons to centralize enrollment units] comes from what he was hearing externally. (CEnO, private master’s institution) [Centralization of enrollment units] appeared to be, at that point in time, a natural thing to do, combined with [the new appointed chief enrollment officer’s] expertise and what we were seeing happening out and about. (CEnO, private baccalaureate institution) I think [the decision to centralize came] through the network of [religiously affiliated institution] presidents, as well as what’s going on in the country; my guess is that was part of pretty much what drove it. (CEnO, private master’s institution)


27


In some circumstances, restructuring in the image of other institutions can be beneficial, most notably when those structures are modified and adapted to meet the unique needs of an institution. Placed within the context of findings outlined earlier in this analysis, this approach allows institutions to structure their enrollment management units in a manner conducive to the pursuit of external resources. We looked at best practices from other enrollment management units. We took a look at how they were structured; we saw what would work best with us, and it’s just evolved really nicely over the last six years. (CAdO, public research institution) However, when structural changes are made without regard to need, they can be visibly ceremonial. For example, one chief admission officer highlighted how institutional leaders hired a chief enrollment officer to match a perceived organizational trend; yet, following his departure, the institution has continued to operate effectively with the position vacant for several months. Ceremonial changes may project an image of outward stability by embracing an emerging normative model, but may not necessarily improve internal functions if the normative model is not adapted to the culture and specific needs of the institution. Interview data with chief enrollment and chief admission officers further revealed how a more market-driven normative model has the potential to take hold within institutions. Enrollment professionals at a handful of institutions believed their presidents and provosts were motivated to create comprehensive enrollment units to reflect what was happening elsewhere and what they’d seen, sometimes after interacting with enrollment consulting firms such as Noel-Levitz, Inc., TargetX, and Ruffalo Cody. These firms are serving as conduits for the spread of normative values that embrace a more centralized approach to enrollment management and the aforementioned resource benefits associated with such a consolidated reporting structure. The following quote is representative of this phenomenon: One of the reasons why we sort of shifted our structure when the provost came to [the institution] —he’s been here—I guess this is his fifth year. One of the things that he observed or felt was that the whole enrollment area was too decentralized and kind of siloed, and so he was very interested, in terms of structure, what made the most sense. And so like good provosts do, he brought 28



a consultant in. The Huron Group was chosen. And so they were here doing a whole analysis of sort of the entire enrollment area; not what we were doing, but the structure, the organizational structure; who reports to who, what kind of committees are in place for decision making, that kind of thing. And so we didn’t adopt, institutionally, everything that they recommended. I don’t think anybody ever does that with a consultant, but that led to this decision to form this Enrollment Services Division. Then I moved from [chief admission officer] to this [chief enrollment officer] position. My colleague, [name], moved to the operations position and so we basically became the center, trying to unite a variety of disparate offices that previously had sort of all individually reported to different people, whether that was the provost or others. Whenever there’s an interest in change of this kind, historically, we’ve typically had consultants come in to look at it and sort of be an objective third party, generate a report, talk to a lot of people, make recommendations, and then that becomes sort of the impetus for change. (CEnO, private research institution) Of note, consulting firms do not always spread market-driven normative values as hired advisors. Interview data revealed a symbiotic relationship between enrollment professionals and consulting firms whereby firms sometimes hire enrollment professionals to serve as consultants for their member institutions and consultants sometimes leave their firms to take positions as enrollment managers, who then utilize consulting services at an institutional level. If structural centralization is being normalized by consulting firms and permeable boundaries exist among these firms and institutions of higher education, extensive opportunities for isomorphic homogenization emerge. Isomorphic forces were further evident when considering the influence of events held by consulting firms as well as professional associations such as the College Board, the National Association for College Admission Counseling (NACAC), the American Association of Collegiate Registrars and Admissions Officers (AACRAO), and others. A select number of enrollment professionals described how attendance at such functions by either themselves or senior leaders within their institutions planted a seed and initiated a movement toward the centralization of their enrollment units. Enrollment Management Journal Winter 2011

29


I attended one of the College Board programs in Chicago in the early stages of enrollment management. And Don Hossler conducted this couple-day seminar. And it was something that I had really believed in as needed, although I hadn’t heard of anything formal. And so I attended that, came back and convinced the university at that point that we should move in that direction of enrollment management, and we did. (CEnO, private master’s institution) I know [the chancellor] had attended some workshops, for example a NoelLevitz workshop on “What is Enrollment Management?”, and I think he just became interested in the concept and wanted this institution to begin engaging in more deliberate management of its enrollment. (CEnO, public research institution) As such, mimetic processes were evident. A movement toward the centralization of enrollment units at an institution may be stimulated by a desire for enrollment professionals and/or senior institutional leaders to imitate structural and procedural changes highlighted and normalized during professional gatherings. Finally, evidence suggests a market-driven model that embraces the centralization of enrollment units is being normalized to a small extent by senior institutional leaders, virally spreading from institution to institution. A few of the enrollment professionals in this study described changes in administrative leadership as being a catalyst for centralization. At the time [centralization] was done—I want to say that was probably somewhere around 1997. It’s probably about 11 years, 12 years. At the time that that was done, we went through a transition in leadership. We had a new president in the college. Prior to this person coming on board we had a nun, [name], who had been president for 23 years. When she retired and we had a layperson come in, he came from another college from another state, and he brought this enrollment management idea with him from his previous institution and instituted it here, and that’s how it came to be. (CAdO, private master’s institution) I think [centralization was the step that was needed for growth] just to increase efficiencies and to make sure that everything is kind of running as smoothly as possible, and partly because it’s the background of the vice president. She preferred a structure like that. (CAdO, private baccalaureate institution)

30



Presidents, provosts, and vice presidents often serve at a number of institutions throughout their careers. As they move to each institution, they bring with them a set of values that inform their expectations for how an institution should be structured and operate. In summary, enrollment professionals interviewed for this study gave credence to the idea that mimetic and normative isomorphic forces may contribute to the centralization of enrollment units. These forces are being spread within consulting firms and professional organizations, as well as by senior institutional leaders, leading institutions to collectively and visibly move toward the market in their orientation, structure, and behavior as they seek legitimate solutions to resource challenges during uncertain times. Resistance to Centralization By and large, the majority of interview participants, even at institutions with decentralized enrollment structures that do not have a chief enrollment officer in place, expressed a desire for greater coordination of enrollment units behind a central authority. There was a commonly held perception that institutions need to more cohesively approach the practice of enrollment so as to more effectively sustain growth, better prepare for impending demographic changes and more proactively address their enrollment needs, encourage cooperation and success across enrollment-related units, and redefine enrollment as more than admissions in an effort to more effectively move students through the system toward graduation and enhance an institution’s bottom line. That being said, not everyone is ready to embrace the new market-driven paradigm, whether to compete for resources or simply to project an image of legitimacy toward these ends. Findings from this study speak to the power of institutional culture at both higher and lower levels of an institution and its capacity to challenge change agents and derail efforts to more centrally structure institutional enrollment efforts. For instance, one chief enrollment officer highlighted how his institution had centralized to such a degree, moving enrollment and student services units under one central manager, that once the vice president who initiated that change left the institution, institutional personnel immediately split enrollment management and student services units apart. In a separate instance, the inability of the newly appointed chief enrollment officer to adequately manage the flow of resources to enrollment units following a move Enrollment Management Journal Winter 2011

31


to centralize these units proved so unpopular with unit heads that the chief enrollment officer left the institution and the position was disbanded. In other cases, institutional agents such as faculty members, presidents, and unit personnel have prevented centralization from happening in the first place. For example, a handful of enrollment professionals described the influential role of committee- and consensus-based enrollment models at their institutions, where faculty hold substantial authority pertaining to enrollment planning. We do enrollment management the hardest way that you can do it, and that is by committee. We do not have an enrollment czar who tells us what to do. I am not an enrollment czar. I think I could be, but that’s not the way we’re structured. [Institution] is a place that is extremely tied to the concept of faculty governance, which means governance by committee in almost every aspect. And so it’s not surprising that we approach enrollment management in the same way. (CAdO, public research institution) Policy is driven by the faculty. Admissions policies and all of that stuff is faculty driven, faculty derived. Most of the decisions that are made are made in a committee consensus model. (CAdO, public research institution) Empowered faculty have been known to resist centralized efforts aimed at prioritizing enrollment goals that are sometimes at odds with one another, such as academic quality, diversity, and discount rates. One of the strategic goals was to raise the SAT profile by 150 to 200 points while lowering the discount rate and increasing our minority population, and I said, “Which one of those do you want, because you’re not going to get all three. You can’t do it.” . . . I had some pushback from some faculty and deans, yeah. (CEnO, private research institution) In addition, faculty have also been known, in part, to oppose attempts to integrate admission and financial aid units on the grounds that such a close relationship between these units threatens to undermine an institutional commitment to need-based aid. The reason this institution is a throwback is because I would say this would probably resemble what occurred at many institutions in maybe the ‘70s. It has not adapted—I’m not saying it never will, perhaps it will in the future, but up to this point it just simply hasn’t adapted that mainline 32



enrollment management culture that tied admissions and financial aid in particular together in order to affect student decisions and affect enrollment outcomes. . . . There is a prevalent philosophy that I would say is still the majority here at the [institution] among the faculty and among key administrators that going to an enrollment management model leans away from a strictly need-based approach. It just doesn’t have wide support here. (CAdO, public research institution) Finally, faculty members have reportedly fought centralization efforts to avoid threats to their autonomy. More centralized enrollment units may carry with them the capacity to more closely assess the various roles institutional members play to help recruit, enroll, retain, and graduate students. Faculty “would not want the light shown on them in terms of some transparency, in terms of measures of productivity and things like that” (CAdO, private baccalaureate institution). As such, faculty members at some institutions may resist efforts to centralize enrollment units. In addition to faculty members, localized senior leaders are also at times deeply entrenched in tradition, the “old guard” resisting a movement toward centralization. Enrollment professionals at one fifth of the institutions represented in our study described senior leaders as sometimes serving at the very least as barriers to bringing in particular units such as the registrar or retention functions under a chief enrollment officer, and at the most as steering an institution away from more systematic approaches to enrollment management. We have a wonderful president. I have never worked with anybody who is as ethical and as values-oriented as he is. He has been in his role for 26 years; he has been at the institution for 30. And in many respects, when it comes to enrollment, he still functions—my assessment is, at least—that he still functions with 1985 thinking. We do not have much to—I think all of us are involved in enrollment management. We do not have a systematic approach to both understanding and being strategic about our overall enrollment. (CAdO, private baccalaureate institution) In terms of the registrar, that reports up through the academic vice president. I did in my attempt to reorg and complete the one stop shop type of program here have that as part of the reorganization when I pulled bursar and aid together. But at that time the climate just wasn’t right for us to pull Enrollment Management Journal Winter 2011

33


all three together . . . it just didn’t have the support from the top that it needed to move through. (CEnO, private master’s institution) In a way, I think people segregate [responsibility for returning students] out away from me because my focus—again, I started off in admissions and so many people still remember me from that. I think they kind of have a feeling that with returning students there are so many issues with them that are not related to their initial admission and that are not related to probably some of the things that my division does, although I don’t know if I’d agree with that. (CEnO, public research institution) Other senior leaders wish to avoid centralization to maintain a more collective commitment among institutional members to the enrollment function, concerned that creating an enrollment figurehead might lead to a more segmented culture as it pertains to enrollment responsibilities. Direct quote from our president is that, “Enrollment is everyone’s business.” And I think he’s concerned, by giving someone—any one person or department—that title of Enrollment Management, then we have a culture of, “Well, it’s that person’s job; it’s that office’s job to coordinate things: events on campus for new students and the billing culture for current students.” But I think by taking the title away and that assignment away, he feels that we can create this atmosphere where everything everyone does is related to enrollment and increasing enrollment. (CAdO, public master’s institution) Many presidents and provosts who began their leadership service long before enrollment management had become a catch phrase may not see a need for structural changes en route to enrollment stability, growth, or the retention of students. In addition to resistance from faculty and senior leaders, members of enrollment-related units also sometimes lead a push to remain autonomous. These members are often historically localized within their institutions and resist significant changes to their roles as a function of structural adaptation, wish to maintain control over the direction of their unit, or fear the centralization of enrollment units may somehow disproportionately benefit admissions units at their expense. Participants at nearly one quarter of the institutions in our study cited such resistance as barriers to structural change at their institutions.

34



I’d say there’s two different reasons [for resistance to centralization]. In some departments, it’s literally people just have too much to do and they can’t think about how they would change their day-to-day processes to make it work, and it’s easier to just do what you’ve always done. The other one is in some departments we just have people who believe it’s their—that they’ve always done it that way. It’s their department; they should be able to make those decisions. (CEnO, public associate institution) But anyway, at the level of the enrollment departments, I think it’s fair to say that the culture is defined to some degree by a resistance to thinking about things differently, which has created some interesting challenges when you come on board as a change agent. . . . A lot of these folks are near retirement and I think a comfort level has set in that has left them feeling as though they would be best served if they could kind of coast along. (CEnO, public master’s institution) The business lady that’s over financial aid, she doesn’t want that away from her. She likes that and our vice president for campus life, he likes all these areas. (CAdO, private baccalaureate institution) And understand too, our director of financial aid, who has a lot of influence on our campus, is fearful of that type of structure because he sees what’s out there. He knows that oftentimes the admissions person is either elevated to [the chief enrollment officer] role if it’s internal, or someone who is brought in from the outside who has an admissions background. And our financial aid director will tell you he’s suspicious of admissions people. He tells me that all the time. (CAdO, private baccalaureate institution) In general, enrollment professionals often described themselves as proponents of change in response to a changing external environment, yet recognized that their efforts to centralize enrollment systems could be viewed as threatening to other institutional actors, resulting in internal power struggles. Sometimes, however, chief admission officers, themselves, are key barriers to the centralization of enrollment units. One quarter of the chief admission officers at institutions without chief enrollment officers in our study were quite convinced that their enrollment systems, though not necessarily integrated, function quite effectively. We think it works the way it is. I’ve not worked for a president or a provost who’s thought we should do it differently. (CAdO, public research institution) Enrollment Management Journal Winter 2011

35


Our record has been one that we seem to accomplish our various goals and charges. We’ve seen the trend lines in almost all areas, [name of interviewer], go up. So there’s nothing that I think is extraordinary that would suggest that a more centralized approach would be warranted, at least at this time in the college’s history. Everything that I look at, not just in terms of my office and division, but elsewhere that’s related to enrollment, seems to be tracking in the direction that we would hope. (CAdO, private baccalaureate institution) The chancellor here now—let’s see. He’s been here for five—I think he’s in his fifth year. He first talked to me about [adding a chief enrollment officer], evolving my role to that, but I said, “You know, at this point I just don’t think we need it.” (CAdO, private research institution) I believe that if you have an articulated mission, vision, and goals, and no matter how many different subsets of people are off doing their corner of it, if the mission and the goals are well articulated and understood, then a unified command structure manifested in a sole individual is not needed. In this setting, the unified control individual is the plan. (CAdO, private baccalaureate institution) Additionally, one of these chief admission officers was concerned that centralizing beneath a chief enrollment officer could limit the attention senior leaders give to admissions units, a development that could have serious repercussions on internal resource allocation. They felt that a chief enrollment officer, with oversight over a number of enrollment-related units, might not be able to adequately represent the institution’s admissions interests at the senior level. As one chief admission officer explained, I know that, as I think about whatever my next step is, whenever my next step is, that my next position will not report to anyone other than a president. There’s value in that. And, yeah, I think a chief enrollment person—again say that’s first year experience and financial aid and admissions and maybe even athletics if you think about coaches as recruiters—now you’ve got four departments competing for interest and competing for time. I would be concerned that we wouldn’t get enough face time, if you will. (CAdO, private baccalaureate institution)

36



This concern was given additional credibility by a chief admission officer at an institution with a chief enrollment officer. And the other thing is that I think you really need to have somebody who’s at least close to being a peer to the other units within the campus when you’re lobbying for resources that are typically going to be there at the chancellor’s level. Right now, if we go to the table, our dean is going to be representing all the undergraduate deans as well as Enrollment Services and several other programs, when Student Services has their own vice chancellor. And that doesn’t put you in a very strong position, in my opinion . . . so if you don’t have a voice at the highest table, you’re lost pretty—once you get down the organizational chain it’s going to be, you’re competing against larger numbers of voices every time you step down. So in my opinion it’s, if $200 million, probably about 20% of your revenue stream is wrapped up in undergraduate tuition, you’d want to have that person responsible for bringing in that revenue and ensuring that it’s continuously being brought in, you would want to have that person at the table most of the time. And I don’t really see that happening here. (CAdO, public research institution) Consequently, it is little surprise that in some cases chief admission officers themselves are resisting efforts to create structures more conducive to comprehensive enrollment management. In summary, resistance comes from many corners of an institution. Institutional culture is a powerful force for both change and stability. As a result, the degree to which institutions have centralized their enrollment efforts is as varied as the types of institutions within America’s higher education system. Considering the findings from this study, a greater concern may be the extent to which institutions are recruiting and enrolling students strategically rather than maximizing student access and beneficial student outcomes.

Discussion and Significance of the Study How and why institutions structure their enrollment systems as they do speaks to their underlying priorities. As the principal findings of this analysis suggest, despite resistance from many institutional actors, institutions are centralizing their enrollment systems to manage new dependency relations, to more effectively compete for external resources, and, in some cases, in response Enrollment Management Journal Winter 2011

37


to isomorphic forces in pursuit of legitimacy. Hence, evidence directly and indirectly points to management of, competition for, and access to external resources as key reasons for structural change. One might ask what conformity within these constructs means when predicting future centralization trends in enrollment management. There appear to be two clear paths down which institutions are headed, consistent with these theoretical frameworks. The first of these paths is sculpted by revenue considerations. Findings from this study suggest enrollment structures are being centralized so as to put institutions in a position to adapt to changes in the resource environment, namely a greater reliance on tuition revenue, especially within public institutions. With a greater emphasis on tuition revenue comes a natural incentive for public institutions to prioritize the enrollment of privileged students who have the financial means to cover their educational costs. As such, we would not be surprised to see a greater reliance on early decision and early action policies—along with need-aware recruitment and admission practices such as the pursuit of out-of-state With tuition revenue increasingly and international students—that becoming a policy lever, institutions aim to identify and secure fullwill be pressured to compromise their paying students and their tuition social missions focused on access for dollars. With tuition revenue local underserved populations. increasingly becoming a policy lever, institutions will be pressured to compromise their social missions focused on access for local underserved populations. Moreover, the strategic interplay between admissions and student aid units within more centralized enrollment structures will likely intensify the practice of aid leveraging to compete for prestige and tangible external resources, inefficiently committing limited aid dollars to more academically proficient (and wealthier) students. Finally, as has been noted, institutions have been motivated to centralize their enrollment units so as to maximize internal access to institutional resources for units that help secure necessary external resources. Senior enrollment officials believe a more centralized enrollment structure allows them to advocate for and channel resources toward the revenue-generating enrollment sector. One unit’s gain is arguably another’s loss, with student services and instruction bearing the budgetary brunt of a supply-side market mentality.

38

{

{



The second path is molded by legitimacy considerations. If colleges and universities are reshaping their enrollment structures in the image of high-profile institutions without taking into consideration their own unique characteristics and needs, they may be setting up themselves for failure. As was documented in this analysis, institutions that neglect their own distinct organizational cultures in pursuit of external legitimacy may generate internal conflict. For example, a variety of institutional agents may coalesce to preserve their autonomy and mission-centered practices in the face of more centralized enrollment structures that take on a market-oriented persona. Of potentially even greater concern is the widespread reliance on consultants and vendors to help institutions find their footing in a high-paced, hyper-competitive environment. Consultants and vendors offer institutions tremendous enrollment expertise as they seek to maintain legitimate operations in the face of competitors. That said, consultants and vendors are driven by profit motives. It would be naïve to believe the motivations and corporate values they are normalizing are not infused into the practices of enrollment professionals. These practices, as we have detailed in a previous article published in The Journal of College Admission, tend to be focused on market segmentation, promotion and branding efforts, financial aid leveraging processes, and other market-oriented strategies, rather than educational and social considerations. Drawing on the theoretical frameworks that guided this research and on our analysis of the commentary of respondents, we expect to see continued centralization of enrollment functions. This conclusion would hold, we believe, even without the current economic crisis. Institutions have long been observed to seek the maximization of their resources (Bowen, Kurzweil, & Tobin, 2006). This said, economic woes continue to plague the nation, and institutional leaders will likely redouble their efforts to organize themselves to meet this external challenge. With regard to enrollments, the economic worries are likely to manifest themselves in increased competition for tuition-paying students, in seeking increased efficiencies in operations, and in organizational structures consistent with similarly striving institutions. As we have seen, presidents, provosts, and their leadership teams are committed to centralizing enrollment units in pursuit of resources to respond to the external environment, to follow institutional trends, and to fulfill their aspirations.


39


In addition, several factors at play strengthen the trend toward centralization. Our research provides evidence that senior officials experienced with centralized enrollment models sometimes institute those models when they move to new institutions. In addition, we have seen that the consulting firms used in this arena promote the centralization of enrollment units. Indeed, we have observed that these firms employ former enrollment practitioners as consultants, and educational institutions themselves occasionally appoint personnel from consulting firms to enrollment leadership roles. Finally, we note that, while some resist the trend, enrollment professionals sometimes promote a centralized model to ensure a voice at the senior leadership level to better compete for scarce institutional resources and to better coordinate services for students en route to revenue maximization. Moreover, it is our contention that new external forces, namely world economic and educational competition, will drive institutions to structure their enrollment units to meet these external challenges. America’s educational standing in the world has slipped, and President Obama has called for the United States to return to its former position as the world’s leader in educational attainment by the year 2020. The United States, the unmistakable leader in high school and college attainment during the 1960s and 1970s, now ranks 21st for high school completion rates among nations with advanced economies and 11th for postsecondary attainment among younger workers (aged 25–34) (College Board Commission on Access, Admissions and Success in Higher Education, 2008). If we are to meet, or even approach, the president’s goals, America’s educational institutions will need to work extraordinarily hard and effectively to enroll more students and to see them successfully through the college experience. Given the results of this research, we expect that further centralization of enrollment activities will be one key response, especially as institutions compete for federal stimulus dollars and other appropriations made available to aid in this effort. As we note, not all institutions are centralizing, nor do they centralize in the same ways. Institutional cultures, resource needs, and the unique environments in which various institutions operate cause enrollment models to vary. However, it is clear that centralization of institutional enrollment functions is trending forward. While the trend is certainly not universal, it is the rare institution that is not moving to structurally connect and integrate their student recruitment, enrollment, and, to some extent, persistence efforts. 40



Future Research and Final Commentary This research is just beginning. What more can we learn from the various models of centralization? How might these models of centralization and/or their motivations for structural change commonly vary based on institutional size and classification? Which structures are most effective and to what ends? The results of this study suggest that efforts to centralize enrollment units are in many ways driven by revenue considerations. However, to what extent do various degrees of centralization allow institutions to also more effectively deliver their academic functions by moving students through the system toward graduation? To what extent are an institution’s academic functions compromised by organizational motivations to maximize revenue? Gumport (2000) notes that, by prioritizing economic needs and allowing them to dictate organizational change, institutions may ultimately restructure their purpose and place within the greater social context. We hope to further explore the extent to which institutions are heading toward such a fate and the effects of such a transformation in future studies. About the Authors: Scott Andrew Schulz is the director of admissions at Saint Martin’s University. Jerome A. Lucido is a professor of research, executive director of the USC Center for Enrollment Research, Policy, and Practice, and special advisor to the provost at the University of Southern California. Address correspondence to: Scott Andrew Schulz, Saint Martin’s University, 5300 Pacific Ave, SE OM 256, Lacey, WA 98503, [email protected]


41


References Banaszak-Holl, J., Zinn, J. S., & Mor, V. (1996). The impact of market and organizational characteristics on nursing care facility service innovation: A resource dependency perspective. Health Services Research, 31(1), 97–117. Black, J. (2004). Defining enrollment management: The structural frame. College and University Journal, 79(4), 37–39. Bogden, R. C., & Bilken, S. K. (1998). Qualitative research for education: An introduction to theory and methods. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon. Bowen, W. G., Kurzweil, M. A., & Tobin, E. M. (2006). Equity and excellence in American higher education. Charlottesville, VA: University Press of Virginia. Casciaro, T., & Piskorski, M. J. (2005). Power imbalance, mutual dependence, and constraint absorption: A closer look at resource dependence theory. Administrative Science Quarterly, 50(2), 167–199. Cheslock, J. J., & Gianneschi, M. (2007). Replacing state appropriations with alternative revenue sources: The case of voluntary support. The Journal of Higher Education, 79(2), 208–229. Claar, J. M., & Scott, H. J. (2003). Comparing financial issues in public and private institutions. New Directions for Student Services, 103, 17–29. Clark, B. R. (1972). The organizational saga in higher education. Administrative Science Quarterly, 17(2), 178–184. College Board Commission on Access, Admissions and Success in Higher Education (2008, December). Coming to our senses: Education and the American future. College Board Advocacy. Retrieved from http://professionals.collegeboard.com/profdownload/coming-toour-senses-college-board-2008.pdf Coomes, M. D. (2000). The historical roots of enrollment management. New Directions for Student Services, 89, 5–18. Creswell, J. W. (2003). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. DiMaggio, P. J., & Powell, W. W. (1983). The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. American Sociological Review, 48(2), 147–160. DiMaggio, P. J., & Powell, W. W. (1991). The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. In P. J. DiMaggio & W. W. Powell (Eds.), The new institutionalism in organizational analysis (pp. 63–82). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. Duffy, E. A., & Goldberg, I. (1998). Crafting a class: College admissions and financial aid, 1955–1994. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. 42



Dungy, G. J. (2003). Organization and functions of student affairs. In S. R. Komives, D. B. Woodard, Jr., & Associates (Eds.), Student services: A handbook for the profession (4th edition). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Ehrenberg, R. G. (2003, September 19). Reducing uncertainty about costs would increase enrollments. Chronicle of Higher Education, 49(34), A37. Ehrenberg, R. G. (2006). The perfect storm and the privatization of public higher education. Change: The Magazine of Higher Learning, 38(1), 46–53. Froelich, K. A. (1999). Diversification of revenue strategies: Evolving resource dependence in nonprofit organizations. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 28(3), 246–268. Gumport, P. J. (2000). Academic restructuring: Organizational change and institutional imperatives. Higher Education, 39, 67–91. Haveman, H. A. (1993). Follow the leader: Mimetic isomorphism and entry into new markets. Administrative Science Quarterly, 38, 593–627. Henderson, S. E. (2008). Admissions’ evolving role: From gatekeeper to strategic partner. In B. Lauren (Ed.), The college admissions officers’ guide (pp. 1–22). Washington, DC: American Association of Collegiate Registrars and Admissions Officers. Hossler, D., & Anderson, D. K. (2004). The enrollment management process. In M. L. Upcraft, J. N. Gardner, & B. O. Barefoot (Eds.), Challenging and supporting the first-year student: A handbook for improving the first year of college (pp. 67–85). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Hovey, H. A. (1999). State spending for higher education in the next decade: The battle to sustain current support. San Jose, CA: National Center for Public Policy and Higher Education. Huddleston, T., Jr. (2000). Enrollment management. New Directions for Higher Education, 111, 65–73. Johnson, B. L., Jr. (1995). Resource dependence theory: A political economy model of organizations. Unpublished manuscript, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT. Kennedy, D. (1982). Legal education and the reproduction of hierarchy. Journal of Legal Education, 32, 591–615. Kroc, R. J., & Hanson, G. (2003). Enrollment management. In W. E. Knight (Ed.), Primer for institutional research (pp. 79–102). Tallahassee, FL: Association for Institutional Research. Marshall, C., & Rossman, G. B. (1999). Designing qualitative research (3rd edition). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. McPherson, M. S., & Schapiro, M. O. (1998). The student aid game: Meeting need and rewarding talent in American higher education. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Meredith, M. (2004). Why do universities compete in the ratings game? An empirical analysis of the effects of the U.S. News and World Report college rankings. Research in Higher Education, 45(5), 443–461. Enrollment Management Journal Winter 2011

43


Meyer, J., & Rowan, B. (1977). Institutionalized organizations: Formal structure as myth and ceremony. The American Journal of Sociology, 83(2), 340–363. Monks, J., & Ehrenberg, R. G. (1999, July). The impact of U.S. News & World Report college rankings on admissions outcomes and pricing policies at selective private institutions (Working Paper No. 7227). Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research. Newton, J. (2002). Barriers to effective quality management and leadership: Case study of two academic departments. Higher Education, 44(2), 185–212. Noel-Levitz, Inc. (2004). 2004 National Enrollment Management Study: Key findings for two-year and four-year institutions [National Research Report]. Iowa City, IA: Noel-Levitz, Inc. Rhoades, G., & Rhoads, R. A. (2003). The public discourse of U.S. graduate employee unions: Social movement identities, ideologies, and strategies. The Review of Higher Education, 26(2), 163–186. Rhoades, G., & Slaughter, S. (2004). Academic capitalism in the new economy: Challenges and choices. American Academic, 1(1), 37–60. Scott, W. R. (1987). The adolescence of institutional theory. Administrative Science Quarterly, 32(4), 493–511. Selingo, J. (2003, February 28). The disappearing state in public higher education. Chronicle of Higher Education, 49(25), A22. Serban, A. M., & Burke, J. C. (1998, July). The impact of state budget reductions in the 1990s: A view of public higher education in six states. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Society for College and University Planning, Vancouver, Canada. Shaw, K. M., & London, H. B. (2001). Culture and ideology in keeping transfer commitment: Three community colleges. The Review of Higher Education, 25(1), 91–114. Sherer, P. D., & Lee, K. (2002). Institutional change in large law firms: A resource dependency and institutional perspective. The Academy of Management Journal, 45(1), 102–119. Slaughter, S. (2001). Professional values and the allure of the market. Academe, 87(5), 17–22. Slaughter, S., & Leslie, L. (1997). Academic capitalism: Politics, policies, and the entrepreneurial university. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press. Tierney, W. G. (1991). Academic work and institutional culture: Constructing knowledge. The Review of Higher Education, 14(2), 199–216. Tolbert, P. S. (1985). Institutional environments and resource dependence: Sources of administrative structure in institutions of higher education. Administrative Science Quarterly, 30(1), 1–13.

44


How Does Money Help? Students’ Perceptions of the Effect of a Monetary Incentive on Completion of a Summer Bridge Program Heather D. Wathington University of Virginia

Joshua Pretlow University of Virginia

Claire Mitchell University of Virginia

Abstract This study offered an opportunity to earn a conditional cash transfer (CCT) of $400 to 796 students who were underprepared for college to induce them to participate in a developmental summer bridge program (DSBP). Though CCTs have been evaluated quantitatively, as a result of this study a more nuanced understanding of their differential effects on students emerged. Using theories of inducements and motivation, the findings are grouped into three overriding themes: CCT as an inducement, CCT as a wage, and CCT as a bonus (no effect). These findings, supplemented with descriptive statistics, suggest that CCTs may play a considerable role for some students, but perhaps a smaller or no role for others. Implications for practice and policy are discussed. This research was supported by grants from the Institute of Education Sciences (IES) and the Houston Endowment.

The cost of college is a barrier to attendance for many students, especially lowincome ones (Baum, 2001). As tuition and fees have increased faster than the rate of inflation,1 the challenge of funding a college education has become a greater hardship for many low-income students and their families. The net cost of attendance for a full-time student attending a public community college now accounts for almost 30% of a low-income family’s income; the corresponding figure for a public four-year institution is almost 40% (The College Board, After adjusting for inflation, tuition and fees rose an average of 4.4% per year at public four-year institutions and 1.5% per year at public two-year colleges during the decade 1997–98 to 2007–08 (College Board, 2007).

1


45

Heather D. Wathington, Joshua Pretlow, Claire Mitchell

2007). Federal and state financial aid programs are designed to provide qualifying students with scholarships, grants, and loans to help alleviate the financial burden of attendance (Hearn, 2001; Long, 2008; Paulsen, 2001). Recently, a greater number of students have been availing themselves of these programs. From academic year 2000–01 to 2007–08, the percentage of firsttime, full-time degree or certificate seeking undergraduates who received aid increased from 70.3 to 75.6% (National Center for Educational Statistics [NCES], 2009). Though more than three quarters of these undergraduates received some form of aid, many students who are both eligible and needy cannot access sufficient aid to finance their education, leaving them with considerable unmet financial need (Hearn, 2001; Long & Riley, 2007; Zumeta & Frankle, 2007). Ironically, the burden of cost and unmet financial need disproportionally impacts students who attend low-cost community colleges and who remain employed while attending (Long, 2008; NCES, 2009). The amount of unmet need is exacerbated by the fact that the current aid system is not designed to cover all costs associated with attendance. After including both direct (e.g., tuition and fees) and indirect (e.g., health care, books, and foregone earnings) costs, Zumeta and Frankle (2007) estimated that tuition and fees represent just 5% of the true cost of attendance at a California community college. Financial aid comes in many forms (e.g., loans, grants, scholarships), from a variety of sources (e.g., federal government, state government, institutions), and for a number of reasons (e.g., need-based, merit-based). This diversity makes evaluating the impact of aid money on college access and success difficult (Long, 2008). Previous research has indicated that increased aid does facilitate access to college (Leslie & Brinkman, 1987; Long, 2008; McPherson & Schapiro, 1998; Pascarella & Terenzini, 2005), but the research on persistence is less clear (Long, 2008; Pascarella & Terenzini, 2005), especially at community colleges. While Signell (2001) found that receipt of need-based aid increased enrollment and persistence, Dowd and Coury (2006) found that community college students who received a student loan in their first year of enrollment were less likely to persist when compared to students not taking loans. Although enrollment and persistence decisions are the outcomes of many factors (Kennamer, Katsinas, & Schumacker, 2011), finances do play a significant role in these decisions.

46


How Does Money Help?

Conditional Cash Transfer One policy alternative to encourage college-going and persistence among lower income students is a performance-based scholarship or a conditional cash transfer (“CCT”).2 A CCT requires “that recipients commit to undertaking certain behavioral changes in return for the (cash) transfers” (Son, 2008, p. 3). Requirements for the receipt of a CCT can include many socially desirable outcomes, e.g., school enrollment and persistence or prenatal checkups for expectant mothers (de la Briere & Rawlings, 2006). CCTs provide students with an alternative to loans and grants and have the potential to incentivize them to enroll and persist in higher education by simultaneously focusing on increasing an individual’s demand for higher education and decreasing the opportunity cost of attendance. However, if not targeted and implemented precisely, CCT programs have the potential to be a wasteful and inefficient use of public funds (de la Briere & Rawlings, 2006). Thus, targeting individuals truly on the edge of a decision is important if a CCT program is to demonstrate both efficiency and effectiveness. CCTs have proven effective in increasing elementary (Glewwe & Olinto, 2004; Schady & Araujo, 2006; Schultz, 2004) and secondary school (Battistin et al., 2004) enrollment and attendance in randomized trials in other countries. Versions of a CCT are currently being tested in the New York City, Chicago, Dallas, and District of Columbia middle and secondary schools (Turque, 2008). MDRC, a social policy research organization, is currently employing a randomized methodology with six higher education institutions in the U.S. to further investigate the effect of offering low-income students a performance-based scholarship predicated on continued enrollments and satisfactory grades. The early results are promising (Cha & Patel, 2010). Though similar to a performance-based scholarship, the stipend offered to students in this study should be viewed as one aspect of a developmental summer bridge program (DSBP). Whereas the goal of a performance-based scholarship is to increase students’ attendance, persistence, and success in education, the goal of this stipend was to entice students to enroll in and successfully complete the DSBP, thus exposing students to programmatic elements theorized to increase their academic success. Consequently, this article seeks to understand the role of the $400 stipend when combined with the opportunity to attend a DSBP designed to transition underprepared students into college. Although the CCT was offered by the The economic literature refers to payments as CCTs; however, we used the term stipend when talking to students and administrators. To avoid confusion, the terms CCT and stipend will be used interchangeably throughout the paper.

2


47


researchers as an inducement to participate in the DSBP, it is important to know precisely the role that the CCT served for students. This study stems from the findings of the previous quantitative research cited above and seeks to ascertain both how a monetary incentive is viewed by the students and program administrators and if the stipend can positively alter students’ college going behavior. Specifically, 1. How do program administrators view the effects of the $400 CCT on students’ college-going participation and behavior? 2. How do developmental summer bridge students perceive the inducement of a $400 CCT on their college-going participation and behavior?

Theoretical Frameworks Elements of Stone’s (2002) theory of inducements in the polis combined with Deci and Ryan’s (1980, 1985) self-determination theory can offer guidance for understanding how the CCT may influence the college-going behavior of developmental, low-income students. Inducement The CCT, or stipend as it was advertised to students, was developed as an inducement, the purpose of which was “to bring individual motives into line with community goals” (Stone, 2002, p. 266). Though the CCT was designed to achieve this ideal with a particular emphasis on enrollment and persistence in higher education, Stone (2002) cautions policymakers who would assume that actors in the inducement transfer process—both the givers and receivers—are rational, adaptive, future-oriented, and operating in isolation. Rather, individuals often make decisions that appear irrational to an impartial observer out of loyalty to other individuals or out of moral principal. Shifting away from a solely rational and economic perspective allows for an acknowledgement that all human decisions are made within a larger political and social context (Stone, 2002). Each individual has a unique external situation which influences decisions made both in and about education. This recognition allows for consideration of the effectiveness of the CCT in altering behavior not through the program designers’ perspective, but through the students’ lived experiences, which include daily participation in a “web of reinforcing and cross-cutting inducements” (Stone, 2002, p. 279). Therefore, if students do view the stipend as an inducement, we would expect it to positively influence students’ enrollment in the DSBP.

48



Motivation Self-determination theory (SDT) and its inherent concepts of intrinsic and extrinsic motivation focus on the degree to which people endorse their actions at the highest level of reflection and engage in those actions with a full sense of choice (Deci & Ryan, 1980, 1985). Deci and Ryan (2000) described three types of intrinsic motivators essential to an individual’s need for feelings of competence and self-determination: autonomy and self-direction, competence, and relatedness. Each is essential to understanding psychological needs in terms of an individual’s pursuit and attainment of goals. Intrinsic motivation is associated with deeper learning, performance, and general well-being. Activities seen by students as intrinsically motivational do not require or depend on external reinforcements, because the doing of the activity itself is rewarding. Extrinsic motivators consist of the internalization of social mores or regulations, divided into four levels: external, introjection, identification, and integration (Deci & Ryan, 2000). At the lowest level of internalization, external regulations are seen as behaviors controlled by consequences, such as tangible rewards or threatened punishment. External regulations are unlikely to be maintained once the contingencies are withdrawn (Deci & Ryan, 1985). Therefore, students at low levels of integration would require the stipend to influence participation and attendance within the DSBP, but absent the stipend would likely discontinue their engagement with higher education. The greater the level of internalization, the more likely the individual is to fully integrate the behaviors with other aspects of their values and identity—hence college-going would become aligned with the student’s goals (Deci & Ryan, 1995; Pelletier, Tucson, & Haddad, 1997). Thus, extrinsic motivation that is fully integrated psychologically receives the same status and importance as intrinsic motivation. The CCT, then, would potentially serve as a hook, allowing the student to internalize the value of higher education and perhaps alter behavior.

Methods and Data Sources The qualitative data emerged from implementation site visits conducted as part of a larger study of DSBPs at eight higher education institutions in Texas during the summer of 2009.3 Of these eight, six are community colleges and two are open-access four-year institutions. All eight programs offered students instruction in their area of development—math, reading, or English—as Pseudonyms are used for the eight institutions.

3


49


well as on the “soft skills,” e.g., study skills, time management, navigating a college campus, and selecting a major that aligns with career goals needed to be successful college students. See appendix A for more details on the individual programs. Based on eligible placement test scores, students in need of developmental education were actively recruited from area high schools. As part of the DSBP, students had the opportunity to earn up to $400 upon successful completion of the program. The first payment of $150 was to be disbursed at the end of the program’s first week. The balance, $250, was to be paid out to students who successfully completed the program within two weeks of the posting of final grades. In order to successfully complete the program and receive this final payment, students were required to earn a grade of C or better and miss fewer than three days of class. These stipulations ensured students received credit for the DSBP and could advance to the next level course. Researchers conducted extensive site visits to all eight institutions. Each visit included separate focus groups with students and interviews with administrators. These site visits occurred one time with two researchers during the second or third week of the DSBP implementation. In total, 13 administrators and 61 students participated in interviews or focus groups. All sessions were recorded and transcribed for analysis. The data analysis was guided by the approach of Miles and Huberman (1994), who describe themselves as “transcendental realists” (p. 4). Miles and Huberman acknowledge that social phenomena exist both in individuals’ minds as well as in the objective world. Further, they acknowledge that individuals make decisions within the social structures that society has produced. Rather than attempting to establish positivist “laws” of how society works, they attempt to seek out stable relationships and provide explanations of how events were produced. This approach aligns with the goals of this study. The decision to enroll and persist in college cannot be divorced from the larger context in which a student operates. Thus, exploring how students and college staff make meaning of the CCT within their context can provide insight into the possible synergy of motives between the givers and receivers of the CCT. To ultimately evaluate how the inducement functions in the field, the CCT needs to be understood in order to construct an analytic frame that functions as a cohesive whole. Although this study includes descriptive results of students’ participation and completion 50



of the DSBP and fall enrollment in college, we rely primarily on a qualitative examination using data on the administration of the CCT in addition to student and administrator views. A preliminary list of codes was generated utilizing both the site visit protocols and the conceptual frameworks described above, while also allowing additional codes to emerge. The qualitative software NVivo was used to help organize and analyze the data. The descriptive quantitative data for this study were collected from two sources. First, study participants completed a Baseline Information Form prior to the start of the program. This form included questions pertaining to demographics, parent’s or guardian’s education levels, financial assistance, and future educational aspirations. The program enrollment and completion data was collected from each of the eight sites at the conclusion of the summer. Sample Administrators and students were the primary data sources for the study. At each campus, one to two administrators were interviewed individually or in tandem as appropriate. Approximately six to ten student focus group volunteers from each site were drawn from the sample of 689 program participants. The overall sample of program participants was largely female (62.5%), predominantly Latino (84.3%), and age 19 or younger (94.5%).4 Approximately 60% of the program participants received free and/or reduced lunch in high school and 30% reported that their family received some form of public assistance (e.g., welfare, section eight housing, etc.), indicating that most students were, in fact, low-income. Slightly more than 40% of students reported that they were the first in their family to attend college.

Findings The findings illuminate how a CCT functions in practice and data unfolded into three overriding themes: CCT as an inducement, CCT as a wage, and CCT as a bonus (no effect). For students who considered the CCT a bonus, the stipend had little to no effect on their decision to attend or participate in the DSBP. However, these three categories are not mutually exclusive; students might have viewed the CCT as an inducement because they intended to rely on the CCT as a wage. Further, in many instances, if the CCT had an effect on a student’s behavior, that effect was sequential in that the stipend aided in recruitment and then attendance through its Characteristics of specific focus group participants were not collected.

4


51


effect as an inducement and as a wage. Despite possible overlaps and intersections, we maintain that these three categories surfaced consistently throughout the focus group sessions. Each of these themes is discussed in detail below. Recruitment Administrators voiced their belief that the $400 stipend was a powerful recruitment tool which motivated students to enroll in the study. One administrator commented, “[The stipend] has gotten them. It got a lot of them interested.” Another program administrator commented on the stipend’s perceived effect: Well, I think any time you wave a green carrot in front of students, yeah, they’re going to say, yeah, $400 to sit in class for four weeks for half a day, it’s worth it. And that’s what a lot of students have told us. . . . So I say it is a very strong motivator. It may not be all of it, but it’s a very strong motivator. In both of these cases, the administrators indicated that the stipend was successful in altering student motivation to register for the program in that it acted as an extrinsic motivator or a form of allurement. The notion that extrinsic rewards can alter the consequences of individual actions is consistent with inducement (Stone, 2002) and self-determination theories (Deci & Ryan, 1980). Students echoed administrators’ positive assessment of the CCT on recruitment, but added a more nuanced assessment of the stipend’s effect. Some students saw the CCT as simply differentiating the program from the myriad of information they receive as high school seniors. One student articulated this view: “I probably wouldn’t even have thought about [the program]. It’s just another letter in the mail.” Another student reported that she, “didn’t know enough about [the program] to sign up without the money. . . . The money grabbed my attention, and made me come to the meeting, and that’s where I learned more about it. So, if it wasn’t for that (the stipend), then I don’t think I would have come.” In this way, the stipend piqued interest in the DSBP and acted as a positive external motivator for students to take the necessary steps that could potentially facilitate their immediate and long-term educational goals. Other students viewed the offer of a CCT as fundamentally changing their decision to enroll in the DSBP. One student admitted that she, “wouldn’t have [enrolled], but I would have regretted it because it’s a good experience.” Her experience aligns with Stone’s (2002) view of inducements by utilizing money to motivate an individual to 52



invest in additional education. Another student altered her educational plans for the summer upon learning of the stipend. She commented: Actually, this whole summer, I had already arranged to be going to La Hoya (a high school) to get some tutoring from my old high school teacher. But when this class came up, and they said there would be a stipend of $400. . . . Anyway, this class was really convenient for me because not only am I coming over here in a national college, which I believe is a little bit more advanced than what any high school teacher can teach me, plus you’re getting paid. What could be more convenient? Although this student was planning to invest in education during the summer, the potential of receiving the stipend played a role in shaping her decision to participate in the program. This allowed her to experience the other programmatic elements of the DSBP, which in turn may have increased her chances of success in postsecondary education. Administrators from multiple sites expressed concern over what effect the CCT would have in the following summer of 2010, when it would not be offered to students.5 Since potential students would likely have heard about the CCT for 2009 DSBP participants, there was apprehension over how this would affect program recruitment for summer 2010. One administrator commented, “It’ll be very interesting to see if we’ll get the same numbers next year since we won’t have the stipend.” Another administrator echoed this sentiment: “That incentive really came in pretty good, and I think some students that graduate (high school) next year are going to be disappointed that that’s not available.” The views of these two administrators reflect their beliefs that the stipend did help to motivate students to participate in the DSBP. Although the effect of the stipend on the following summer’s recruitment is unknown, both current students and program administrators viewed the opportunity to earn the $400 stipend as having a positive effect on student recruitment during the year of the study. By incentivizing students to acquire additional information and to enroll in the developmental summer bridge program, the CCT appears to have functioned as a tool that enabled the DSBP the opportunity to positively affect students’ outcomes. Since the student stipends were funded by the researchers as part of the developmental summer bridge program, they were not offered in summer 2010, though all eight institutions did offer the summer bridge program in summer 2010.

5


53


Attendance Disbursed in two payments, the staggered distribution of the CCT was intended to encourage program persistence among participants. Since most program administrators did not interact daily with students, their commentary on the CCT’s effect on attendance was limited. However, students’ self-reports on the CCT’s effect on attendance were telling. A student commented that the stipend, “motivates you kind of, like to go to first period because they tell you if you don’t go to all your classes, you’re not going to get [the stipend]. So it kind of makes you, because if it was up to me, I wouldn’t go to specific classes.” How the CCT motivated students on a daily basis was summed up succinctly by students at two different sites who said, “I think that’s what wakes you up,” and “It’s an incentive to get out of bed.” This idea of the stipend as an extrinsic motivator for students was consistently reported and aligns with Deci and Ryan (1980; 1985). Another student said, “I gotta wake up. I’m not going to be late today. I won’t be half an hour late, and I won’t sleep throughout all my classes. [The stipend] pushes you a step further.” In addition to just simply attending class, this student linked the stipend to increased effort in class. When asked what effect, if any, the stipend had on her behavior, another student reported: You’re like, “Okay, I’m going [to class].” But then some days you’re like, “Oh my God. This is boring. I’m not going to this class. I’ll go to the other one.” But then you’re like, “Ooh, you can’t miss a day or you ain’t gonna get that $400.” That keeps you in the class. Judging from students’ perceptions, the requirements for receiving the stipend were clear, and this translated into increased attendance and effort by the students. It was unclear from student comments, however, if the stipend would have a lasting impact on their decision to attend college in the fall. In fact, the students’ comments suggested that the CCT had an effect on their day-to-day lives and might serve only an external and temporary purpose. Wage Our second finding corresponds to the CCT as a potential wage for students. An important consideration in the design of the stipend was to enable students to work fewer hours, if at all, during the program, thus decreasing the opportunity cost of attending and allowing students to devote more time and 54



energy to their school work. Both students and administrators indicated that the CCT served the role of a wage for students in the DSBP. Students in the program, knowing that they were earning money through the DSBP, could work fewer hours at summer jobs. When asked what they would do without the stipend, students’ typically replied, “Work more” or “Probably have a full [work] schedule. Right now, I only work four days out of the week.” For the majority of students, the CCT functioned as researchers had intended—to free students from outside obligations so they could devote more time to the program. By altering or countering the obstacles students faced in attending the DSBP, the stipend acted as an inducement and facilitator to help students attend the program, providing them with the opportunity to be successful, just as Stone’s (2002) theory of inducements predicts. An administrator at one site offered an alternative view of the stipend as a wage. When asked if she believed the stipend amount was sufficient to affect students’ behaviors, she responded by relaying a conversation she had with a student who decided not to attend the summer program: No. It was not [enough] because it wasn’t just the $400 for school. [The student said], “I need to help support the household. We need—$400 is wonderful. . . but I need more. . . I need to be able to help with the financial obligations at home.” This example contrasts with a report by an administrator at another site. When asked if students were disappointed when not selected to be in the DSBP and have a chance at earning the stipend, she responded: The only students that were really disappointed. . . were our nonresident students. They don’t have social security numbers so they can’t work. And so this was an opportunity to earn money for the summer. And so that was the real disappointment for them. They can go to school and pay resident tuition. Taken together, these two examples demonstrate that evaluating the effect of the CCT is complex and nuanced; individual student contexts vary, and what makes financial sense for one student does not for another (Stone, 2002). Some students needed and thought they could earn more than the value of the stipend by working over the summer, while for other students the stipend was their sole opportunity to earn money. Enrollment Management Journal Winter 2011

55


Unfortunately, all eight of the participating institutions experienced administrative challenges distributing the stipend and, as a result, many students did not receive their first stipend payment as scheduled. The research plan called for the first payment of $150 to be made at the end of the first week of the program, with the balance, $250, to be paid out to successful students within two weeks of final grade posting. Though all students who qualified were ultimately paid the correct amount, the initial payment was almost uniformly not delivered on time. This resulted in many of the focus group participants making comments and inquiries about the stipend. When asked about the effect of the stipend, one student pointed out that “we haven’t received any of it yet, so—but we’re still liking [the program], so that’s good.” On the other hand, some students described the hardship associated with not having the funds on time: Honestly, with the money that we were supposed to get, I wanted to get the internet at my house because I’m way out there. I don’t have access to a library close by. The closest library is about 20 minutes away. It’s kind of hard to go to the library and have your kids quiet. My point is that with that money—I don’t know if you guys could make the comment that that actually does help some students. Some students from our class actually left because they didn’t have any gas money. We’re talking about—we have kids coming from Rio Grande, and I come from Palm View, so I come from way out there. Although the implementation issues associated with the CCT were unfortunate— especially the stories of students who dropped out due to financial issues— students’ comments about the implementation challenges reinforce the finding of the CCT as a form of financial support or wage. Perhaps because financial constraints were considerable for some students, the stipend as wage can only be seen as an immediate inducement. Students for whom the stipend functioned as a wage had needs that were immediate and tangible, and so the stipend was considered primarily and only if it made financial sense to the student. Bonus Although a majority of students and administrators reported that the offer of a stipend influenced students’ decisions to participate, this sentiment was not universal. The third finding illustrates that a minority of participants perceived the CCT as a bonus. That is, it was a benefit in addition to the DSBP—which they viewed as a solid opportunity to begin their postsecondary studies. As a result of her interactions with students, one administrator concluded, “I know 56



money is important, but for some students, money is not an issue.” Many administrators at other institutions underscored this notion; student comments reinforced it further. Students reported that they would have attended the DSBP regardless of the stipend. One student said, “It’s kinda nice that you pay us to be in this program, but in the end, it’s for our benefit. It gets us prepared. So, the money is kinda like something extra.” When asked if the stipend had an effect on attendance, another student responded “No, I know that I have to have this class to get into my next English class. So that’s why [I attended].” When asked a follow-up question—if the stipend affected her effort—the same student responded, “No. I mean, it’s nice because I’m sure that I’ll have to spend that money on books (in the fall).” This intrinsically motivated student viewed the CCT as a bonus to her attendance. Though she indicated that she would use the money to help finance her education in the future, she also indicated that the stipend did not alter her actions. In addition to this rather strong endorsement for the program, a more nuanced view of the stipend as a bonus emerged from the data. Rather than merely reporting that the stipend did or did not influence their behavior, many students stated that the free DSBP itself was a motivating factor in their attendance. The DSBP did not charge tuition and, in most cases, was essentially free except for the opportunity cost incurred by attendance. When asked if the stipend influenced her decision to attend, a student responded, “Actually, not really. The fact that I didn’t have to pay for [the program], yes. But the—I mean, I would’ve done it without getting paid.” Another student in the focus group concurred: “Yeah, if they would’ve just said, ‘Oh, hey. I mean, you can do this and you don’t have to pay for the class or book.’ . . . yeah, sure.” A student at another institution also echoed this sentiment: Because y’all can even, so that you won’t have to put a lot of money toward this program, you could take that money [the stipend] away that you’re giving to kids because it’s [the program] already a benefit for us. So you could take that money away, but keep it [the program] free. This subtle difference, which emerged from the data, is an important distinction. For some students, the stipend was viewed as a bonus only, not influencing their behavior in any way. This view, and subsequent behavior, warrants the criticism of CCT programs as an inefficient use of scarce public funds to pay participants Enrollment Management Journal Winter 2011

57


for actions they will take regardless (Attanasio, Elma, & Gomez, 2005). However, though other students also viewed the CCT as a bonus, these students viewed the free DSBP as an ample incentive to entice their enrollment. Since a threecredit developmental course costs between $150 and $250 at each of the eight participating institutions, the cost savings of the DSBP can be significant for students, especially for those who enrolled in two or more developmental courses. This finding has implications for institutions and policymakers, which are discussed in further detail below. Quantitative Findings The data in Table 1 below summarize students’ actions with regard to participation in and completion of the DSBP and their subsequent enrollment in the fall semester. Column 3, displaying the number of students who have ever attended the DSBP, represents an above average take-up rate, especially given the fact that many students signed up for the summer program as early as April of their senior year of high school—in some cases four months before the start of the DSBP. This take-up rate of over 86% aligns with the qualitative finding that the stipend positively influenced recruitment and enrollment. Almost all students who ever attended the DSBP successfully completed the program (92.6%, column 4). This is a high completion rate, especially considering that the program targeted developmental students—a group that traditionally has high dropout and low persistence rates—and occurred over the summer (Bailey, Jeong, & Cho, 2008). This low attrition rate lends support to students’ reports of the stipend positively affecting attendance. Further, as seen in column 6, a majority of students who completed the program went on to enroll in college in the subsequent fall semester. Although it is not known what portion of these students would have enrolled without having participated in the study—and receiving the stipend—having such a high percentage of developmental students persist from the summer to the fall semester could show potential for increasing the success rate of remedial students.

58



Table 1 | Participation, Completion, and Fall Enrollment Institution

Students who signed up for DSBP

Students who ever attended DSBP

Students who successfully completed DSBP

Students who completed and enrolled in fall (#)

Students who completed and enrolled in fall (%)

Border College

122

113

111

99

89.2%

East Community College

164

139

138

100

72.5%

Valley Community College

52

51

41

34

82.3%

River Bend Community College

91

51

47

40

85.1%

West Community College

155

146

139

108

77.7%

North Community College

75

65

64

57

89.1%

South Community College

54

52

35

28

80.0%

Mountain College

83

72

63

48

76.2%

Totals

796

689

638

514

80.6%

Study Limitations This study has several limitations. First, researchers spoke only with students who attended the program and took part in the focus groups; we were unable to speak with students who exited the program. Consequently, we were only able to interview students who had a realistic chance of receiving the full amount of the CCT. Second, program students self-selected to attend and participate in the focus groups. Third, student focus groups were held only once at each campus, during either the second or third week of the program. Thus, some of the students had received their initial payment ($150) while students at other sites had not due to the aformentioned implementation challenges that prevented a prompt distribution of the CCT. Finally, students were not contacted after they had received the final payment of $250.


59


Discussion and Implications Our findings suggest that students are varied in their needs and motivations. CCTs may play a considerable role for some students, but perhaps a smaller or negligible role for others. The CCT’s primary goals included both attracting students into the program and facilitating their successful completion. Both students and program administrators perceived that the stipend did influence students’ behavior in this way. For a minority of students, the offer of a free summer program was a great value and the stipend provided an additional bonus to participating in the DSBP; for others, however, the stipend provided an inducement for enrolling and persisting in the program. For students who are intrinsically motivated to attend higher education, the program alone serves a purpose and is of clear value. Alternatively, if students who are unsure of their postsecondary plans could be induced to attend a summer bridge program by the stipend, this If students who are unsure of their innovation provides an opportunity postsecondary plans could be induced to capture them. Viewing the stipend to attend a summer bridge program by as one aspect of the program and the stipend, this innovation provides adapting summer bridge programs an opportunity to capture them. to specifically address the needs and motivations of students on the margins may represent one of the last opportunities to both attract and retain students before they pursue other alternatives, such as work. For students who were drawn to the program and attended daily only because of the stipend, one must question how likely the student would be to enroll and persist in higher education after the completion of the program. For these students, the value and worth of higher education is in question, and perhaps a DSBP that underscores the potential of a college degree, in addition to the specific skills required to be successful in college, is needed. For yet other students, the CCT was simply a bonus and held no value for encouraging participation within the program. These students were already motivated and inclined to participate in higher education and saw the program itself as a benefit to their goals. These are the students for whom the stipend holds little or no value.

60

{

{



Implications These findings are informative for both policymakers and practitioners. The findings point out that a free DSBP can be attractive to students who are intrinsically motivated to succeed in higher education absent a stipend; they interpret the free program as a benefit to their goals. For other less motivated students, stipends help, but must be used in concert with a broader array of inducements to modify behavior and encourage students to enroll and attend college. The findings within this study can be used to amend the goals and purposes of developmental summer bridge programs—especially for students on the margins who are the least likely to pursue higher education. Our findings that distinguish between these groups are also an important step toward implementing CCTs on a larger scale if they are to function as intended—to effectively alter students’ college-going behavior. The implementation of CCTs on a larger scale could serve as a platform for capacity building, or “the transfer of money to individuals or agencies for the purpose of investment in future benefits—material, intellectual, or human resources” (McDonnell & Elmore, 1987, p. 139). This is a more future oriented view of the CCT as a way to incentivize young adults to commit to and pursue higher education. The intermediate objective of the CCT is for students to enroll, persist, and successfully complete the DSBP. The longer term goal, of course, would be for students to continue their engagement with higher education by enrolling and persisting in the fall semester and beyond. Larger scale CCT programs with this goal could be of interest to states seeking ways to increase the education level of their citizens. While CCTs have been criticized as an inefficient use of public funds for programs that do not alter participants’ behavior, the case can be made that they work for some students depending on the student’s motivation and financial need. If CCT policies could be more nuanced and target students who demonstrate high levels of intrinsic motivation and financial need, their use would represent a more efficient use of public funds (Attanasio et al., 2005). Further, changing other policies and practices with the incentive, such as altering the focus of the DSBP for some students, could present great potential for bolstering low-income student success in college. The potential benefits of CCT programs are represented in Table 2.


61


Table 2 | Summary of Findings Stipend function

Student’s reported motivation

Stipend as inducement

Stipend as capacity-builder

Recruitment and attendance

Extrinsically motivated

Yes

No, not likely

Wage

Extrinsically motivated

Yes

Yes, possibly

Bonus

Intrinsically motivated

Yes

Yes, possibly

It is clear that issues surrounding CCTs require greater exploration and both quantitative and qualitative methods should be employed. The value and timing of a stipend’s effect on participants are areas that this study did not address. However, it is hoped that the findings presented here can inform practitioners, policymakers, and future researchers to help answer these relevant and important questions. About the authors: Heather D. Wathington is an assistant professor in education leadership, foundations, and policy at The University of Virginia. Joshua Pretlow is a graduate student in education leadership, foundations, and policy at The University of Virginia. Claire Mitchell is a graduate student in education leadership, foundations, and policy at The University of Virginia. Address correspondence to: Heather Wathington, Curry School of Education, Department of Educational Leadership, Foundations and Policy, University of Virginia, P.O. Box 2654, 405 Emmet Street South, Charlottesville, Virginia 22904, [email protected]

62



References Attanasio, O., Elma, F., & Gomez, A. (2005). The impact of a conditional education subsidy on school enrollment in Colombia. (Report Summary Familias 01). Retrieved from the Institute of Fiscal Studies website: http://www.ifs.org.uk/edepo/rs_fam01.pdf Bailey, T., Jeong, D. W., & Cho, C. (2008). Referral, enrollment, and completion in developmental education sequences in community colleges. New York, NY: Community College Research Center, Teachers College, Columbia University Press. Retrieved from http://ccrc.tc.columbia.edu/Publication.asp?UID=659 Battistin, E., et al. (2004). The evaluation of education maintenance allowance pilots: Three years’ evidence. A quantitative evaluation. (Research Report no. RR499). London, UK: Department for Education and Skills. Retrieved from http://www.dfes.gov.uk/research/data/uploadfiles/RR499.pdf Baum, S. (2001). College education: Who can afford it? In M. B. Paulsen & J. C. Smart (Eds.), The finance of higher education: Theory, research, policy & practice (pp. 39–52). New York, NY: Agathon Press. de la Briere, B., & Rawlings, L. (2006, June). Examining conditional cash transfer programs: A role for increased social inclusion? (Social Protection Discussion Paper No. 0603). New York, NY: The World Bank. Cha, P., & Patel, R. (2010). Rewarding progress, reducing debt: Early results from Ohio’s performance-based scholarship demonstration for low-income parents. Retrieved from http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/ED512171.pdf Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1980). The empirical exploration of intrinsic motivational processes. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 13, pp. 39–80). New York, NY: Academic Press. Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behavior. New York, NY: Plenum. Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1995). Human agency: The basis for true self-esteem. In M. H. Kernis (Ed.), Efficacy, agency, and self-esteem. New York, NY: Plenum. Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2000). Intrinsic and extrinsic motivations: Classic definitions and new directions. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25(1), 54–67. Dowd, A. C., & Coury, T. (2006). The effect of loans on the persistence and attainment of community college students. Research in Higher Education, 47(1), 33–62. Glewwe, P., & Olinto, P. (2004). Evaluating the impact of conditional cash transfers on schooling: An experimental analysis of Honduras’ PRAF Program. Final Report for USAID. Washington, DC: International Food Policy Research Institute. Retrieved from http://siteresources.worldbank. org/INTISPMA/Resources/383704-1109618370585/No168_Glewwe_04.pdf Enrollment Management Journal Winter 2011

63


Hearn, J. C. (2001). The paradox of growth in federal aid for college students, 1960–1990. In M. B. Paulsen & J. C. Smart (Eds.), The finance of higher education: Theory, research, policy, & practice (pp. 267–320). New York, NY: Agathon Press. Leslie, L., & Brinkman, P. (1987). Student price response in higher education. Journal of Higher Education, 58, 181–204. Long, B. T. (2008). What is known about the impact of financial aid? Implications for policy. (NCPR Working Paper). Retrieved from http://www.postsecondaryresearch.org/i/a/ document/6963_LongFinAid.pdf Long, B. T., & Riley, E. K. (2007). Financial aid: A broken bridge to college access? Harvard Educational Review, 77(1), 39–63. Kennamer, M. A., Katsinas, S. G., & Schumacker, R. E. (2011). The moving target: Student financial aid and community college student retention. Journal of College Student Retention: Research, Theory, and Practice, 12(1), 87–103. Miles, M. B., & Huberman, M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. McDonnell, L., & Elmore, R. (1987), Getting the job done: Alternative policy instruments. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 9(2), 133–152. McPherson, M. S., & Schapiro, M. O. (1998). The student aid game: Meeting need and rewarding talent in higher education. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. National Center for Educational Statistics (NCES). (2009). The condition of education: Financial aid for first time-time students. Washington, DC: Department of Education. Pascarella, E. T., & Terenzini, P. T. (2005). How college affects students (Vol. 2). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Paulsen, M. B. (2001). The economics of human capital and investment in higher education. In M. B. Paulsen & J. C. Smart (Eds.), The finance of higher education: Theory, research, policy & practice (pp. 55–94). New York, NY: Agathon Press. Pelletier, L. G., Tuson, K. M., & Haddad, N. K. (1997). Client motivation for therapy scale: A measure of intrinsic motivation, extrinsic motivation and a motivation for therapy. Journal of Personality Assessment, 68, 414–435. Schady, N., & Araujo, M. C. (2006). Cash transfers, conditions, school enrollment, and child work: Evidence from a randomized experiment in Ecuador. (World Bank Policy Research Working Paper 3930). Retrieved from http://ideas.repec.org/p/wbk/wbrwps/3930.html Schultz, T. P. (2004). School subsidies for the poor: Evaluating the Mexican Progresa poverty program. Journal of Development Economics, 74(1), 199–250.

64



Signell, L. D. (2001, August). Come and stay a while: Does financial aid effect enrollment and retention at a large public university? New York, NY: Cornell Higher Education Research Institute. Retrieved from http://digitalcommons.ilr.cornell.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article =1011&context=cheri&seiredir=1#search=%22Come+and+stay+a+while:+Does+financial+ai d+effect+enrollment+and+retention+at+a+large+public+university?%22 Son, H. H. (2008). Conditional cash transfer programs: An effective tool for poverty alleviation? (ERD Policy Brief Series, No. 51). Retrieved from Asian Development Bank website: http://www.adb.org/Documents/EDRC/Policy_Briefs/PB051.pdf Stone, D. (2002). Policy paradox: The art of political decision making (Revised ed.). New York, NY: W. Norton & Co. The College Board. (2007). Trends in pricing 2007. Princeton, NJ. Retrieved April 30, 2009 from http://www.careercornerstone.org/pdf/universities/tuition07.pdf Turque, B. (2008, August 29). 14 schools named to D.C. program to motivate students with cash. The Washington Post, p. B01. Walpole, M. (2003). Socioeconomic status and college: How SES affects college experiences and outcomes. The Review of Higher Education, 27(1), 45–73. Wessel, R. D., Bell, C. L., McPherson, J. D., Costello, M. T., & Jones, J. A. (2007). Academic disqualifications and persistence to graduation by financial aid category and academic ability. Journal of College Student Retention: Research, Theory & Practice, 8(2), 185–198. Zumeta, W., & Frankle, D. (2007). California community colleges: Making them stronger and more affordable (Report #07-1). San Jose, CA: The National Center for Public Policy and Higher Education.


65


appendix A | Selected Programmatic Characteristics of Developmental Summer Bridge Programs Institution

Valley Community College Mountain College West Community College Border College South Community College East Community College North Community College River Bend Community College

66

Years offered

# of weeks and hours of instruction

Breadth of subject(s) offered

Depth of level(s) offered (below college level)

4

4 weeks; 52–64 hours

Math or English

1

2

4 weeks; 80–100 hours,

Math

1, 2, and 3

6

4 weeks; approx. 65–95 hours

Math, reading, and/or writing

1, 2, and 3

3

5 weeks; 100 hours

Math

1, 2, and 3

2

4 weeks; 60–76 hours

Math

2 and 3

4

5 weeks; 100 hours

Math and reading/ writing

1, 2, and 3

4

4 weeks; 67 hours

Math, reading or writing

1

10

5 weeks; 95 hours

Math, reading, writing (chose 2 classes)

1, 2, and 3


Taking the Family to College: Understanding the Role of Family in the Resiliency of Hispanic Students at a Predominantly White Midwest University Monique Mendoza University of California, San Diego

Jeni Hart University of Missouri

Stephen Whitney University of Missouri

Abstract The purpose of this qualitative case study was to better understand the experiences of 28 Hispanic students at a predominantly White institution. The concepts of resiliency and familismo guided our investigation. While many of the participants confronted barriers during college, they were resilient, driven, and academically successful. Findings point to two family-focused phenomena that served as important support systems and enhanced their motivation and success: campus family and family of origin.

In 2007, the Census Bureau projected that Hispanics1 would become the largest minority in the United States by 2025. However, Hispanics are already the largest racial minority in the United States, exceeding 47 million (U.S. Bureau of the Census, 2010). Between 2000 and 2006, Hispanics accounted for more than one half of the growth rate of the U.S., which was more than three times the overall rate of 24.3% (U.S. Bureau of the Census, 2007). Moreover, the median age for the Hispanic population is 27.4 years, 9 years less than the median age for the entire population (U.S. Bureau of the Census, 2007). One We recognize that the choice of Hispanic and/or Latino/Latina is not inclusive of the diversity of the students in whom we are interested. However, we will use the term Hispanic throughout this study to mirror the term that is used in our institutional data, unless an individual participant used other terms. In those cases, we stayed true to their voices.

1


67

Monique Mendoza, Jeni Hart, Stephen Whitney

third of the Hispanic population is under the age of 18 (U.S. Bureau of the Census, 2007). Given this young and growing group, we would anticipate similar demographic changes in higher education; however, to date, the numbers of Hispanics in college are not consistent with their population growth (National Center for Education Statistics [NCES], 2009). In 2007, 26.6% of Hispanics 18 to 24 years of age were enrolled in colleges and universities, compared to 42.6% of Whites and 33.1% of Blacks (NCES, 2009). Hispanic college enrollment is projected to increase over the next several years. Reports project that between 2007 and 2018, Hispanic student enrollment in degree-granting institutions will increase by 38%, the highest projected increase across all racial/ethnic backgrounds (Hussar & Bailey, 2009). While there has been and an increase in Hispanic students enrolling in colleges and universities, their graduation rates remain lower than those of White and Black students (NCES, 2009). Additionally, according to recent statistics on degrees conferred in the 2006–07 academic year, Hispanic students earned 11.7% of all associate degrees, 7.5% of bachelor’s degrees, 5.8% of master’s degrees, 3.4% of doctorates, and 5.2% of first-professional degrees (NCES, 2009). These statistics suggest that enrollment and persistence are issues for Hispanic students. Thus, an investigation of the factors that contribute to Hispanic college students’ attitudes toward and experience of college is clearly needed to understand what influences their retention rates. Further, given that Hispanic culture traditionally has been defined as collectivistic and family-oriented (Sue & Sue, 2003), while higher education is essentially an individualistic endeavor, engagement in a predominantly White institution’s (PWIs) environment may present additional barriers and stressors for Hispanic college students. These barriers may subsequently influence persistence and degree completion. Specific barriers Hispanic college student may face include alienation, discrimination, isolation, and confusion regarding roles and responsibilities within the academic setting, particularly at PWIs (Hurtado, Milem, ClaytonPedersen, & Allen, 1999; Jones, Castellanos, & Cole, 2007; Ponterotto, Martinez, & Hayden, 1986; Quintana, Vogel, & Ybarra, 1991). Moreover, the low representation of Hispanic students, faculty, and staff at all levels of higher education leads to feelings of isolation, a lowered sense of belonging, and limited access to role models (Castellanos & Gloria, 2007; Castillo et al., 2006; 68


Taking the Family to College

Freeman, Anderman, & Jensen, 2007). These barriers often lead to academic attrition (Hurtado & Carter, 1997; Olenchak & Hebert, 2002). In addition, stressors related to acculturation and negative stereotypes can influence selfconcept, group identity, and perceptions of the majority culture (Neimann, 2001). Similar findings point to Hispanic students experiencing a cultural mismatch, as their values (e.g., collaboration, interdependence, group

identity) are inconsistent with the values of higher education institutions (e.g., competition, independence, individuation, and self-identity) (Castellanos & Gloria, 2007). This mismatch affects perceptions of the

university environment, belonging, and cultural congruity (Gloria, Castellanos, & Orozco, 2005; Gloria & Robinson Kurpius, 1996, 2001; Gloria, Robinson Kurpius, Hamilton, & Wilson, 1999). Given what research has shown about Hispanics in college (e.g., Castellanos & Gloria, 2007; Neimann, 2001; Olenchak & Hebert, 2002; Oritiz & Santos, 2009), we argue higher education institutions need to better anticipate their needs to create an environment where they can be successful. A number of factors facilitate Hispanic student success, including academic preparation and performance (Arbona & Nora, 2007; Nora & Cabrera, 1996), financial assistance (Cabrera, Stampen, & Hansen, 1990), social support (Solberg & Villarreal, 1997), and a sense of belonging (Hurtado & Ponjuan, 2005). In addition, outcomes such as successful college adjustment (Alvan et al., 1996; Crockett et al., 2007), retention (Hernandez, 2000), degree completion (Arbona & Nora, 2007), aspirations to persist (Castillo et al., 2006), and social and academic engagement (Tinto, 1993) have also been shown to enhance their success. Forging effective relationships with peers, faculty, and staff can also contribute to success. Such connections become important to helping students navigate through college and believe they can achieve their academic goals (Hurtado, Carter, & Spulera, 1996; Torres & Solberg, 2001; Zalaquett, 2006). Moreover, Tinto (1993) and Ortiz and Santos (2009) found that ethnic student organizations are instrumental in helping students engage in the campus community, while also providing a subcommunity of support. The literature about the factors that contribute to the collegiate success of Hispanic students provides a rich foundation to inform our current investigation. We hope our study will advance this knowledge base.


69


Purpose The purpose of this study was to examine Hispanic students’ experiences at one PWI in the U.S., Land Grant University (LGU). LGU is a public research university in the Midwest, with a predominantly White (non-Hispanic) student population (83.7%). There are 18 colleges and schools at LGU. There are significant opportunities for cocurricular involvement at LGU: More than 100 student organizations are active on campus, including more than 50 focused on diversity and multiculturalism. The total undergraduate enrollment at the time of the study was 23,000 students. The largest historically underrepresented group was Black (6.3%), followed by Asian (2.5%), Hispanic (1.9%), and Native American (0.6%). Consistent with national trends, the numbers of undergraduates who identified as Hispanic at LGU had increased in the previous 5 years; yet they were still underrepresented, comprising less than 2% of the undergraduate student population. No ethnicity data (e.g., Cuban, Puerto Rican) for Hispanics or any other racial group were available. We explored the contribution of the family to Hispanic students’ college experiences resilience, as demonstrated by their retention and academic success. The goal was to make meaning of these students’ collegiate experiences so that educators, leaders, and policymakers can structure their support services to be inclusive welcoming toward Hispanic students. The rationale for examining resilience harbors on the assumption that understanding how Hispanic students overcome the challenges of the predominantly White LGU will reveal processes and successful outcomes that can guide recommendations for university stakeholders. Further, the role of the family in educational experiences of Hispanic students can offer insights into developing a supportive, cohesive campus community (Wang & Gordon, 1994).

Conceptual Framework Resilience Resilience is the capacity for successful adaption after or during the experience of risk and other adversity, such as stress (Beauvais & Oetting, 1999; Wang & Gordon, 1994). Resilience theory primarily focuses on strengths rather than deficits and is fundamentally concerned with how individuals overcome challenges and risk exposure (Perez, Espinoza, Ramos, Coronado, & Cortes, 2009). Studies consistently report that in comparison to other racial groups, Hispanics are the least likely to earn 4-year degrees (Leon, 2003; Rendón 70



& Nora, 1988; Zurita, 2007). While we are very concerned about the leaky pipeline and the lack of persistence for Hispanics, researchers have begun to provide some explanation for this phenomenon (Canabal, 1995; Fry, 2002; Hurtado, 1994; Nora, 1990; O’Brien, 1993; Sedlacek, Longerbeam, & Alatorre, 2003). We did not approach this study using a deficit model (i.e., why students do not succeed); we approached this study looking at student persistence, success, and achievement. We were interested in better understanding what contributes to Hispanic student resilience in light of the barriers many experience in going to and staying in college. Padilla, Treviño, Gonzales, and Treviño (1998) refer to this sort of resilience as self-nurturing. In their research, they found that students who were successful in light of other barriers were able to develop the ability to take care of themselves. Thus, we consider the idea of resilience, or self-nurturing, in the current study. Academic resilience among Hispanic college students is related to both personal and environmental resources (Perez et al., 2009), including integration in school communities and parents who value school (Gandára, 1995; Perez et al., 2009). Other studies of successful Latino college students identified family, education, responsibility toward others, a sense of accomplishment, and support from community and school personnel as common factors that enhanced their college experience (Ortiz & Santos, 2009; Padilla et al., 1997; Zalaquett, 2006). Our study complements the research about resilient Hispanics who persist in a college environment with numerous challenges. Central to the students’ capacity to be resilient is the notion of familismo. Familismo Often, scholarship about Hispanics discusses the importance of family and strong emotional connections to relatives (Hernandez & Lopez, 2004; Hurtado, 1994; Vega, 1995). And, for many Hispanics, family is defined broadly, including nuclear family units, extended family, and combinations of relationships (Wilkinson, 1993). The term familismo includes the desire to maintain strong family ties, the expectation that the family is the primary source of instrumental and emotional support, the feeling of loyalty to the family, and the commitment to the family over individual needs and desires (Negy & Woods, 1992; Staples & Mirandé, 1980). Further, Hispanics tend to report higher levels of family cohesion than White European Americans (Sabogal, Marín, Otero-Sabogal, VanOss Marín, & Perez-Stable, 1987). Enrollment Management Journal Winter 2011

71


The value of family, or familismo, offers a support system or network that can foster success and resiliency (Zalaquett, 2006). This salience of family has been noted as an important part of the lives of Hispanic college students (Fry, 2002; Hernandez & Lopez, 2004; Hurtado, 1994). In 2002, the Pew Hispanic Center reported that Hispanic students tend to maintain strong ties to their families throughout college (Fry, 2002). In fact, research has shown that familismo has encouraged Hispanic youth to stay out of gangs (Soriano, 1994) and has lowered health risks (Delgado, 1995). Moreover, those making programmatic decisions on many college campuses often use the concept of familismo to enhance the success of Hispanic college students by developing opportunities for students with similar values and behaviors to interact (Ashburn, 2007; Castellanos & Gloria, 2007; Gardella, Candales, & Ricardo-Rivera, 2005). Hurtado (1994) and her colleagues (Hurtado, Hayes-Baurtista, Valdez, & Hernandez, 1992) found family played an important role in the lives of Hispanics across generations. This means that while our campuses begin to see more Hispanic students who are the children and grandchildren of immigrants, familismo continues to play a significant role in their lives. Identifying a familylike system in higher education may foster relationships in which informational, emotional, social, and academic supports address the demoralizing process of juggling values within the university context (Castellanos & Gloria, 2007; Gloria, 1997). Thus, peers, faculty, and university staff can provide information to navigate the university environment, facilitate adjustment, and offer cultural affirmation. For the current study, we build on the concept of familismo to better understand the role family plays in the lives of Hispanic undergraduates at LGU.

Methods The following research question guided our study: What role does familismo play in the experiences of academically resilient Hispanic students at LGU? To answer this question, we conducted a single instrumental case study (Creswell, 2007). This design is best suited for our study since we are interested in particular issues (i.e., resilience and family in the experiences of Hispanic college students) in one particular setting (i.e., LGU). Thus, the case plays a supporting role to set the context in which we can understand these issues (Stake, 1995). Our purpose is descriptive and explanatory. And while no qualitative study is intended to be generalizable, the characteristics of an instrumental case study 72



design move away from the particularistic to the more universal. This is to say that we know our findings are unique to the students who participated at LGU; however, we hope that other PWIs will view our analysis as transferable to their settings (Johnson & Christensen, 2008). We used two forms of data collection for this investigation—focus groups and individual interviews with Hispanic undergraduate students at LGU. To identify potential participants, we worked with the university’s registrar to gather a list of students who had completed at least one semester of undergraduate coursework and who self-identified (on admission forms) as Hispanic. At the time of data collection, there were approximately 380 students at the university who identified as such. We invited all self-identified Hispanic students via email and also informed relevant campus organizations (e.g., Supporting Hispanics in Leadership [SHL]) and gatekeepers (e.g., Director of the Multicultural Center) to enhance participation. Twenty-eight students responded to our invitation and all participated in the data collection process. Participants completed a short survey prior to the interviews to provide us with additional demographic data (see Table 1). Due to the relatively small number of Hispanic students, we planned for the majority of students to participate in focus groups rather than individual interviews in order to help students develop networks as an outgrowth of our project. We conducted focus groups on campuses at a neutral, centrally located meeting space, and students chose a focus group based upon the time that was most convenient to them. We followed Krueger and Casey’s (2000) recommendation to conduct at least three groups to ensure robust data. However, in some cases participants were unable to attend a focus group due to scheduling conflicts. In those cases, we conducted individual interviews. For this study, we conducted four focus groups, one of which was conducted at an SHL meeting and two others that resulted from advertising with the SHL. Each group ranged from four to six participants (n = 20), and we conducted eight individual interviews with self-identified Hispanic students at a large, public, predominantly White Midwest research university. Of our participants, 16 were female and 12 were male. Seven (25%) were firstgeneration college students, and students had attended LGU for an average of 2.25 years. In addition, we asked the students to identify specific Hispanic organizations on campus (we listed nine that were institutionally recognized) Enrollment Management Journal Winter 2011

73


in which they were involved. On average, they indicated involvement in two campus organizations. While we did not collect age data, the average age of degree seeking undergraduates at LGU is 20, and only 4% of undergraduates are age 25 and older (LGU, 2010). Thus, it is highly likely that our participants were of traditional undergraduate college age. We also did not ask participants to identify their majors. However, several specifically discussed their academic programs in the interviews and focus groups. These included business, journalism, education, and liberal arts. Table 1 | Demographics of Study Participants N

Valid %

Gender

Female Male

16 12

57.1 42.9

First-generation college student

Yes No

7 21

25.0 75.0

Years as full time student at LGU

1 2 3 4

6 11 6 2

21.4 39.3 32.1 7.1

Ethnic background

European American Puerto Rican Mexican Cuban Central or South American Other Hispanic Hispanic/Latino

4 2 7 2 5 2 6

14.3 7.1 25.0 7.1 17.9 7.1 21.4

Three researchers participated in this study. Two were White (non-Hispanic), and one was Hispanic. The positionality of the researchers is worth noting, as our backgrounds shape who we are, how we understand higher education, and ultimately our interpretation of the data. We bring expertise from three fields of study: higher education, counseling psychology, and educational psychology. One of the researchers focuses her scholarship on campus climate assessment, another is an expert in resilience in education, and the third is establishing her research agenda on the experiences of Hispanic students in colleges and universities. We felt these various and intersecting interests would add to our ability to explore the nuances of the experiences of the Hispanic students who participated in our study. Further, coming from multiple perspectives allowed us to approach the study in unique ways and to facilitate rich, multifaceted analysis. 74



To address our specific research question, data were gathered using a semistructured protocol to provide our participants with an opportunity to share their voices and provide sufficient detail about social relationships and settings (Geertz, 1973; Lincoln & Guba, 1985). The protocol prompted participants to reflect on their academic and social experiences and the role of family in their lives at college. Each focus group and interview was digitally recorded and transcribed verbatim. To enhance the trustworthiness of the data, all researchers were present at each focus group to triangulate emergent patterns and themes prior to more detailed analysis (Lincoln & Guba, 1985). In addition, having multiple researchers present at each focus group helped establish consensual validity with regard to the description and interpretation of data (Creswell, 2007). Prior to data collection and analysis, we individually identified our assumptions about the focus of our study. Based upon our backgrounds, we assumed that students who participated in our research would have experienced some degree of isolation and discrimination, were able to overcome obstacles in their academic and social lives, and considered family to be a significant source of support throughout their college lives and beyond. While no research is without bias, we bracketed these assumptions to mitigate some bias in our analysis (Creswell, 2007). Specifically, we set aside our experiences and assumptions as much as possible as we analyzed the data. In addition, we used NVivo, a qualitative data management tool, to help us organize our analysis. We utilized a qualitative analytic approach that included open, axial, and selective coding to discover emergent patterns and themes in the focus group transcripts, individual interview transcripts, and the researchers’ field notes (Strauss & Corbin, 1990). First, we individually coded all the transcripts, reading them line by line. We used our conceptual frameworks to guide our coding, but remained open to other patterns that might emerge. As we identified patterns, we highlighted and labeled them. Next, we met as a group to discuss the emergent themes and then returned to the data to further reduce and relate them to the agreed upon central categories. We met again to discuss convergence and divergence of analysis. If we disagreed on particular codes, we tried to understand why; was it due to our individual assumptions and biases? After discussing why we made our individual analytic decisions, we worked to come to consensus regarding the emergent themes. Finally, we returned to our


75


individual analyses to confirm and further develop the emergent themes, and then met again to reflect on the outcomes of our selective coding. In addition, we compared themes and triangulated our findings to further strengthen their credibility. Agreement between us for all coded passages ranged between 85– 100%; the agreement was less than 90% in only 14 of 1,404 coded passages. As we present our findings, we have chosen not to provide any demographic attributions to protect the participants’ confidentiality. In addition, when considering the emergent themes, we found no variation among them according to demographic and other personal identifying characteristics (e.g., gender, age, class year), which further supported our decision not to attribute participants to any particular group.

Findings The participants in our study described barriers and challenges throughout their college experience, which is important to note in order to contextualize resiliency. Sometimes these challenges were subtle; other times, more overt and pervasive. Even the more subtle microaggressions, when considered in the aggregate, created a campus climate that was not always welcoming. However, they also consistently described factors that facilitated their success, including their own internal initiative and drive. In the end, their stories showed perseverance and resilience as students at LGU and highlighted the role family played in that resilience. Specifically, two themes related to family emerged from the data: creation of a campus family and family of origin support. The first theme, creating a campus family, was significant for nearly all of our participants. Some used the language of brothers and sisters—more often than not, referring to other Hispanic students—who created a network of support for them when they were unable to reach out to their family of origin. The second theme that emerged was the emotional tie to their family of origin. For some, coming to LGU was a purposeful decision to be geographically close to that family so the support would literally be “right around the corner.” Others, who did not have family nearby, often expressed difficulty in being physically far away from them, reinforcing the values of familismo.

76



Creation of a Campus Family Several participants discussed organizations and other activities that supported their efforts to remain at LGU and to be academically successful. While students were involved in a variety of activities (including those without a racial or ethnic focus), the organization noted most often was SHL. SHL started as a grassroots organization to support Hispanic students on campus. Other Hispanic student organizations developed over time, some related specifically to student majors (e.g., engineering and journalism), some to specific to a particular ethnicity (e.g., a Cuban student group), while others were more socially oriented (e.g., a multicultural sorority). For nearly all students, these organizations, serving as second or extended families, were instrumental in establishing a sense of belonging, identity, and foundation for academic success. Students shared how they were able to find and participate in opportunities for a cultural connection with LGU. For example, one remarked: I just think opportunities like this, focus groups and creating dialogues and having discussions, that is the first step. . . . I think that is the best . . . to create dialogue and keep having discussions and keep having these kinds of groups that focus just on us because we don’t have that. I think it is our turn to go into a room where there are people like us and talk about issues we all face. Other students shared how important SHL was in supporting their need for culturally relevant connections with the higher education setting: “I consider SHL my family, and I consider Alpha Beta [the multicultural sorority] my sisters.” Similarly, another student described how welcoming SHL was and what a difference it made to help her feel like she belonged: [SHL] took me in like a little sister, they helped me get used to the weather by taking me shopping for winter coats, and they showed me where everything was. So I definitely think that was the biggest club that has helped me. These students sought out opportunities to engage in groups to support their cultural identity at the predominately White LGU. They established a sense of belonging to feel more connected, comfortable, and ultimately socially and academically resilient.


77


Students also discussed how they saw themselves differently than other students on campus. Because they are underrepresented on campus, they have intentionally sought out ways to associate with other Hispanic students to be more connected to their own identities, an experience reminiscent of living with their families of origin. One woman stated: I think, yes, being a Latina student has made my experience different from others just because we aren’t very represented here. But it has also made me very passionate for learning more about and creating my identity and becoming comfortable with that, because I was never forced to really be familiarized with my identity prior to college. Now that I am, I’m more passionate about finding organizations that will support people like me and doing something about it and taking the proactive approach. Another student connected the purpose of SHL to creating a home for other Hispanics on campus when he stated, “I mean my job [leadership position] with SHL is to expose ourselves. ‘Hey we are here. We are here to help you. We are here to bring you a home.”’ Like others involved in SHL, he described his work with the organization as a commitment to his campus family, sometimes superseding other personal goals. However, he also stated that he would not compromise his academic success or his social relationships outside of SHL, as they were necessary to allow him to be a part of SHL. Consistently, we heard how powerful Hispanic student organizations are in the lives of the participants in our study. One student summed up succinctly what we heard as it related to feeling connected to the university: “It’s not just family, it’s community.” However, another student, who primarily identified as biracial, described a different experience than those shared above. This perspective reinforces the reality that there is no monolithic student experience, despite the very salient theme that creating community with other Hispanic students was crucial to the academic, personal, and social success of these students. Interestingly, despite the lack of connection with other Hispanic students and organizations, this student described the relationship between family and SHL saying: [Students in SHL] are involved in everything. And they are really close to their families too. They are really driven. We share that but . . . It’s weird for me, I don’t tend to be Hispanic, I identify with being Caucasian. I don’t feel like there is a certain group that I have to be like, “Oh well we work the same way.” 78



Family of Origin Support The role of the family of origin for the Hispanic students in our study was a source of strength. It was clear from the participant responses how important their family was in their ability to continue to engage in the university. For example, referring to his family at home, one student said, “At times college can be a very strenuous environment, and it would be nice to be able to be around those who love me and accept me for who I am.” Another student described how his parents reinforced the value of college and pushed him to continue his education. He stated, “They have always been supportive of me to go to college. It has been an expectation. So they have always been supportive of me going. They never were going to let me stop.” Similarly, this student talked about parental support in maintaining good grades in high school, finding financial resources, and continuing in college: And so they helped me find scholarships; they were with me through that whole process. So that was a big role, wanting me so bad to get into the college that I wanted. And supporting me and helping me earn those scholarships and everything. Just pushing me through high school, also to get those good grades, because you had to be in the top 20% of your class and get a 27 on your ACT to even apply. They pushed me through high school too. . . . And now that I am here [they are] being supportive. We also heard from students who recognized that the odds were against them going to college. Despite those odds, family helped them believe college was a possibility. Often, parents were the largest driving force for enrolling and persisting in college. One student relayed his experience: My whole life my parents have played great roles scholastically. We come from an immigrant family so community standards for me are not to be here [in college]. I should be working somewhere right now or in jail. But my parents have always, especially my mom and dad, told us “We would like you to go to school.” This same student described how the support to go to college extended beyond his parents. He shared that both his sister, who “spent her whole life trying to get her education” and now has a master’s degree, and his brother have been role


79


models and support systems for him throughout his education. We also talked with a student who has been a mentor for his younger brother, who was also attending LGU. He said: Hispanic families are traditionally very, very close-knit. . . . I call my parents multiple times a day, and my grandparents multiple, it’s more. It’s not just the nuclear family where it’s your mom, your dad, your brother, and your sister. It’s also the extended family. I’m very close to all my aunts and uncles. Another described how she counted on time to talk with her family in order to get the support she needs to persevere in college: But it’s just kind of known that on Sundays, my family and I, we have a phone call and we talk on Sundays. That’s like our family day to talk. Having that and making that part of my routine has been helpful because I can always look forward to that time to share what is going on in my life with my family and get their support and get their encouragement and just knowing that is a bit of a comfort. They’ve played a big role in keeping my head on straight while I’m college. Some applied to LGU because they could continue to live at home, or because it was a short drive from their family of origin so they could easily go home on weekends. One woman relayed, “Well, my family is only 30 minutes away and my parents work here in [the town where LGU is located], so if I wanted to I could just call them up and eat lunch or dinner with them or whatever I want.” The two brothers referenced earlier actually moved their parents to the town where LGU is located, to keep their family close. The older brother stated: We both decided after his freshman year, that we needed to bring our parents here for their own benefit, their own sake. My parents, my dad is 72, my mom is 62. So they are old aged. And so we decided for them to enjoy our college careers and to be with us. . . . It’s made a great contribution to our lives because we are super involved and we live off campus, and they are the ones that cook for us. While family mattered for most of our study participants, there was a small number who indicated they went to a university some distance away from their family to develop a more independent sense of self. This is not to suggest that family was unimportant, but rather that they placed a different priority 80



including their family of origin in their collegiate experiences. Moreover, these statements act as a reminder about the individual differences present in all racial and ethnic groups. Supporting this idea, one participant said: My parents wanted me to go to community college at first because they didn’t want me to move away. So when I moved down here, it was a big deal. They were crushed. I guess it was our way as a family to adapt to American life; you know how the kids go off to college and you move on. But it’s still hard. I talk to my mom like every night. [Others agree in the background]. Similarly, a woman from Puerto Rico talked about how difficult it was to be far away from her family and how much she valued talking to her family a couple of times each week. She also stated that it was her family that gave her the strength to go away to college. She reported: I guess because of the relationship I have with my family. We are so close, they’ve played a really big role, and if it wasn’t for the strength and the tools they gave me I don’t think I would be able to be out here and being as independent as I am. They’ve played a really big role. Whether students’ families lived close to LGU or far away, their family of origin had an important influence on their collegiate lives. They talked often with their families about college life, whether in person or on the phone. Further, both physical and psychic support contributed to these students’ resilience and success. Several students even reflected that without their families, they may not have stayed at or even gone to college.

Discussion Like many Hispanic college students in the U.S., the participants in our study described barriers that made campus life at LGU challenging (Hurtado et al., 1999; Jones et al., 2007; Ponterotto et al., 1986; Quintana et al., 1991). Despite barriers, they also shared stories of experiences that facilitated their success and contributed to their resilience, including their internal drive and initiative, which both their campus family and family of origin shaped. Our findings point to familismo as an important role in the participants’ resiliency. Our study complements and contributes to the extant literature about Hispanic college students in several significant ways. The themes that emerged from our Enrollment Management Journal Winter 2011

81


study are consistent with the extant research that finds community supports and friendships are an important part of the college experience and imperative for Hispanic student retention (e.g., Castellanos & Gloria, 2007; Gandára, 2010; Ortiz & Santos, 2009; Padilla et al., 1997; Zalaquett, 2006). Further, our findings connect student group belonging to the concept of a campus family— extending familismo beyond the family of origin. Research shows time and again that students’ peer groups are the most important influence on student development (Astin, 1993; Chickering, 1969; Eimers & Pike, 1997; Pascarella & Terenzini, 1991, 2005; Padilla et al., 1997). Our findings reaffirm the importance of a supportive peer group. However, there is a subtle difference between peer support and familismo. For those in our study, the campus family held a revered place in their lives, often holding more value than students’ individual goals and pursuits (Castellanos & Gloria, 2007; Negy & Woods, 1992). Being a member of a club or organization, while important, was not sufficient in the lives of those in this study. Instead, the club or organization had to become a place that felt like home, where members supported one another unconditionally. Our research also challenges earlier studies about ethnic student enclaves (Person & Rosenbaum, 2004; Sidanius, Levin, Van Laar, & Sinclair, 2004). For students in our study, their campus family did not create balkanization. Instead, family came together to identify campus resources and opportunities throughout campus and to encourage engagement in and outside the family, enhancing academic and social resilience. The campus family was a supportive community to which students could temporarily retreat within the predominantly White campus. This study also extends the findings from studies that found environmental and social opportunities were critical for Hispanic students in developing relationships with supportive peers in order to be academically resilient (Padilla et al., 1997; Perez et al., 2009). Additionally, the creation of the campus family addresses students’ need for attachment to the school and the development of a sense of belonging through cocurricular activities (Gandára, 2010; Padilla et al., 1997). Again, our study complements existing research, but it also expands it. Specifically, the participants in our study were quite literal in the language they used to describe their campus family; campus family was not a metaphor, but a real lived experience. The campus family was not a substitute family, but an extension of their families of origin. 82



We found that for the students in our study, the institution and its resources (e.g., academic advisors, faculty, campus-wide events) were only minimally regarded as supports for student resilience, outside of student-initiated and -led organizations such as SHL. Instead, the campus family and family of origin were critical in helping these Hispanic students stay internally motivated, driven, and ultimately resilient. In fact, our findings underline the power of family beyond what has been identified in previous research (e.g., Fry, 2002; Hernandez & Lopez, 2004; Hurtado, 1994; Padilla et al., 1997). For those participating in this study, the role of family is primary. If we fail to recognize this, we are discounting their experiences and are unaware of their needs. As educators committed to supporting all students in their academic and social success, these findings have significant implications.

Implications We argue that universities and colleges should consider what supports are currently in place for Hispanic students and evaluate whether these foster a sense of community and family. As educators, we cannot create families for our students, but we can promote an environment that values and supports campus families and families of origin. We should ask whether our policies and practices allow for the notion of family. We should also consider whether we can reach out to families of origin to make them feel a part of the campus family. Students can be the conduit for enhancing the relationships between the campus families and families of origin; however, we should not We argue that universities and colleges sit back and wait for that to happen. should consider what supports are We must take an active role in letting currently in place for Hispanic students and evaluate whether these foster a students know our commitment to sense of community and family. their values and success.

{

{

Inviting entire members of students’ families to tour the campus, speak with professors and advisors, and become involved in their students’ higher education experience is another way universities can foster familismo. To make this visit as beneficial as possible, universities should provide staff who speak Spanish and ensure that university websites, brochures, and other outreach materials are available in both Spanish and English. Staff can work with families of current university students to gather in their own communities to talk about what the university is like and how families of origin adjust to having a student in college. Enrollment Management Journal Winter 2011

83


Establishing these connections can go a long way toward demonstrating that the institution values the role family plays in the lives of Hispanic students. We encourage institutional leaders to support student groups like SHL and other organizations in which students find their campus families. This means leaders should know about and advocate for these groups and ensure emerging groups know how to access university resources. Also, we believe educators should support students who are navigating through their new campus families, as well as through racial and ethnic identity development. Finally, given the unique role of family in the lives of the Hispanic students in our study, we must be conscious of the transition these students may experience when they return to their families of origin. These students are resilient and independent, and this may challenge familial expectations, changing their relationship within the family.

Limitations As with all studies, the current study has limitations. While the sample was purposely chosen to include a broad range of Hispanic students by inviting all Hispanic students enrolled in LGU, not all Hispanic backgrounds are similar. For example, individuals of Puerto Rican, Cuban, and Mexican descent have distinct cultural backgrounds. Future research should examine the potential differences between Hispanic cultures and how these differences may lead to more specific supports within higher education. We also did not collect data from our participants about if or when their families immigrated to the United States, or if they were raised in a predominately Hispanic area or neighborhood. As families of immigrants spend more time within a dominant culture, they become acculturated, and in some cases, assimilated (Greenman & Xie, 2008). This assimilation influences identity development and collegiate experience. Although we reached out electronically to invite all selfidentified Hispanic undergraduates at LGU to participate in our study, three of our focus groups were organized through additional advertisement at an SHL meeting. As a result, this recruitment effort may have influenced the overwhelming regard expressed about SHL. Finally, some of the Hispanic students interviewed for the study requested individual interviews because they were unavailable to meet during the times of the focus groups, or in one case, did not want to share her story with a larger group. These individual interviews did not have the same opportunities to play off other participants’ perspectives. However, groupthink did not influence these participants, which can occur in focus groups. Despite this, our data analysis resulted in similar salient themes in both the individual interviews and focus groups. 84



Conclusion Our findings showed the importance of family in the lives of the Hispanic students with whom we spoke. In many cases, our participants wanted the opportunity to “take their family to college.” They found ways to connect to their families of origin; however, we challenge educators to consider intentional ways to facilitate other connections between students and their families so that familial support can be more easily accessed. In addition, our findings highlight how the Hispanic students in our study created new family ties with campus families. These campus families warrant recognition and support by the university, as they are crucial to student resilience and success. Ultimately, finding the balance between family and campus life is critical—but the role of family remains salient for most of our participants. In the same way that Hurtado’s (1994) study found that familismo stood the test of generations, our study showed that for our participants, familismo stood the test of geography. Even with families of origin living some distance from campus, our students found ways to stay connected and became members of a campus family at LGU. By integrating our findings with existing research, we can work with other scholars, educators, and policymakers to develop multifaceted approaches to enhance Hispanic students’ experiences in higher education. Along with increased Hispanic student recruitment, hiring and retention of Hispanic faculty, and policies and practices to address discrimination and improve campus climate (Ortiz & Santos, 2009), institutions needs to be mindful of the role of family in the lives of many of our Hispanic students. In addition, we need to think creatively about strategies to include family in Hispanic students’ college experiences to enhance resilience—and perhaps one day create a system where resilience is unnecessary due to the elimination of barriers for all students. About the Authors: Monique Mendoza is a Post Doctoral Fellow in Counseling and Psychological Services at the University of California, San Diego. Jeni Hart is an associate professor of Higher Education in the Department of Educational Leadership and Policy Analysis at the University of Missouri. Stephen Whitney is an associate professor of Educational Psychology in the Department of Educational, School and Counseling Psychology at the University of Missouri. Address correspondence to: Monique Mendoza Counseling & Psychological Services (CAPS) University of California, San Diego 9500 Gilman Drive, 0304 La Jolla, CA 92093-0304, [email protected] Enrollment Management Journal Winter 2011

85


References Arbona, C., & Nora, A. (2007). The influence of academic and environmental factors on Hispanic college degree attainment. The Review of Higher Education, 30, 247–269. doi:10.1353/rhe.2007.0001 Ashburn, E. (2007, April 20). It’s a family affair. The Chronicle of Higher Education, 53(33), p. A40. Astin, A. W. (1993). What matters in college? Four critical years revisited. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Beauvais, F., & Oetting, E. R. (1999). Drug use, resilience, and the myth of the golden child. In M. D. Glantz & J. L. Johnson (Eds.), Resilience and development: Positive life adaptations (pp. 101–126). New York, NY: Kluwer Academic/Plenum. Cabrera, A. F., Stampen, J. O., & Hansen, W. L. (1990). Exploring the effects of ability to pay on persistence in college. Review of Higher Education, 13(3), 303–336. Canabal, M. E. (1995). Hispanic and non-Hispanic White students attending institutions of higher education in Illinois: Implications for retention. College Student Journal, 29, 157–167. Castellanos, J., & Gloria, A. M. (2007). Research considerations and theoretical application for best practices in higher education. Journal of Hispanics in Higher Education, 6, 378–396. Castillo, L. G., Conoley, C. W., Choi-Pearson, C., Archuleta, D. J., Phoummarath, M. J., & Van Landingham, A. (2006). University environment as a mediator of Latino ethnic identity and persistence attitudes. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 53, 167–171. doi:10.1037/0022-0167.53.2.267 Chickering, A. (1969). Education and identity. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Creswell, J. W. (2007). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches (2nd ed). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Delgado, L. (1995, March–April). Meeting the health promotion needs of Hispanic communities. American Journal of Health Promotion, 9(4), 300–311. Eimers, M., & Pike, G. (1997). Minority and nonminority adjustment to college: Differences or similarities? Research in Higher Education, 38, 77–97. doi:10.1023/A:1024900812863 Freeman, T. M., Anderman, L. H., & Jensen, J. M. (2007). Sense of belonging in college and freshmen at the classroom and campus levels. Journal of Experimental Education, 75, 203–220. doi:10.3200/JEXE.75.3.203–220 Fry, R. (2002, September 5). Hispanics in higher education: Many enroll, too few graduate (Pew Hispanic Center Report). Washington, DC: Pew Charitable Trusts and USC Annenberg School for Communication. Gandára, P. (1995). Over the ivy walls. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press. 86



Gandára, P. (2010). The Latino education crisis. Educational Leadership, 67, 24–30. Gardella, L. G., Candales, B. A., & Ricardo-Rivera, J. (2005). “Doors are not locked, just closed”: Hispanic perspectives on college. New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education, 108, 39-51. doi:10.1002/ace.196 Geertz, C. (1973). The interpretation of cultures: Selected essays. New York, NY: Basic Books. Gloria, A. M. (1997). Chicana academic persistence: Creating a university-based community. Education and Urban Society, 30, 107–121. doi:10.1177/0013124597030001007 Gloria, A. M., Castellanos, J., & Orozco, V. (2005). Perceived educational barriers, cultural fit, coping responses, and psychological well-being of Latino undergraduates. Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences, 27, 161–183. doi:10.1177/0739986305275097 Gloria, A. M., & Robinson Kurpius, S. E. (1996). The validation of the Cultural Congruity Scale and the University Environment Scale with Chicano/a students. Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences, 18, 533–549. doi:10.1177/07399863960184007 Gloria, A. M., & Robinson Kurpius, S. E. (2001). Influences of self-beliefs, social support, and comfort in the university environment on the academic nonpersistence decisions of American Indian undergraduates. Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology, 7, 88–102. doi:10.1037/1099-9809.7.1.88 Gloria, A. M., Robinson Kurpius, S. E., Hamilton, K. D., & Wilson, M. S. (1999). African American students’ persistence at a predominantly White university: Influence of social support, university comfort and self-beliefs. Journal of College Student Development, 40, 257–268. Greenman, E., & Xie, Y. (2008). Is assimilation theory dead? The effect of assimilation on adolescent well-being. Social Science Research, 37(1), 109–137. doi:10.1016/j. ssresearch.2007.07.003 Hernandez, J. C., & Lopez, M. A. (2004). Leaking pipeline: Issues impacting Latino/a college student retention. Journal of College Student Retention, 6(1), 37–60. doi:10.2190/FBLY0UAF-EE7W-QJD2 Hurtado, S. (1994). The institutional climate for talented Hispanic students. Research in Higher Education, 35, 210–241. doi:10.1007/BF02496660 Hurtado, S., & Carter, D. F. (1997). Effects of college transition and perceptions of the campus racial climate on Latino college student’s sense of belonging. Sociology of Education, 70, 324–435. Hurtado, S., Carter, D. F., & Spuler, A. (1996). Latino student transition to college: Assessing difficulties and factors in successful college adjustment. Research in Higher Education, 37, 135–157. doi:10.1007/BF01730113 Hurtado, A., Hayes-Bautista, D. E., Valdez, R. B., & Hernandez, A. C. R. (1992). Redefining California: Latino social engagement in a multicultural society. Los Angeles, CA: UCLA Chicano Studies Research Center. Enrollment Management Journal Winter 2011

87


Hurtado, S., Milem, J., Clayton-Pedersen, A., & Allen, W. (1999). Enacting diverse learning environments: Improving the climate for racial/ethnic diversity in higher education. (ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Report, Vol. 26, No. 8). Washington, DC: The George Washington University, Graduate School of Education and Human Development. Hurtado, S., & Ponjuan, L. (2005). Latino educational outcomes and the campus climate. Journal of Hispanic Higher Education, 4(3), 235–251. doi:10.1177/1538192705276548 Hussar, W. J., & Bailey, T. M. (2009). Projections of education statistics to 2018 (NCES 2009062). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education. Johnson, B., & Christensen, L. (2008). Educational research: Quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methods approaches (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Jones, L., Castellanos, J., & Cole, D. (2002). Examining the ethnic minority experience at predominantly White institutions: A case study. Journal of Hispanic Higher Education, 1, 19–39. doi: 10.1177/1538192702001001003 Krueger, R. A., & Casey, M. A. (2000). Focus groups: A practical guide for applied research (3rd ed). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Leon, D. J. (2003). Introduction. In D. J. Leon (Ed.), Hispanics in higher education. Diversity in higher education, (Vol. 3, pp. 1–6). Oxford, England: Elsevier Science. Land Grant University college portrait. (2010). Retrieved from http://www.collegeportraits.org/ LG/LGU/characteristics Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage. National Center for Education Statistics. (2007). Digest of education statistics, 2006. Washington, DC: Author. National Center for Education Statistics. (2009). Digest of education statistics, 2008. Washington, DC: Author. Negy, C., & Woods, D. (1992). The importance of acculturation in understanding research with Hispanic-Americans. Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences, 14, 224–247. doi:10.1177/07399863920142003 Neimann, Y. F. (2001). Stereotypes about Chicanas and Chicanos: Implications for counseling. The Counseling Psychologist, 29, 55–90. doi:10.1177/0011000001291003 Nora, A. (1990). Campus-based aid programs as determinants of retention among Hispanic community college students. Journal of Higher Education, 61, 312–331. doi:10.2307/1982133 Nora, A., & Cabrera, A. F. (1996). The role of perceptions of prejudice and discrimination on the adjustment of minority students to college. Journal of Higher Education, 67(2), 120–148. doi:10.2307/2943977 88



O’Brien, E. (1993). Hispanics in higher education. Research briefs. Washington, DC: American Council on Education. Olenchak, R., & Hebert, T. (2002). Endangered academic talent: Lessons learned from gifted first generation college males. Journal of College Student Development, 43, 195–212. Ortiz, A. M., & Santos, S. J. (2009). Ethnicity in college: Advancing theory and improving diversity practices on campus. Sterling, VA: Stylus. Padilla, R. V., Treviño, J., Gonzales, K., & Treviño, J. (1997). Developing local models of minority student success in college. Journal of College Student Development, 38(2), 125–135. Pascarella, E. T., & Terenzini, P. T. (1991). How college affects students: Findings and insights from twenty years of research. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Pascarella, E. T., & Terenzini, P. T. (2005). How college affects students: A third decade of research (Vol. 2). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Perez, W., Espinoza, R., Ramos, K., Coronado, H., & Cortes, R. (2009). Academic resilience among undocumented Latino students. Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences, 39, 149–181. doi:10.1177/0739986309333020 Person, A. E., & Rosenbaum, J. E. (2004). “Chain enrollment” and college “enclaves”: Benefits and drawbacks for Latino college students (Working Paper No. 04-01). Retrieved from Northwestern University, Institute for Policy Research website: http://www.northwestern. edu/ipr/publications/papers/2004/WP-04-01.pdf Ponterotto, J. G., Martinez, F. M., & Hayden, D. C. (1986). Student affirmative action programs: A help or hindrance to development of minority graduate students? Journal of College Student Personnel, 27, 318–325. Quintana, S. M., Vogel, M. C., & Ybarra, V. C. (1991). Meta-analysis of Latino students’ adjustment in higher education. Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences, 13(2), 155–168. doi:10.1177/07399863910132003 Rendón, L. I., & Nora, A. (1988). Hispanic students: Stopping the leaks in the pipeline. Educational Record, 68(4), 79–85. Sabogal, F., Marín, G., Otero-Sabogal, R., VanOss Marín, B., & Perez-Stable, E. (1987). Hispanic familismo and acculturation: What changes and what doesn’t? Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences, 9, 397–412. doi:10.1177/07399863870094003 Sedlacek, W. E., Longerbeam, S. L., & Alatorre, H. A. (2003). In their own voices: What do the data on Hispanic students mean to them? (Research Report #5-02). University of Maryland: Counseling Center. Sidanius, J., Levin, S., Van Laar, C., & Sinclair, S. (2004). Ethnic enclaves and the dynamics of social identity on college campus: The good, the bad, and the ugly. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 87(1), 96–110. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.87.1.96 Enrollment Management Journal Winter 2011

89


Solberg, V. S., & Villarreal, P. (1997). Examination of self-efficacy, social support, and stress as predictors of psychological and physical distress among Hispanic college students. Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences, 19, 182–201. doi:10.1177/07399863970192006 Soriano, F. (1994). U.S. Latinos. In L. Eron, J. Gentry, & P. Schlegel (Eds.), Reason to hope: A psycho-social perspective on violence and youth (pp. 119–132). Washington DC: American Psychological Association. Stake, R. E. (1995). The art of case study research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Staples, R., & Mirandé, A. (1980). Racial and cultural variations among American families: A decennial review of the literature on minority families. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 42, 887–903. doi:10.2307/351831 Strauss, A. L., & Corbin, J. (1990). Basics of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory (2nd ed.). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage. Sue, D. W., & Sue, D. (Eds.). (2003). Counseling the culturally diverse. Theory and practice (4th ed.). New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons. Tinto, V. (1993). Leaving college: Rethinking the causes and cures of student retention (1st ed.). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. U.S. Bureau of the Census. (2007, January 12). County population estimates by demographic characteristics—age, sex, race, and Hispanic origin. Retrieved from http://www.census.gov/ popest/counties/asrh/ U.S. Bureau of the Census. (2010, July 11). Population estimates by demographic characteristics— Hispanic or Latino By Race, 2008. Retrieved from http://factfinder.census.gov/servlet/DTTable Vega, W. A. (1995). The study of Hispanic families: A point of departure. In R. E. Zambrana (Ed.), Understanding Hispanic families: Scholarship, policy, and practice (pp. 3–17). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Wang, M. C., & Gordon, E. W. (1994). Educational resilience in inner-city America: Challenges and prospects. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Wilkinson, D. (1993). Family ethnicity in America. In H. P. McAdoo (Ed.), Family ethnicity: Strength in diversity (pp. 15–59). Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Zalaquett, C. P. (2006). Study of successful Hispanic/Latino students. Journal of Hispanic Higher Education, 5(1), 35–47. doi:10.1177/1538192705282568 Zurita, M. (2007). Stopping out and persisting: Experiences of Hispanic undergraduates. In A. Seidman (Ed.), Minority student retention: The best of the Journal of College Student Retention: Research, Theory, and Practice (pp. 123–146). Amityville, NY: Baywood.

90


International Graduate Students: How Do They Choose Academic Majors? Jia Ren Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey

Linda Serra Hagedorn Iowa State University

Michael T. McGill Iowa State University

Abstract International graduate students are a sizeable segment of the student body in the U.S. higher educational system, but remain an understudied population in the educational literature. As a result, this student population is not adequately understood by higher education administrators and faculty. The current study explored 16 factors associated with international graduate students’ choice of academic majors for their American degrees and how factors affected this population’s academic choice among four academic categories. Based on the findings, this study suggests recruitment and admission policies and support services and programs to attract and retain international graduate students, in order to understand and direct this population of students during their study in the United States, and to increase international graduate students’ contributions in economy, innovation, and diversity.

Since the 1950s, the United States has been a major host country to international students from around the globe. According to an Open Doors report (2010), 293,885 international students enrolled in graduate programs (approximately 43% of the total international students) in the U.S in 2009–10. Moreover, international graduate students represented approximately 12% of graduate enrollment in American higher education institutions (Snyder, Dillow, & Hoffman, 2008). The total number of international graduate students in the 2009–10 academic year was 3.7% higher than the previous year. This represents a 23% growth from the previous decade (Open Doors, 2010). American higher education institutions have increasingly relied on international graduate students to enhance enrollment in doctoral programs in certain disciplines (Davis, 1999). Enrollment Management Journal Winter 2011

91

Jia Ren, Linda Serra Hagedorn, Michael T. McGill

Enrollment of international students has enriched American higher education economically while adding a necessary dose of cultural diversity. In the current financial climate, higher education institutions face tight and declining budgets. Public institutions are facing a profound shift forcing them to depend more on tuition than on state appropriations (Desrochers, Lenihan, & Welman, 2010). In most cases, international students enrolled in public institutions pay a higher (non-state-subsidized) tuition rate and hence contribute significantly to institutional costs. The total economic contribution of international students in the United States was nearly $20 billion in 2009–2010 (Open Doors, 2010). In addition, international graduate students often provide qualified research and teaching assistants (Davis, 1999). Researchers found that international graduate students are important contributors to U.S. innovation (Chellaraj, Maskus, & Mattoo, 2005). Due to the specialized nature of graduate level study, along with the critical contributions made by international graduate students, they merit focused study apart from of their undergraduate counterparts (Poyrazli, Arbona, Nora, McPherson, & Pisecco, 2002). The extant research on international graduate students consists solely of studies about social and educational experiences (Perrucci & Hu, 1995; Trice, 2004), culture shock and adjustment strains (Chapdelaine & Alexitch, 2004; Poyrazli et al., 2002; Poyrazli & Kavanaugh, 2006), impact of language proficiency and communication needs (Kim, 2006; Xu, 1991), conflict with faculty supervisors (Adrian-Taylor, 2007), mental health needs and use of counseling services (Hyun, Quinn, Madon, & Lustig, 2007), career placement concerns and needs (Shen & Herr, 2004), and academic success factors (Nelson, Nelson, & Malone, 2004). The extant research has not explored how international graduate students choose their academic majors for graduate study in the United States. The existing research on choice of major for American students has included academic preparation, gender role, academic climate, parental influences, and value systems for American undergraduate and graduate students (e.g., Malgwi, Howe, & Burnaby, 2005). Although international graduate students likely share some of the same reasons for choosing their majors with their American counterparts, international students also face a unique set of influencing factors. For example, international students must also consider their native culture and values, English language ability, affordability, and a foreign collegial atmosphere as well as 92


International Graduate Students: How Do They Choose Academic Majors?

adjustment to new social environs. A better understanding of how international students choose their majors may enable universities to attract and retain more international graduate students, as well as to increase international graduate students’ contributions in economy, innovation, and diversity. Factors Associated With Choice of Academic Majors Following an intensive review of the literature, no study specific to international graduate students’ choice of academic majors could be identified. Without previous academic literature in which to situate this study, we were informed by the literature and research pertaining to choice of academic majors among international undergraduate students and American graduate students. We acknowledge the divides between the undergraduate and graduate experiences, yet we believe that the literature on how undergraduates choose their majors can be instructive. The lack of specific literature on how graduate students choose their majors speaks loudly for the need of the current inquiry. Porter and Umbach (2006) found that studies on the choice of undergraduate academic majors have emphasized academic preparation, social and cultural influences, demographic attributes of students, academic climate, and value systems. There is a close tie between academic preparation, academic achievement, standardized test scores, and the selection of a major for both undergraduates and graduate students (Gamoran, 1987; Simpson, 2001). Student selection of courses and majors is based on previous academic performance and expectancies (Lackland & De Lisi, 2001). Turner and Bowen (1999) reported that different academic preparation—especially precollege level mathematics performance—was a main factor influencing academic choices regardless of gender. They asserted that because men tended to take more advanced math courses in high school, they tended to exceed women in college math skills. Simpson (2001) also noted that the more math preparation a student received in high school, the more likely the student will choose a technical-related major. International graduate students’ academic background may be highly related to their choice of study field. Social support received from family also affects a student’s academic choice and performance. Parental aspirations for children’s education impact students’ educational attitudes and college plans (Zea, Jarama, & Bianchi, 1995). Shih, Enrollment Management Journal Winter 2011

93


Pittinsky, and Ambady (1999) indicated that the influence of sociocultural stereotypes on individual performance was powerful. For example, it was found that Asian students were more likely to choose college majors in the sciences and technology (Tang, Fouad, & Smith, 1999). International graduate students’ social support may affect their valuation of academic disciplines. Gender role identification stereotypes have also been found to influence students’ choice of college majors. Lackland and De Lisi (2001) found that English, education, and nursing majors were dominated by women likely because these majors reflect traditional female gender roles. Similarly, traditional male roles were found to promote men’s choice of majors in fields such as mathematics, engineering, and natural sciences. Gender role socialization (e.g., nurturing and involvement with people) and family responsibility (e.g., pregnancies and child rearing) were cited as reasons for women’s educational and career choices in the social sciences and humanities (Jacobs, 1995). Researchers found that underrepresented groups felt uncomfortable and unsupported on campus. Women were more likely to study in fields enrolling a large number of females (Kanter, 1993). A “chilly climate” has been reported in natural sciences and engineering, typically blamed on an underrepresentation of women (Sandler & Hall, 1986). The small proportion of female students in these classes is believed to cause discomfort and feelings of lack of support. Minority groups may similarly feel a “chilly climate” on a campus dominated by White students. For example, Hispanic students were more successful at institutions with diverse population than those dominated by White students (Hagedorn, Chi, Cepeda, & McLain, 2007). When international students view themselves as the underrepresented group in the area of study, they may feel “chilly” and uncomfortable. Lackland and De Lisi (2001) found that student’s value systems were significant predictors of choice of courses and academic majors. The selection of a major in the “helping professions” was associated with a humanitarian concern, but the utility value was highly ranked among science majors, especially among male students. Eccles, Adler, and Meece (1984) explained that gender differences in academic choice and achievement arise from gender differences in the subjective values attached to various achievement activities.

94



Institutional factors and academic ability also play a role in the selection of academic majors (Lackland & De Lisi, 2001). College students’ choice of majors was strongly influenced by interest in the subject, the availability of employment, and potential earnings (Kim, Markham, & Cangelosi, 2002; Malgwi et al., 2005). Malgwi and colleagues (2005) also indicated that women were strongly influenced by their beliefs, while men were more influenced by expectations. Leppel, Williams, and Waldauer (2001) suggested that educational choices and career choices are essentially linked, and educational decisions represent a step toward career decisions. While some students plan to return to their home countries immediately after finishing study in the United States, others plan to live and work in the United States indefinitely (Shen & Herr, 2004). Hence, career plans upon graduation and employment opportunities in the home country and America affect international students’ academic choice in American graduate study.

Purpose of the Study The current study appears to be unique in identifying how international graduate students choose academic majors in the United States. The problem this research will address is how to best recruit and retain international graduate students specifically in targeted majors. This is important because the increasing enrollment of international students may positively contribute to a university’s budget as well as diversity. The findings may also assist higher education practitioners in developing effective recruitment strategies to attract more international students, to better understand and direct this population during their study in the United States, and to retain high quality international graduate students. The research questions of this current study are: (1) What are the factors associated with the choice of academic majors among international graduate students? (2) How do the factors influence the choice of academic majors? This study’s conceptual framework is based on a modified version of the Expectancy-Value model of achievement motivation (Wigfield & Eccles, 2000) and the nature of international students. In the Expectancy-Value model, student’s academic-related choices are influenced by subjective task values Enrollment Management Journal Winter 2011

95


and expectation of success. Wigfield and Eccles (2000) proposed three major components of subjective values: attainment value (importance of doing well on a given task), intrinsic value (enjoyment from performing the task), and utility value (usefulness for future plans). Expectation of success was defined as beliefs about how well one will perform on upcoming tasks, either in the immediate or long term future. Both values and expectations are directly influenced by goals and beliefs, which are influenced by two constructs—the individual’s interpretations of experience, and an individual’s perception of beliefs, expectations, and attitudes. The construct of interpretations of experience is influenced by perception, previous achievement-related experience, differential aptitudes, beliefs, and behaviors, and the cultural milieu. The conceptual framework includes five constructs: demographics, academicrelated inputs, personal perceptions, subjective values, and choice of academic majors. Based on the academic division at the research site and the distribution of international students in the fields of study (Open Door, 2010), academic majors are divided into four categories: business and management, engineering, natural and health sciences, and humanities and social sciences. For the purposes of this study, the construct of demographics includes age, gender, native region, and graduate level. The construct of academic-related inputs consists of continuity of academic majors, relevance to academic background, and relevance to work experience. English language ability belief, expectation of success, family influence, and feeling welcome are included in the construct of personal perceptions. Subjective values comprise academic interest, prestige of the academic program, professor’s prestige, employment opportunities, and financial assistance opportunities.

Methods This study used an original researcher-developed questionnaire based on the literature and findings of numerous previous studies. An expert panel—three professors and two doctoral candidates in the areas of educational research and higher education studies— reviewed and commented on the questionnaire construction, operationalization, wording format, and question flow to ensure that the content of this instrument sufficiently addressed international graduate students’ choice of academic majors. Upon the approval of the Institutional Review Board at the research site, a pilot test of 20 questionnaires was conducted. 96



The questionnaire was conducted online at a large public research university located in the southeast U.S.. More than 50,000 students study at the institution which offers over 100 undergraduate majors and almost 200 graduate programs. After modifications were made to the questionnaire from findings during the pilot activities, an email invitation (containing the online questionnaire link) was sent to 2,112 international graduate students the entire international graduate student population at the research site. As a result of reminder email messages, 505 responses were received for a response rate of 33.5%. Participants Of the 505 participants responding to the online questionnaire, 136 (27%) were master’s students and 369 (73%) were in doctoral programs. Three hundred and six (60%) participants were male. The age of the participants ranged from 21 to 46 years (M = 27.9). The participants reported 72 home countries/areas, which were subsequently divided into eight regions. Participants’ academic majors, also self-reported, were subsequently divided into four categories. Table 1 provides the academic majors’ distribution by participants’ native regions. Similar to the makeup of international graduate student population on campus, most of the participants majored in the engineering discipline, and were from East and Southeast Asia. table 1 | Participants’ Academic Major Distribution by Native Region Native region

Natural and health sciences

Engineering

Humanities and social sciences

Business and management

Africa

7

5

5

3

Central and South America

9

20

5

14

North America

0

3

3

0

Central and South Asia

31

95

5

7

East and Southeast Asia

54

102

24

33

Middle East

5

14

3

7

Europe

12

17

9

10

Oceania

2

1

0

0

Note: Participants from North America were Canadian, and those from Oceania were Australian and New Zealanders. Enrollment Management Journal Winter 2011

97


Data Analysis To adjust for possible sampling bias, a weighting procedure based on the country of origin was applied to the sample. The weighted data represented the international graduate student population on campus. Since the number of participants from North America (Canada) and the Oceania (Australia and New Zealand) regions was far lower than those from other regions, data from these two regions were excluded. In addition, students from these two regions spoke English as their first language and hence may have had different experiences. A nominal regression analysis was performed to investigate variables associated with international graduate students’ choice of academic majors. The dependent variables were the academic fields of study—business and management, engineering, humanities and social sciences, and natural and health sciences; the independent variables were age, gender, native region, graduate level, continuity of academic major, relevance to academic background, relevance to work experience, English language ability belief, expectation of success, family influence, feeling welcome, academic interest, prestige of the academic program, professor’s prestige, employment opportunities, and financial assistance opportunities. The variables of age (younger [< 30 years old] vs. older), gender (male vs. female), graduate level (master’s vs. doctoral), and continuity of academic major (continuity vs. discontinuity) were dummy coded in SPSS. The variables of relevance to academic background, relevance to work experience, English language ability belief, expectation of success, family influence, feeling welcome, academic interest, prestige of the academic program, professor’s prestige, employment opportunities, and financial assistance opportunities were self-reported based on assessments of these variables’ affects on students’ academic choices. These assessments used Likert-type scales, with 1 representing “strongly agree” and 5 representing “strongly disagree.” Due to the nature of nominal regression and the need to predict four categories of academic majors—humanities and social sciences, engineering, natural and health sciences, and business and management—three models were created for the analysis. The three models related to the first three academic major categories, while the last category, business and management, was considered the baseline

98



group for comparison. Comparisons were made based on the log odds of being placed in one of the three other groups as opposed to business and management. An inspection of significant parameters was conducted to determine the significant variables necessary for a viable model. While the three aforementioned models could be used to predict the odds of entering an academic major other than business and management, the use of all three simultaneously enabled the prediction of the specific academic major that would be chosen. For example, whichever of the three equations gave the highest odds determined inclusion in that particular program. On the other hand, if the three equations all implied low odds of being in a major other than business and management, then the assumption was made that the individual would study business and management. In order to create more useful predictive equations, the log odds equations can be used to create four separate probability equations that predict the probability of being within a certain academic major. Let the vector of parameter estimates including the intercept be called B. Then let the vector of standard and dummy coded variables be called X. Thus, for the product BX, a standard regression equation can be made as in Formula 1 below.

Formula 1

Here, n is the total number of predictors, including all standard continuous variables and dummy coded variables. The equation in Formula 1 is equivalent to the log odds found in Formula 2. Formula 2 uses humanities and social sciences as an example, with the baseline being the business and management major.

Formula 2

Similar formulas can be created using the engineering and natural and health sciences majors. e Let the parameter estimatese βfor the humanities and social sciences be called Bh, = π Engineering β β the estimates for engineering called 1 + e h + ebee + e β n Be, and the estimates for natural and to calculate the direct probabilities for the health sciences be called Bn. In βorder e n = equations π Naturalmajors, academic must be Sciences the βe β n manipulated in the following manner. ββ h

1+e

e

+e +e

π Engineering = β β 1β π Business = 1 + e β + e β + e β h

1+ e

h

e

+ ee βe n + e

n n

Enrollment Management = Journal Winter 2011 π Natural Sciences

π Business =

1 + e β h + e βe + e β n 1 βh

βe

βn

99


To find the probability of a student falling in the humanities and social sciences category, Formula 3 must be used.

π Humanties =

1 + e βh

e βh + e β e + e β n

Formula 3

In the above formula, π Humanities is the probability of a student being in the academic major of humanities and social sciences. The probability equations for the remaining three categories can be found below. e βe 1 + e + e βe + e β n e βn π Natural Sciences = 1 + e β h + e βe + e β n 1 π Business = 1 + e β h + e βe + e β n

π Engineering =

βh

Formula 4

The equations used to find the probabilities can be solved directly by SAS JMP. The JMP program then uses these equations to determine the probability that a given individual will pursue one of the four academic major categories. The calculated probabilities for academic major membership can then be analyzed using ANOVA, followed by Tukey’s Honestly Significant Difference test to determine specific group differences.

Results Nominal regression analysis was used to answer the first research question: What are the factors associated with the choice of academic major among international graduate students? An overall inspection of the nominal regression model for the parameters indicated that all sixteen of the independent variables were significant, with all associated p-values less than 0.001. The model shows good fit in the form of minimal variability that cannot be explained by the model, as shown by the two Pseudo R-square values; namely, the Cox and Snell at 0.650 and Nagelkerke at 0.709. The overall correct classification rate was 72.5%. The correct classification rates were 69.4% for humanities and social sciences, 76.7% for engineering, 68.6% for natural and health sciences, and 78.9% for business and management. Thus, on the whole the model was adequate in its ability to determine which of the four academic major categories an international graduate student would enter based on the noted predictors, with a model significance of 0.00. 100



For inclusion in any of the academic majors apart from business and management, the odds were increased the most due to “relevance to academic background” and “feeling welcome.” Thus, the three equations weighed most heavily in terms of increased odds for categorical inclusion due to two variables. Of these two factors, relevance to academic background was the greatest contributor to an increase of the odds ratio. Specifically, the greater the relevance of a major to an individual’s academic background, the more likely that individual was to be in that major. The parameter estimates for the nominal regression formulas can be found in Table 2. Note that these values were the parameter estimates for the log odds regression equation. As such they can be used to create the direct probability equations, as shown in the Analysis section. The direct resulting formulas are too complex to display here, but can clearly be used to create rather accurate probabilities to estimate academic major membership based on the independent variables. table 2 | Parameter Estimates for Nominal Regression Equations Parameters Intercept


Engineering


39.161

13.438

10.359

Younger age

2.643

4.319

3.723

Male

1.646

4.142

2.342

Master’s program

0.018

−5.500

−6.321

Continuity of academic major

2.940

4.639

3.786

Africa

0.007

−18.506

−4.029


0.001

−5.772

−5.246


1.028

2.524

1.782


8073.962

9.118

8.620

Middle East

91.192

5.055

4.078

Relevance to academic background = Strongly agree

15.663

36.432

12.149

Relevance to academic background = Agree

15.119

35.545

11.516

Relevance to academic background = Neutral

12.018

47.714

21.343

Relevance to academic background = Disagree

3.724

22.572

−0.809


101


table 2 | Parameter Estimates for Nominal Regression Equations Parameters


Engineering


Relevance to work experience = Strongly agree

−5.224

−4.231

−3.250

Relevance to work experience = Agree

−3.975

−4.706

−3.895

Relevance to work experience = Neutral

8.233

-6.830

21.343

Relevance to work experience = Disagree

−2.677

−1.315

−0.809

Academic interest = Strongly agree

−20.013

−32.027

−6.509

Academic interest = Agree

−25.813

−37.419

−3.895

Academic interest = Neutral

11.544

−20.910

−6.863

Academic interest = Disagree

−12.062

−24.288

−1.429

−1.896

−0.856

0.816

0.355

1.116

2.669

−0.743

0.735

4.683

3.247

5.818

Expectation of success = Strongly agree

−15.949

−5.809

−3.841

Expectation of success = Agree

−12.006

0.098

1.339

Expectation of success = Neutral

−20.074

−8.209

−6.831

Expectation of success = Disagree

−21.868

−10.264

−8.219

Prestige of professor = Strongly agree

−10.430

−10.547

−10.285

Prestige of professor = Agree

−0.566

−1.173

−0.652

Prestige of professor = Neutral

−3.615

−4.845

−4.514

Prestige of professor = Disagree

−5.179

−3.767

−2.497

Feeling welcome = Strongly agree

8.696

8.419

11.011

Feeling welcome = Agree

9.100

9.412

11.144

Feeling welcome = Neutral

13.575

14.258

15.957

Feeling welcome = Disagree

13.182

12.212

12.598

Prestige of academic program = Strongly agree Prestige of academic program = Agree Prestige of academic program = Neutral Prestige of academic program = Disagree

102

−4.09



table 2 | Parameter Estimates for Nominal Regression Equations Parameters


Engineering


Family influence = Strongly agree

−4.439

−3.678

−5.328

Family influence = Agree

−2.643

−1.118

−1.627

Family influence = Neutral

3.757

4.731

4.411

Family influence = Disagree

−0.436

−0.645

−1.788

Financial assistance opportunity = Strongly agree

0.747

3.538

1.714

Financial assistance opportunity = Agree

0.528

3.331

1.995

Financial assistance opportunity = Neutral

3.617

6.767

5.334

Financial assistance opportunity = Disagree

4.650

7.541

5.524

English language ability belief = Strongly agree

−12.875

−13.517

−11.329

English language ability belief = Agree

−14.164

−15.633

−12.676

English language ability belief = Neutral

−17.956

−18.132

−15.261

English language ability belief = Disagree

−20.411

−22.609

−20.266

Employment opportunity = Strongly agree

2.034

2.482

−0.189

Employment opportunity = Agree

5.388

4.216

1.211

8321.693

10.882

8.592

0.057

−0.903

−3.019

Employment opportunity = Neutral Employment opportunity = Disagree

The second research question—How do the factors influence the choice of academic majors?—was answered by the probabilities of variable level changes for academic major membership. The SAS JMP program computed probabilities for inclusion in any of the four academic major categories; these were then analyzed to investigate variable level changes for membership in the categories. Table 3 shows the averaged probabilities based on gender and the four academic majors. Female students were more likely to enter humanities and social sciences or natural and health sciences, while males were more likely to study engineering. These averages all had p-values less than 0.001. Business and management, however, was found to be equivalent based on gender.


103


table 3 | Average Estimated Probabilities for Academic Majors by Gender Humanities and social sciences

Engineering



Male

0.116182

0.506224

0.323650

0.053943

Female

0.335483

0.206451

0.399999

0.058067

The probability of academic major membership was analyzed using ANOVA. The averaged values are placed in Table 4. The older age group (≥ 30 years old) was more likely to choose the humanities and social sciences, natural and health sciences, or business and management than their younger counterparts. Younger students, on the other hand, were more likely to be pursue the engineering major than older students with similar criteria. table 4 | Average Estimated Probabilities for Academic Majors by Age Humanities and social sciences

Engineering



Younger age

0.122136

0.557252

0.290076

0.030536

Older age

0.244360

0.304511

0.383458

0.067671

The average probability for academic major membership can be found in Table 5. The outstanding attribute of this table was the fact that knowing the native region for a specific student allows a probability estimate to be assigned for possible academic major selection. Students from Africa, Central and South America, Central and South Asia, and Europe were most likely to enter the natural and health sciences. The category of humanities and social sciences appeared to take a cross sectional set of students from the six regions except for Central and South Asia. The makeup of the engineering category consists mainly of students hailing from Central and South Asia, East and Southeast Asia, and the Middle East. Overall, the students in this study were less likely to pursue majors in the business and management category.

104



table 5 | Average Estimated Probabilities for Academic Majors by Native Region Humanities and social sciences

Engineering



Africa

0.294111

0.058822

0.529406

0.117661


0.210526

0.210526

0.394737

0.184211


0.046296

0.555556

0.361110

0.037038


0.257310

0.385965

0.333333

0.023393

Middle East

0.320000

0.400000

0.240000

0.040000

Europe

0.289473

0.236841

0.368421

0.105265

Tables 6–12 denote the averages for academic major membership based on the self-reported importance of family influence, feeling welcome, relevant academic background, employment opportunity, financial assistance opportunity, academic interest, and prestige of academic program on the decision of the respondent. Generally, respondents did not agree that family influence, feeling welcome, relevant academic background, employment opportunity, academic interest, and financial assistance opportunity affected their choice of the humanities and social sciences. table 6 | Average Estimated Probabilities for Academic Majors by Family Influence Humanities and social sciences

Engineering



Strongly agree

0.100000

0.500000

0.300000

0.100000

Agree

0.137255

0.411765

0.411765

0.039126

Neutral

0.119658

0.470086

0.384615

0.025641

Disagree

0.247999

0.40800

0.255999

0.088003

Strongly disagree

0.304877

0.256096

0.378049

0.060978


105


table 7 | Average Estimated Probabilities for Academic Majors by Feeling Welcome Humanities and social sciences

Engineering



Strongly agree

0.222221

0.206350

0.507934

0.063494

Agree

0.186335

0.434782

0.316770

0.062113

Neutral

0.157895

0.429824

0.385964

0.026317

Disagree

0.333332

0.361111

0.222221

0.083336

Strongly disagree

0.304348

0.434782

0.130435

0.120435

table 8 | Average Estimated Probabilities for Academic Majors by Relevance to Academic Background Humanities and social sciences

Engineering



Strongly agree

0.190265

0.376106

0.389380

0.044250

Agree

0.206666

0.406667

0.320000

0.066667

Neutral

0.0000004

0.857135

0.142854

0.000006

Disagree

0.357141

0.285714

0.214284

0.142861

Strongly disagree

0.599989

0.000000864

0.111119

0.200005

table 9 | Average Estimated Probabilities for Academic Majors by Employment Opportunity Humanities and social sciences

Engineering



Strongly agree

0.208954

0.343283

0.343282

0.104482

Agree

0.151724

0.462069

0.337931

0.048277

Neutral

0.203389

0.372881

0.398304

0.025425

Disagree

0.285714

0.387755

0.244898

0.081634

Strongly disagree

0.333333

0.166666

0.388889

0.111111

106



table 10 | Average Estimated Probabilities for Academic Majors by Financial Assistance Opportunity Humanities and social sciences

Engineering



Strongly agree

0.222222

0.324787

0.393161

0.059831

Agree

0.161538

0.423077

0.361538

0.053846

Neutral

0.114284

0.457142

0.371427

0.057146

Disagree

0.228069

0.491228

0.245613

0.035090

Strongly disagree

0.499999

0.142855

0.250001

0.107145

table 11 | Average Estimated Probabilities for Academic Majors by Prestige of Academic Program Humanities and social sciences

Engineering



Strongly agree

0.218302

0. 336166

0.355824

0.089709

Agree

0.165873

0.456750

0.324705

0.052672

Neutral

0.197459

0.390271

0.372148

0.040122

Disagree

0.222299

0.351920

0.354675

0.071106

Strongly disagree

0.327745

0.340405

0.278583

0.053267

table 12 | Average Estimated Probabilities for Academic Majors by Academic Interest Humanities and social sciences

Engineering



Strongly agree

0.215384

0.323076

0.405128

0.056412

Agree

0.210191

0.433121

0.292993

0.063695

Neutral

0.040000

0.559999

0.360000

0.040000

Disagree

0.249996

0.499998

0.299996

0.00000933

Strongly disagree

0.499991

0.499997

0.00000455

0.000006966


107


Engineering students agreed that family influence, relevant academic background, employment opportunity, and financial assistance opportunity were influential factors, while disagreeing that feeling welcome and academic interest had affects. Prestige of academic program had similar probabilities across the agreement scale. International graduate students in natural and health sciences reported that they agreed the factors of feeling welcome, relevant academic background, financial assistance opportunity, and academic interest influenced their choice of study field. But the probabilities were similar across the agreement scale regarding family influence, prestige of academic program, and employment opportunity. International students in business and management had factors of family influence, employment opportunity, and prestige of academic program that were rather similar across the agreement scale probability-wise. Students in this academic major disagreed that the factors of feeling welcome, relevant academic background, and financial assistance opportunity affected their decision to choose the business and management major. However, respondents agreed that academic interest was an influential factor for their choice.

Discussion All 16 factors were significantly associated with international graduate students’ choice of academic major—age, gender, graduate level, native region, continuity of academic majors, relevance to academic background, relevance to work experience, academic interest, English language ability belief, expectation of success, family influence, feeling welcome, prestige of academic program, professor’s prestige, financial assistance opportunity, and employment opportunity. These factors influenced international graduate students’ selection of four academic fields: humanities and social sciences, engineering, natural and health sciences, and business and management. The results show that younger male Asian students were more likely to choose the engineering major. Receiving family support, having a relevant academic background, getting financial aid, and having better employment opportunities contributed to international graduate students’ decision to choose the engineering major. This finding reflects the norm that engineering is viewed as male’s field 108



(Lackland & De Lisi, 2001). Moreover, Asian culture and sociocultural norms (Tang, Fouad, & Smith, 1999) contributed to the differences among native regions as well as the importance of family support of major selection. Engineering programs expect incoming graduate students to be academically well-prepared; hence, most respondents agreed that relevant academic background was one of the reasons they selected this major. In addition, these students valued not only financial aid opportunities while in the program, but also job opportunities upon graduation. This finding was in agreement with Kim, Markham, and Cangelosi (2002). Receiving financial assistance not only benefited international students’ financial situation, but also enriched their academic experience if the funding source was from research grants or assistantships. Considering employment opportunities during the academic decision process reflected the fact that educational choices and career choice are linked (Leppel, Williams, & Waldauer, 2001). Engineering students also disagreed that feeling welcome affected their choice. They may have been aware of the large number of international graduate students enrolled in engineering programs at the research site as well in the United States (Open Door, 2010). Due to a combination of other influential factors, academic interest did not play an important role for international graduate students who pursued in engineering majors. Older female international students from outside of Central and South Asia tended to choose the humanities and social sciences. This finding concurs with Jacobs’s research (1995) in highlighting a decision trend that reflects traditional female roles. In contrast with engineering majors, international students in humanities and social sciences did not agree that family support, relevant academic background, financial assistance opportunity, or employment opportunities affected their choice of academic major. The expectations of the humanities and social sciences are different than those in engineering. This academic category does not rely so much on knowledge from prior academic experience. In addition, older students are less influenced by their family members in selection of academic fields than younger students. International students who selected the humanities and social sciences did not value financial assistance or employment opportunities, unlike their counterparts in engineering. These older students probably had better financial situations than younger students; hence, financial assistance opportunity did not affect their choice of studying in the humanities and social sciences. Enrollment Management Journal Winter 2011

109


Older female international students from Africa, Central and South America, Central and South Asia, and Europe were more likely to choose the natural and health sciences. Although the finding of gender difference conflicts with Lackland and De Lisi’s study (2001), the conflict may be caused by the academic differences at the graduate level, while Lackland and De Lisi’s study was targeted toward undergraduate students. Similar to engineering students, relevant academic background and financial assistance opportunity influenced students’ decision to choose this academic major category. Moreover, according to the responses of natural and health sciences students, academic interest and feeling welcome were influential factors as well. Hence, these students cared about the departmental climate and personal interests. The average probabilities of gender and native region for students studying in the category of business and management were almost equivalent on the agreement scale. The students in this academic field at the graduate level are expected to have more work experience, especially in the master’s of business administration program; therefore we found that older students tended to select this academic category. In addition, similar to students who selected the humanities and social sciences, relevant academic background and financial assistance opportunities had a low influence on students’ academic decisions. It is possible that students enrolled in the master’s of business administration program have various academic backgrounds. Those students may not need financial supports, as they probably have a better financial status due to their multiple years of work experience. This study also found that international students’ selection of business and management majors was based on their academic interest. Clearly, international graduate students’ academic decisions were influenced by a combination of several factors. Therefore, higher education administrators need to understand all influential factors and apply them to international graduate student recruitment and retention strategies.

Implications International graduate students are a unique and increasing student population at American higher education institutions. Administrators and faculty members at these institutions typically expect this population to assimilate and emulate American students. However, this group brings unique backgrounds and 110



reasons for choosing their major disciplines. Based on the results of this study, universities may consider developing the following services, programs, and policies in order to attract and admit future international students, assist international graduate students’ success, keep a diverse student population on campus, and maintain economical contributions from this student population. Recruitment and Admission Policies The results of this study indicated that demographic factors influenced international graduate students’ choice of majors. Engineering discipline recruiters may find more interest in the younger international student population, while other discipline recruiters may find older students more willing to apply. Female students may be more likely to apply for programs in the humanities and social sciences and natural and health sciences disciplines, while the engineering discipline may receive more applications from male students. Recruiters may consider the native culture and values that students bring with them. Engineering recruiters might consider intense recruitment in Asia because people in this region are more likely to pursue engineering majors. Natural and health sciences recruiters might target Africa, Central and South America, Central and South Asia, and Europe. Humanities and social sciences recruiters might consider decreasing their recruitment efforts in Central and South Asia. In addition, financial opportunities, prestige of academic program, employment opportunities, and a diverse and hospitable campus should be highlighted on international recruiting advertisements, as these factors also influence international graduate students’ decisions about academic majors. This study suggests that recruitment policies could be developed to recruit international students in underrepresented disciplines. This study found that the majority of international graduate students were in engineering programs, while the number of international graduate students in humanities and social science programs was significantly lower. The unbalanced student population does not contribute to diversity at American universities. Although we acknowledge that international students may feel a chilly climate when the department is dominated by Americans, the other side of this issue is that American students benefit from working in a diverse setting with international students.


111


The recruiting officers may develop policies to attract international students to underrepresented disciplines. These policies should take into account the following recommendations: offering financial aid opportunities to international students who apply to underrepresented disciplines, providing research and work opportunities with a diverse student population in underrepresented departments, hiring international students from underrepresented regions as recruiting assistants in their home countries, and replacing selected admissions criteria with international students’ relevant work experiences and educational backgrounds. Graduate school applications usually request applicants’ demographic and academic-related information. However, this study found that personal perceptions and their subjective values also influence the academic choices of international graduate students. The researchers recommend that preadmission interviews, conducted online or over the telephone, be included in the admission process. Understanding why students are interested in a major may help institutions to provide better guidance. Support Services and Programs Retention is as important as recruitment. Support services and programs are crucial to assist international students’ academic success at American universities. This study found that the factor of feeling welcome influenced international graduate students’ choice of natural and health sciences. Hence, natural and health sciences graduate programs are encouraged to work with the university’s international student center to organize Support services and events and clubs for students from the programs are crucial to same region and invite them to participate assist international students’ in regular activities, such as African academic success at Nights or the Middle Eastern Club. These American universities. activities would assist students from certain regions to support each other academically and socially. Interaction activities between international and domestic students as well as between international students and faculty/staff originally from other countries may also be organized, so that international students feel welcome and recognized on campus.

{

{

Financial assistance opportunity was an influential factor among international graduate students who chose engineering and natural sciences and health majors. For this reason, unsupported or partially supported currently enrolled 112



international students and new applicants in these academic fields should be equally considered for financial assistance opportunities. Financial concerns may distract students’ focus on academic study or cause discontinuity of study. Full financial assistance not only contributes to students’ academic success, but also increases their contribution in teaching and/or research if the funding is through teaching and/or research assistantships. Additionally, international students in these academic areas are more likely to remain in their selected major. This study found that 16 factors are associated with the choice of academic majors among international graduate students. Moreover, a combination of several factors affected students’ academic decisions. The university may consider providing workshops for international graduate students to better understand or appreciate the wide array of choices of majors in U.S. universities. They may not understand that they can modify their earlier choice. The workshops would allow international graduate students to explore different ideas and options. The international student academic advisors could provide appropriate advisement based on the students’ demographic attributes, academic-related inputs, personal perceptions, and subjective values. International graduate students’ academic advisors should help them select the academic program that fits their needs, as well as direct them during their study in the selected academic area. A supportive academic environment may result in successful learning experiences and may attract more international graduate students in the future. International students bring welcome revenue to the institution and are future international alumni. They build a global network for the institution and the institution’s international reputation in their home countries.

Limitations One of the limitations of this study was the relatively low response rate of the online survey. This study’s response rate was 33.5%, which is higher than the expectation of an email survey response rate of 25%–30% (Kittleson, 1997), because “the response rates for email surveys appear to be somewhat lower than those of traditional mail surveys” (Sheehan & McMillan, 1999, p. 48). Confidentiality and Internet security were concerns for many participants. Some respondents were hesitant to reply to a request for participation over the Internet (Sills & Song, 2002). Enrollment Management Journal Winter 2011

113


The results of the study may not be generalizable to other institutions. The study was conducted in a Southeastern public university with an enrollment of approximately 50,000 students. Since the participants were from one institution, the study results may be applicable only to public universities with a large number of international graduate students who are demographically alike.

Conclusion An increasing number of international graduate students decide to pursue their graduate studies in the United State every year, coming with various purposes and motivations. International graduate students not only assist in teaching and research and enrich campus diversity, but also contribute economically to American universities’ tight and declining budgets as well. The current study contributed to the very limited literature on this population and their motivations for academic decisions. Sixteen factors were found related to international graduate students’ academic choices. Although some of these factors are shared with their domestic counterparts, many were unique to international graduate students. This study discussed how factors affected international students’ choices among four academic major categories. Based on the findings, recruitment and admission policies as well as support services and programs targeted toward international graduate students were suggested, in order to effectively attract and retain more high quality international graduate students. We also suggested that international graduate students be acknowledged and respected at higher education institutions and that further studies on this population be considered. About the authors: Jia Ren is an assistant dean in the Business School at Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey. Linda Serra Hagedorn is associate dean in the College of Human Sciences at Iowa State University. Michael T. McGill is a postdoctoral research associate in Research and Evaluation at Iowa State University. Address correspondence to: Jia Ren, One Washington Street, 10th floor, Newark, NJ, 07102, [email protected]

114



References Adrian-Taylor, S. R. (2007). Conflict between international graduate students and faculty supervisors: Toward effective conflict prevention and management strategies. Journal of Studies in International Education, 11(1), 90–117. Chapdelaine, R. F., & Alexitch, L. R. (2004). Social skills difficulty: Model of culture shock for international graduate students. Journal of College Student Development, 45(2), 167–184. Chellaraj, G., Maskus, K. E., & Mattoo, A. (2005). The contribution of skilled immigration and international graduate students to U.S. innovation. Retrieved from http://www-wds. worldbank.org/servlet/WDSContentServer/WDSP/IB/2005/05/15/000090341_200505151 25129/Rendered/PDF/wps3588.pdf Davis, T. M. (1999). Open doors 1998/1999: Report on international educational exchange. New York: Institute of International Education. Eccles, J., Adler, T., & Meece, J. L. (1984). Sex differences in achievement: A test of alternate theories. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 46(1), 26–43. Desrochers, D. M., Lenihan, C. M., & Welman, J. V. (2010). Trends in college spending. Report of the Delta Project on Postsecondary Education Costs, Productivity, and Accountability. Retrieved from http://www.deltacostproject.org/resources/pdf/Trends-in-College-Spending-98-08.pdf Garmoran, A. (1987). The stratification of high-school learning opportunities. Sociology of Education, 60, 135–155. Hagedorn, L. S., Chi, W., Cepeda, R. M., & McLain M. (2007). An investigation of critical mass: The role of Latino representation in the success of urban community college students. Research in Higher Education, 48(1), 73–91. Hyun, J., Quinn, B., Madon, T., & Lustig, S. (2007). Mental health need, awareness, and use of counseling services among international graduate students. Journal of American College Health, 56(2), 109–118. Jacobs, S. C. (1995). Changing patterns of sex segregated occupations through the life-course. European Sociological Review, 11(2), 157–171. Kanter, R. M. (1993). Men and women of the corporation. New York, NY: Basic Books. Kittleson, M. (1997). Determining effective follow-up of e-mail surveys. American Journal of Health Behavior, 21(3), 193–196. Kim, S. (2006). Academic oral communication needs of East Asian international graduate students in non-science and non-engineering fields. English for Specific Purposes, 25(4), 479–489. Kim, D., Markham, F. S., & Cangelosi, J. D. (2002). Why students pursue the business degree: A comparison of business majors across universities. Journal of Education for Business, 78, 28–32.


115


Lackland, A. C., & De Lisi, R. (2001). Students’ choices of college majors that are gender traditional and nontraditional. Journal of College Student Development, 42(1), 39–48. Leppel, K., Williams, M. L., & Waldauer, C. (2001). The impact of parental occupation and socioeconomic status on choice of college major. Journal of Family and Economic Issues, 22(4), 373–394. Malgwi, C. A., Howe M. A., & Burnaby P. A. (2005). Influences on students’ choice of college major. Journal of Education for Business, 80(5), 275–282. Nelson, C. V., Nelson, J. S., & Malone, B. G. (2004). Predicting success of international graduate students in an American University. College and University, 80(1), 19–27. Open Doors. (2010). The annual report of international education. Retrieved from http://opendoors.iienetwork.org/ Perrucci, R., & Hu, H. (1995). Satisfaction with social and educational experiences among international graduate students. Research in Higher Education, 36(4), 491–509. Porter, S. R., & Umbach, P. D. (2006). College major choice: An analysis of person-environment fit. Research in Higher Education, 47(4), 429–439. Poyrazli, S., Arbona, C., Nora, A., McPherson, R., & Pisecco, S. (2002). Relation between assertiveness, academic self-efficacy, and psychosocial adjustment among international graduate students. Journal of College Student Development, 42(5), 632–642. Poyrazli, S., & Kavanaugh, P. (2006). Marital status, ethnicity, academic achievement, and adjustment strains: The case of graduate international students. College Student Journal, 40(4), 767–780. Sandler, B. R., & Hall, R. (1986). The campus climate revisited: Chilly for women faculty, administrators, and graduate students. Washington, DC: Association of American Colleges and Universities. Sheehan, K., & McMillan, S. (1999). Response variation in e-mail surveys: An exploration. Journal of Advertising Research, 39, 45–54. Shen, Y., & Herr, E. L. (2004). Career placement concerns of international graduate students: A qualitative study. Journal of Career Development, 31(1), 15–29. Shih, M., Pittinsky, T. L., & Ambady, N. (1999). Stereotype susceptibility: Identity salience and shifts in quantitative performance (Research Report). American Psychological Society, 10, 80–83. Sills, S. J., & Song, C. (2002). Innovations in survey research: An application of Web-based surveys. Social Science Computer Review, 20(1), 22–30. Simpson, J. (2001). Racial differences in the factors influencing academic major between European Americans, Asian Americans, and African, Hispanic, and Native Americans. The Journal of Higher Education, 72(1), 63–100. 116



Snyder, T. C., Dillow, S. A., & Hoffman, C. M. (2008). Digest of education statistics, 2007, NCES 2008-022. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. Tang, M., Fouad, N. A., & Smith, P. L. (1999). Asian Americans’ career choices: A path model to examine factors influencing their career choices. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 54(1), 142–157. Trice, A. G. (2004). Mixing it up: International graduate students’ social interactions with American students. Journal of College Student Development, 45(6), 671–687. Turner, S. E., & Bowen, W. G. (1999). Choice of major: The changing (unchanging) gender gap. Industrial and Labor Relations Review, 52, 289–313. Wigfield, A., & Eccles, J. S. (2000). Expectancy-value theory of achievement motivation. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25, 68–81. Xu, M. (1991). The impact of English language proficiency on international gradaute students’ perceived academic difficulty. Research in Higher Education, 32, 557–570. Zea, M. C., Jarama, L. S., & Bianchi, F. T. (1995). Social support and psychosocial competence: Explaining the adaptation to college of ethnically diverse students. American Journal of Community Psychology, 23, 509–531.


117

Do Minority Students Ever Become Connected to Community Colleges? Elizabeth R. Przymus Central Community College–Columbus

Abstract Students of color represent a substantial proportion of the students enrolled in American community colleges. In fact, nearly 50% of all minorities in higher education today are enrolled in community colleges. However, the graduation and transfer rates of minority students are astoundingly low. In order to better understand the unique experiences of minority students, this study explored the level of institutional connectedness experienced by minority students at a community college in the Midwest. The findings revealed that while the participants felt comfortable in their environment and a sense of connection to the faculty, staff, and students, they were not involved on campus and they longed for more diversity at their schools. This study provides insight into the ways in which minority students connect with their community colleges, with implications for community college faculty, counselors, other student services staff, and educational leaders concerned with the retention and transfer rates of minority community college students.

A growing number of racial minorities are turning to our nation’s community colleges as their gateway to higher education. According to 2008 National Center for Education Statistics data, students of color constitute over 40% of the community college student population (Provasnik & Planty, 2008). Yet, it is disconcerting that many minority students leave the community college without ever accomplishing the goals they set out to achieve. Nationally, approximately 50% of community college students drop out between the first and second year (McClenney, 2004). Strauss and Volkwein (2004) emphasized that the retention differences between two-year and four-year institutions are significant, noting that the “proportion of students leaving college without a degree is almost twice as large at two-year versus four-year campuses” (p. 204). The large number of minority students attending community colleges, coupled with the high rates of attrition at these institutions, makes for a troubling combination. Thus, there is a critical need for research that explores factors that help keep students of color engaged at the community college and able to complete their academic goals. 118


Do Minority Students Ever Become Connected to Community Colleges?

The purpose of this study was to explore the level of institutional connectedness experienced by minority students enrolled at a community college in the Midwest. For this study, institutional connectedness was generally defined as a bond or sense of attachment between the student and the institution. This definition is based on the conceptual understanding of “connecting retention strategies,” which Beatty-Guenter (1994) described as helping the student become linked with the college community by giving them a sense of belonging. The central research question for this study was: How are minority students connected (or not connected) to their community college? In addition, this investigation explored the following subquestions: (a) How do minority students describe their connection or involvement with student groups or organizations on campus? (b) What kind of connections/relationships do minority students have with fellow students, instructors, and staff members at their community colleges? A substantial amount of research has been conducted on student persistence/ retention in general, with foundational theories dating back over 50 years (Bean, 1980, 1981, 1992; Braxton, Sullivan, and Johnson, 1997; Cabrera, 1991; Durkheim, 1950; Halpin, 1990; Mallette & Cabrera, 1991; Pascarella et al., 1983; Pascarella & Terenzini, 1977, 1980, 1983; Spady, 1970, 1971; Tierney, 1992; Tinto 1975, 1988, 1993). Two of the more prominent theories on student persistence are Tinto’s integrationist model of student departure (1975, 1988, 1993) and Astin’s model of student involvement (1984, 1993). These two scholars contended that students who are attached to and involved in a college are more likely to persist. The vast majority of persistence research, however, has been conducted at four-year colleges. The amount of research that has specifically focused on the persistence of students of color at two-year colleges is even more limited (Green, Marti, & McClenney, 2008). This study is significant for two specific reasons. First, the amount of research focused on the engagement and persistence of students of color at two-year colleges is limited. This study will broaden researchers’ understanding of the minority student experience at community colleges, and it will add to the literature on potential factors related to minority student persistence at these institutions. Lewis and Middleton (2003) emphasized that, given rapidly rising minority enrollments at community colleges, a concerted effort should be made to increase research in this area. Enrollment Management Journal Winter 2011

119

Elizabeth R. Przymus

Second, this study will be valuable for community college practitioners, including counselors and other student services professionals who work daily to support and assist minority students. The findings from the study may help to expand practitioners’ knowledge of the varied ways that students of color either connect (or fail to connect) with their community colleges and of their overall college experience.

Review of the Literature Student persistence has been one of the more prevalent areas for empirical research in higher education throughout the past several decades. Tierney (1992) aptly described the expansiveness of the research on student attrition/persistence, noting that “One could argue that student departure has been the central focus of higher education research” (p. 604). Vincent Tinto (1975, 1988, 1993) provided the theoretical framework for much of the literature that exists related to the issues of student attrition and persistence. He established a model of student departure from college that was based on research conducted by Spady (1970, 1971). Tinto’s model emphasized the importance of integration and the idea that college is essentially a “rite of passage” through which students must successfully pass in order to persist. Tinto described the attrition process in relation to the level of integration or attachment that a student feels to the institution. Thus, students who do not persist in college are insufficiently attached or assimilated with the institution—both socially and academically (Tinto, 1975). Some researchers, however, have questioned Tinto’s integrationist model of student departure because it failed to adequately address the minority student population (Braxton, Sullivan, & Johnson, 1997; Tierney, 1992). Specifically, Tierney (1992) contended that Tinto misused the concept of “ritual” and argued that the theoretical model Tinto developed has potentially damaging applications for racial and ethnic minorities. Tierney (1992) also questioned the integrationist perspective in Tinto’s theory. He asserted that we need to look at student participation in college through an entirely different lens—a “multicultural” lens which must in turn impact how we go about engaging minority students (p. 604). While significant critiques of Tinto’s work have been made, his theory has been rather widely accepted and has served as an influential model for further research in the area of student attrition (Bean, 1980, 1981, 1992; Halpin, 1990; Mallette 120



& Cabrera, 1991; Pascarella et al., 1983; Pascarella & Terenzini, 1977, 1980, 1983). The vast majority of this research, however, has been conducted at the four-year college level with minimal persistence research conducted at two-year colleges. The extent of the empirical work that has explored factors related to minority student persistence at two-year colleges is even more limited. While few studies have examined the persistence of students of color at community colleges, the majority of the empirical work that has been done centered around three categories in particular. A small group of studies focuses on academically related factors and preparation (Green et al., 2008; Mason, 1998; Mohammadi, 1994). A second, considerably larger set of studies examined environmental factors—particularly the impact of outside support and financial aid (Bean & Vesper, 1992; Blau, 1999; Cofer & Somers, 2001; Hippensteel et al., 1996; Kern, 2000; Nora & Cabrera, 1994; Nora and Cabrera, 1996; St. John & Starkey, 1994; St. John & Starkey, 1995), as well as the impact of a critical mass of minority students and faculty on campus (Hagedorn et al., 2007). A third, very small category of studies has touched upon the idea of connectedness, including studies that have focused on mentoring programs used for minorities in a community college (BeattyGuenther, 1994; James, 1991; Stromei, 2000). The aspect of connectedness, however, has been only minimally researched. Academic Characteristics/Preparation Some researchers have investigated academic variables/preparation and the effect of these factors on community college student persistence and success (Green et al., 2008; Mason, 1998; Mohammadi, 1994). The level of academic preparedness that students possess upon entering college, the number of credit hours they take, and the clarity that students have with regard to their educational goals have all been shown to be significant predictors of student retention at community colleges. Using a mixed methods approach, Mason (1998) surveyed and interviewed 93 African American males enrolled in an urban community college to identify a model of persistence for this particular segment of students. One of Mason’s significant findings was that students who had high levels of certainty about their educational goals were more likely to attend class regularly, study more, and persist in their program.


121


The literature reveals a significant disparity in academic achievement between African American and Hispanic college students and their nonminority peers (Price, 2004). Green, Marti, and McClenney (2008) used multiyear survey data from the Community College Student Report (CCSR) to examine whether students from various racial/ethnic groups at two-year colleges differ in their level of engagement and how much these levels of student engagement contribute to positive academic outcomes. There were 3,143 participants from Florida community colleges included in the quantitative study. Results indicated that African American students reported higher levels of engagement than their White peers; however, they demonstrated lower academic outcomes than White students. Hispanic students reported higher levels of engagement than White students on only one of the three engagement factors analyzed in the study. The results also showed that Hispanic students earned significantly lower grades than their White peers but were as likely as White students to pass courses. Green et al. (2008) suggest that an “Effort-Outcome Gap” exists for African-American students. The authors contend that such a gap occurs when students must work harder to persist and achieve (due to numerous institutional and academic barriers) as compared to their peers, who are able to achieve the desired outcomes with less engagement and effort. Environmental Factors: Financial Factors, Outside Encouragement, and Minority Presence Other research on minority student persistence in community colleges has explored the role of environmental factors and how these may affect minority student success. Tuition costs and financial aid in all its forms (grants, loans, etc.) have been examined by many scholars as a probable factor associated with student persistence in college (Cofer & Somers, 2001; DesJardins et al., 2002; Dowd & Coury, 2006; Hippensteel et al., 1996; St. John & Starkey, 1994; St. John & Starkey, 1995). However, the empirical findings on the effects that different forms of aid have on student persistence have yielded mixed results. Some research has indicated that grants have a negative effect on student persistence and that loans have an insignificant effect (Hippensteel, St. John, & Starkey, 1996; St. John & Starkey, 1994). Other researchers, however, have found a positive and significant correlation between financial aid (including both grants and loans) and student persistence (Cofer & Somers, 1999).

122



Dowd and Coury (2006) extended the work of these previous scholars (Cofer & Somers, 1999; Hippensteel, St. John, & Starkey, 1996; St. John & Starkey, 1994) and examined the impact of tuition prices and financial aid on the persistence and associate degree attainment of community college students. Dowd and Coury (2006) analyzed data from two surveys (National Postsecondary Student Aid Study of 1989–90 and the Beginning Postsecondary Students, Second Follow-up of 1994) using a sample of 694 participants. Results showed that student loans had a negative effect on persistence rates, and grants and work-study awards had no significant effect on persistence. Also, no form of financial aid had a significant effect on associate degree attainment. While Dowd and Coury’s study (2006) included some analysis of demographic and status variables (including race/ethnicity), the authors acknowledged that their results may not accurately reflect the experiences of Hispanic and African American community college students due to the sampling strategy and the resulting small sample size of minority students. Several studies have revealed the positive impact that outside encouragement and family support can have on students’ likelihood to persist in higher education (Bean & Vesper, 1992; Blau, 1999; Kern, 2000; Nora & Cabrera, 1994; Nora & Cabrera, 1996). Mason’s (1998) mixed methods study, designed to develop a model of persistence for African American male urban community college students, explored the impact that environmental variables have on the persistence of this group of students. Ninety-three participants were included in this study. Through his investigation, Mason discovered that outside encouragement had a significant, positive influence on the persistence of African American males at community colleges. Mason noted that this support generally came from a significant female in the student’s life, and that the more support the student received from outside the college, the more likely he was to persist. Other scholars have studied additional environmental factors affecting the academic success of minority students. Hagedorn, Chi, Cepeda, and McLain (2007) examined the impact that the level of representation of Latino students and faculty on a community college campus had on the academic success of Hispanic/ Latino students. Data was collected from the Transfer and Retention of Urban Community College Students (TRUCCS) surveys that were administered to over 5,000 students in nine colleges in the Los Angeles Community College District. Findings from this quantitative study reveal that students on campuses with high


123


levels of Latino students and faculty experienced greater academic success (higher GPAs, higher rates of successful course completion) and were more likely to enroll in transfer level courses. The authors suggested that a “critical mass” of Latinos (students and faculty) helps foster a sense of belonging for Latino/Hispanic students (Hagedorn et al., 2007, p. 89). Institutional Connectedness Factors Within the literature, very little empirical research has specifically explored the concept of institutional connectedness and the sense of connectedness that minority community college students possess. A few scholars have examined related concepts, including research on the use of mentoring programs designed specifically for students of color in a community college (Beatty-Guenther, 1994; James, 1991; Pope, 2002; Stromei, 2000). Pope (2002) utilized a quantitative research design to explore minority student perceptions about the use of multilevel mentoring on their community college campuses. Pope defined multilevel mentoring as including both formal mentoring programs and informal methods such as faculty accessibility and the presence of minority faculty and staff on campus. Pope’s study was part of a large investigation that surveyed 375 minority students enrolled at 15 community colleges around the country. Results showed that the types of mentoring that minority students consider important were available to them— with the exception of faculty mentoring for students. Another important finding from this study was that minority students felt that having multiple types of mentoring at their community college was important for their success. This research suggested that mentoring might be one effective way to establish a connection between students of color and their community college.

Methods In this investigation, I utilized a qualitative research design to obtain first-hand testimony of minority students’ sense of connectedness to their community college. I wanted to hear directly from students of color and capture their voices and perspectives on this topic. I was guided by a constructivist epistemology, aiming to explore the multiple perspectives of the participants and relying upon their views of the phenomenon being studied (Creswell, 2009).

124



I conducted this study on one campus of a multicampus, comprehensive community college system located in the Midwest. The campus offers a variety of degree and diploma programs in 14 career and technical education areas, as well as academic transfer courses in 25 program areas. It is a residential campus offering a wide range of campus activities, clubs, organizations, and other opportunities for students to become involved in campus life. For confidentiality purposes, the community college in this study will be referred to as Nearby Community College or NCC. The majority (87%) of the 13,350 students enrolled in credit courses at NCC report their racial/ethnic background as White. However, over the past five years this particular community college system has experienced rapid growth in the percentages of students from various racial backgrounds. The college’s recent annual enrollment report released in August of 2009 revealed sizeable percentage increases over the five-year period from 2004–05 to 2008–09. This growth included a 25% increase in the number of Black non-Hispanic students, a 36% increase in the number of American Indian or Alaska Native students, a 49% increase in the number of Asian or Pacific Islander students, and a 43% increase in the number of Hispanic students (NCC 2008–2009 Annual Enrollment Report). I used purposeful sampling to select the participants for this research. Specifically, I used maximum variation sampling in order to ensure as much variation as possible in participant situations and perspectives (Creswell, 2007). In choosing the participants, I considered the following aspects for inclusion: (1) various racial/ethnic backgrounds, (2) residential status (including both on-campus and off-campus students), (3) number of semesters at NCC, and (4) age (including both traditional and nontraditional students). To obtain names and contact information for potential participants, I communicated with specific campus personnel who work directly with many of NCC’s students of color. The housing director, athletic director, academic success center director, and a sociology instructor all provided names of potential participants for this study. After obtaining suggestions from these staff members, I selected six students, contacted them by telephone, and arranged a time to meet individually with them. In these brief meetings, I explained the purpose of the study and obtained each student’s permission to participate—in accordance with Institutional Review Board guidelines. Participants were asked to complete a short form regarding their background.


125


Table 1 presents a summary of the participants’ backgrounds. In order to ensure the participants’ anonymity, pseudonyms are used throughout this article. Table 1 | Participant Background Characteristics Name

Gender

Race/ Ethnicity

Residence

Age

Semesters at NCC

Educational goal

Maria

F

Hispanic

Residence hall

19

One

Academic transfer

Jamel

M

African American

Apartment

20

One

Academic transfer

Ricardo

M

Hispanic

Own home

33

Four

2-year program

Amber

F

African American

Residence hall

20

Three

Academic transfer

Graciela

F

Hispanic

Parents’ home

20

One

Academic transfer

Ling

M

Asian

Parents’ home

20

Five or more

Academic transfer

Data Collection I collected multiple sources of data in this research. First, I conducted two focus group interviews with the selected participants. Second, I asked the participants to create a drawing or submit a photograph illustrating a particular aspect of “connectedness”—thus, using photo elicitation to produce a visual data source. Third, I conducted observation sessions with random groups of students of color enrolled at NCC (in three different settings). These multiple sources produced a rich, expanded data set. I then triangulated the data to ensure greater validity. Each data collection process is described in detail below. I conducted two focus group interviews with the participants. Both interviews were conducted in a classroom at NC. I used an interview protocol form (Creswell, 2009) to guide the data collection process during the interviews. The following questions were included in the protocol: (1) Please introduce yourself by sharing your major and a little bit about yourself; (2) Are you a part of any student groups or organizations on campus? Please share your thoughts about this; (3) How familiar are you with the student services this college provides, and what services do you use/access? (4) Please tell me about the friendships you have at this college; (5) Could you please tell me about any connections or 126



relationships you’ve established with instructors or staff members? (6) Do you feel connected (a sense of attachment) to this community college? (7) What else do I need to know about this topic, or is there anything else you’d like to share with me about your experiences? Each focus group interview lasted approximately one hour. I audiotaped each interview and took handwritten notes. I then transcribed the interviews verbatim as soon as possible after the conclusion of each interview. In order to collect a visual source of data, I used a photo elicitation strategy, which provided the participants an opportunity to directly share their reality (Creswell, 2009). I asked each of the interview participants to create a drawing or submit a photograph illustrating some aspect that they believed would help minority students feel connected to or bonded with their community college. Participants submitted their drawing or picture to me in the days following the conclusion of the interviews. I then visited individually with each of the participants to ask them about their rationale and thought processes behind the creation of their pictures/drawings. As a third source of data, I conducted three observation sessions of random groups of minority students as they went about their normal activities. The reason for observing random groups (as opposed to observing only the participants who participated in the focus group interviews and the photo elicitation process) is because I wanted to observe the behavior and interactions of as many minority students as possible—in a naturalistic and unobtrusive way. I conducted these observation sessions in three different settings. First, I observed students in a social setting—specifically, at a student dance held on campus, an event that an overwhelming majority of NCC’s minority students attend. Second, I observed students as they participated in a meeting of a student organization at NCC. Before selecting this cocurricular setting, I visited with the advisor of this student organization to verify that there were minority students who belonged to this group. Finally, I observed students in an academic setting (i.e. in a classroom during a lecture course). Prior to observing this class, I verified with the instructor that minority students were enrolled in the course. I selected these settings because I felt they would provide evidence of the level of connectedness that the participants have with their community college. Each observation session lasted approximately 45 minutes. I used an observational Enrollment Management Journal Winter 2011

127


protocol form to guide the data collection process and to record descriptive and reflective field notes during the sessions.

Data Analysis I utilized an inductive process in analyzing the data from this study. The inductive logic of research in a qualitative study entails the gathering of raw data through various sources. The researcher then builds upward from that data to establish categories or themes that are later developed into broad theories, patterns, or generalizations (Creswell, 2009). After transcribing both focus group interviews verbatim, I read through each page of transcription line by line and wrote notes about the topics discussed by each interviewee. Next, I read through each transcription page in detail for a second time. During this second reading, I assigned codes to the interview data, looking for themes and patterns. I conducted this same two-step analysis and coding process for the observation field notes. In analyzing the visual data sources, I first wrote notes about each of the drawings or photographs submitted by the participants, and then assigned codes to the visual data, looking for patterns and themes. During the data analysis process, I made continual checks of the raw data to ensure that the emerging codes and themes originated from the three data sources and that the themes contained evidence from multiple sources. Through the analysis of the interviews, observation field notes, and visual data, 56 initial codes/code phrases emerged. I then reviewed the initial codes (looking for overlap and similarities) and reduced the code list to 17 core codes that I then collapsed into four initial themes. A fifth theme emerged as an underlying current among the other four key findings.

Validation Techniques I incorporated multiple validation strategies into this research. First, I used self-reflection (reflexivity) to identify how my values, biases, and background may have shaped the ways in which I viewed and interpreted the data. Next, I gathered multiple sources of data and triangulated the data sources in order to establish consistent, accurate themes reflective of the information gathered

128



during the data collection processes. Third, I used a member-checking strategy, asking the interview participants to review the five themes from this study in order to confirm the accuracy of the findings. Finally, I sought assistance from the campus president of NCC who served as a peer-debriefer for this study. These four strategies (Creswell, 2009), coupled with the rich description found in the words of the participants, lend significant validity to this research.

Limitations I purposefully chose the focus group interview format because I perceived the potential for the interview discussions to become sensitive and that participants might feel more comfortable in opening up about their experiences if other minority students were present. It is possible, however, that a focus group format (as opposed to individual interviews) created a dynamic where some participants may have agreed with a popular idea or were perhaps guided by other participants’ responses. Also, I conducted interviews with six total participants. It’s possible that including additional participants in this study may have resulted in the emergence of new or different themes. However, the multiple sources of data (focus group interviews, observation sessions, and photos/drawings) and the triangulation validation method used in the analysis stage add depth and reliability to the findings.

Findings The findings from this study indicated that the participants’ sense of connectedness to their community college is dichotomous in nature. On the one hand, participants expressed a strong connection to the instructors and staff members, with fellow students, and to the community college environment itself. However, the participants also conveyed adamant feelings of disconnect from student organizations and involvement on campus, sharing profound frustrations about the lack of information and minimal outreach to them as students of color. Laced throughout the findings is a clear desire for more diversity on campus, which the participants of the study indicated would help them feel more connected to their institution. This desire for more diversity was apparent even in aspects where the evidence showed a strong connection to the institution, such as in the participants’ relationships with instructors and staff members.


129


Instructors, Staff, and Caring Without exception, all of the participants indicated they had formed connections and positive relationships with college instructors and staff members. Participants spoke highly of instructors and staff, describing them as “understanding,” “helpful,” and people who truly cared about them. All participants described specific instances when instructors or staff members went above and beyond to help them out in some way. Ricardo talked about the care and attention shown to him by his anatomy and physiology instructor. [The anatomy and physiology instructor] is a hard teacher. He’s really, really hard. But he cares though about all of his students—no matter if you’re White, Black, or whatever color you are. He wants you to succeed. Just like last week . . . he helped me out for an hour. And I appreciated that because I needed the help. Because of the genuine attention and caring shown by their instructors, the participants felt a certain comfort on campus and a sense of belonging. Amber explained how she believed the instructors at NCC have helped her feel like she belongs—because they notice her and are interested in her success. The teachers help a lot too—making you feel like you belong. They want you to succeed. They don’t want you to fail and not come to class and everything. They want you to succeed. If I was gone for a week from classes, the teachers would notice, and they would want to know what’s wrong and why I wasn’t there. Participants indicated that the instructors and staff helped make it possible for them to achieve their goals. Ricardo submitted a picture illustrating his feelings about the critical support he received from instructors and staff at NCC. His picture shows a mountain climber as he is nearing the top of the mountain peak. Ricardo stated that he chose this picture because the instructors and staff at NCC make students believe they can accomplish their goals, no matter how difficult they may appear. Another aspect of the role that instructors and staff played in the participants’ experiences included the staff members’ efforts to periodically check-up on students, providing support, encouragement, and help. Maria described how the residence hall director provided this kind of support to her by showing an interest in her wellbeing: “Sometimes she’ll see me in the hallway or in the cafeteria, and she’ll ask me 130



how I’m doing and how I’ve been. It seems like she cares about you and everything.” Jamel also talked about an instructor who checks-up on him periodically. I think that’s the general goal of every teacher here whether you have them as a teacher or not. . . . they still look at you as their student. For instance, I don’t even have [the physical education instructor] as a teacher, but he still checks up on me and asks me how I’m doing in my classes and if I need any help with anything. And he’s not the first teacher who has done that. Thus, a clear finding in this study was that the participants felt supported as a result of the personal interest and caring attention given to them by instructors and staff members. Student Togetherness In describing the level of connectedness they felt toward their community college, several participants emphasized that the students at the college helped them feel a sense of belonging, like they were part of something. Some participants thought the smaller size of the institution helped them get to know each other better, which created a sense of togetherness. As one participant explained, “Here, everybody knows everybody because we’re kind of like a small community.” An important factor associated with the participants’ sense of togetherness is the existence of friendships. All of the participants spoke about friendships they had made since becoming students at the community college. Ling emphasized how he and other students spend a lot of time together: “We will play games together, hang out, and do homework together.” Several participants talked about the importance of the new friendships they formed at NCC, as compared to the students they were friends with in high school. Graciela, who described herself as timid and not having a lot of friendships established yet, explained how the students at NCC make her feel like she belongs: “Even though I’m like a really quiet person. . . . They [the students] seem like they want my friendship.” This dynamic, in which NCC students reach out to minority students in a friendly manner, was also evident at the student dance I observed. During the dance, a female White student walked over to where two female Hispanic students were sitting and attempted to coax them onto the dance floor where other students were dancing. Another dimension of this sense of togetherness relates to the absence of “groups” in the community college environment. Several participants described Enrollment Management Journal Winter 2011

131


how previous experiences with groups (particularly in high school) made them feel uncomfortable and out of place. Amber noted how in high school there were distinctions among people, such as the “jocks,” the “prep group,” and the “really smart people,” and that no one went outside of their group. She explained that it’s different at NCC, noting that, “Here . . . anybody can be friends with anybody, and that’s really nice.” To several of the participants, the absence of groups at their community college was something that made them feel more unified as students. Jamel emphasized that as students at NCC, they all “stick together,” regardless of their color. You can look down the hall and see somebody walking with somebody and think . . . “That’s an odd combination of people walking together.” But, they’re getting along just fine. And that’s something that you do notice here. You don’t feel segregated. You don’t feel like you have to stick with these types of people or fit in with this certain crowd because it feels like we’re all the same. These feelings of togetherness and the lack of segregated groups suggest some level of social integration was taking place. According to Tinto’s theory (1975), social and academic integration are critical to helping students persist in college. Thus, for these participants, student togetherness was an important factor in helping them feel connected to the institution and quite likely a factor that will positively affect their successful persistence. In observation sessions I conducted of random groups of minority students on campus, however, there appeared to be some “grouping” taking place. For example, in both a classroom setting and at the campus dance, the African American students tended to congregate together as a group, as did some of the Hispanic students. So, while the participants expressed feelings of togetherness with fellow students, there appeared to be some evidence suggesting contrary behaviors. However, despite some evidence of racial grouping at this institution, this did not affect the overall feeling of comfort the participants had about their environment. They unanimously expressed feeling very comfortable in their community college home. Feeling At Home Several participants stated that NCC made them feel “at home” and “comfortable.” Maria talked about feeling initially worried that she would miss her home and her parents and would want to leave. However, she explained that after starting college at NCC, she didn’t feel that way anymore. 132



Before, I used to be that person who would want to go home. When I got here, it just seemed so different. I feel like I’m at home. I don’t feel like I’m missing somebody. I know that I have friends here. I feel at home. Several participants emphasized that the atmosphere of the community college helped them feel at home. They described the atmosphere as “welcoming” and a place where they felt people cared about them. Jamel recalled a prior unpleasant experience, describing how the atmosphere at the four-year college he attended the previous year had affected him as a student. It was kind of like a negative atmosphere to me there, so it rubbed off. I was negative all the time. I didn’t want to be there. I hated it there. I would see a teacher with a frown on her face, so then I’m pissed off the whole class. Versus here . . . everybody’s always smiling, everybody’s always happy. Everybody’s like . . . “Hey, how are you doing?” Jamel further explained his feelings about the atmosphere at NCC through a picture he submitted showing a group of people who all looked “different” from one another. Underneath the picture was the phrase, “We All Count.” Jamel stated that he chose this picture because the atmosphere at a community college makes minority students feel like they “all count.” Similar to Jamel’s situation, there was a feeling among other participants that the atmosphere at this community college impacted them in a positive way, making it possible and desirable for them to be in college. Ricardo explained how the NCC atmosphere provided an opportunity for him that he may not have otherwise had. You know if I hadn’t found this friendly environment. . . . I got a wife and my kids . . . I probably would have just stayed working in a factory. You know . . . if they don’t care about me, why bother? But now, I know I’m going to be working really hard, but that welcome mat and the message they’re sending us with the teachers [pause] . . . it’s making a difference. Another dimension of the at-home feeling is the open-door philosophy that the participants said many of the community college instructors and staff members had. Participants stated they felt comfortable seeking help from campus personnel not only on academic issues, but for other concerns as well—because of their Enrollment Management Journal Winter 2011

133


open-door policy. Amber talked about the support she received from the campus counselor, stating that she would go to the counselor’s office whenever she was feeling stressed or needed someone to talk to: “She helps a lot. I just go in there and talk to her whenever I have a problem or I’m stressed out or anything.” This study revealed that the environment at NCC made a difference in how the participants felt about being there. Because of the at-home feeling and the welcoming atmosphere of the college, participants felt like they belonged. They wanted to be there, and they knew where to go and who to see when they needed help (also see Wells, 2003). While the participants expressed strong connections to the staff, students, and environment, their perspectives related to opportunities for involvement in campus organizations were significantly different. Barriers to Involvement With regard to student groups and organizations, the majority of the participants expressed no connection to this aspect of their community college. All participants (with the exception of one) stated they were not involved in any student groups or organizations. These participants identified several barriers and reasons why they were not involved. Several of the participants lacked knowledge about student organizations. They emphasized that there was “not enough information” and that they didn’t “even know what’s available.” Maria shared her frustration, noting that this lack of information about student groups and organizations is what prevented her from becoming involved: “They haven’t told me nothing about them, so I don’t see why I should join them if I don’t really know about them and how they are organized and their meetings and everything. That’s why I haven’t joined them.” Other participants indicated that, if they do receive information about opportunities for campus involvement, it is minimal and doesn’t help them understand what the organizations are about; nor is it enough to help them make a decision about joining. Several participants stated that they want to be treated as individuals who have something to contribute to a student organization and not just receive a piece of paper—in what they perceive as an impersonal attempt to recruit them. Jamel shared his frustrations about this kind of an approach.

134



Like, they just hand us a piece of paper, and we’re supposed to know what it all means. It may say what it means, but you’re not going to convince me by handing me a piece of paper that you want me to be a part of something. You need to talk to me and make me feel like an individual. The participants’ lack of connections with student groups and organizations grew largely out of their desire to “feel needed.” They wanted to be personally approached about the opportunity for student involvement and personally talked to about what these organizations were doing. The desire for personalized recruitment (and their disregard for superficial invitations) was poignantly explained by Ricardo. I mean, there are a lot of posters out there. There’s a lot of paper. But, no one comes and actually talks to you and explains what the groups are about. Instead of being a number, you want to feel like they need you . . . that you can be part of something. Participants also described other barriers that prevented them from becoming involved in organizations, including living off campus and “not knowing people” in such groups, which they said made it difficult to become involved. Ling explained that although he was aware of some organizations, he didn’t know any of the students who were in them: “Yes, I was aware. But, I didn’t have any friends who were part of any organizations, so that is why I didn’t get involved.” The observation sessions I conducted revealed few minority students involved in student organizations, and some appeared hesitant about becoming involved. I observed a Campus Crusade student group meeting held in the student center. There were two minority students in attendance at this meeting among a total of over twenty students. During the meeting, two additional students of color walked through the student center, pausing to see what the group was doing. After several students in the organization invited them to participate, the two minority students hesitantly sat down with the group. Thus, even though participants enjoyed the community college atmosphere, the staff, and their fellow students, this level of comfort was not enough to spur their involvement with student organizations. Thus, it appears that institutional connectedness on one level does not necessarily translate to connectedness on Enrollment Management Journal Winter 2011

135


another. It also appears that connectedness to campus involvement may happen for students of color only through more personalized, meaningful outreach. Desire for More Diversity While all three data sources revealed significant evidence of the connections the participants had with instructors, campus staff, and their fellow students, some participants stated that more diversity (in terms of race/ethnicity) among both instructors and students would help them feel more comfortable at the college. This desire for more diversity emerged as an underlying current among the other four key findings. As noted, participants were asked to create a drawing or submit a photograph illustrating some aspect that they believe would help minority students feel “connected to” or “bonded with” their community college. Amber submitted a picture of three teachers, all from different racial backgrounds. In a follow-up discussion with her, I asked Amber why she chose to submit that picture. She explained that if NCC had instructors from diverse backgrounds, they could serve as role models and mentors to students of color. If there were more teachers from different backgrounds, I think that would help minority students feel connected because they would have someone they could look up to. Students could go to them with problems, and they would feel comfortable going to talk to them. The teachers would really understand where the students come from. The desire to have instructors who understand minorities was also evident in the focus group interviews. Several participants talked about their connection with the sociology instructor at NCC, who teaches diversity-related courses. While this instructor is Caucasian, the participants commented about her level of understanding of them as minority students. Ricardo stated that, “She knows what it’s like to be in our shoes. She knows how hard it is to be in a minority group. She’s sensible. She understands.” Amber talked about how much she enjoys the diversity-related topics they get to explore in this instructor’s classes: “I’m taking Issues of Unity and Diversity with her, and everything she teaches is just really interesting to me. I love learning about minority groups and diversity and psychology and stuff like that.” 136



Other participants noted that having more diverse students would help minority students feel connected to the college. Maria submitted a picture showing a group of students from different racial/ethnic backgrounds. In a follow-up discussion with Maria, she stated that she believed more diversity in the college’s student body would be helpful because minority students wouldn’t worry about feeling out of place. I think that if there were more students from different backgrounds, then that would help them [minority students] feel connected . . . especially for students who were looking to come to college. It would help them feel more comfortable because they would see that there are more students like them. They wouldn’t feel like they would be the only ones. While Maria and other participants spoke highly of the friendships they had formed with fellow students and the importance of these friendships, it appears they have a need to feel even more connected—thus their desire for diversity and interest in seeing “more students like them.” This suggests that the friendships and student camaraderie that exists at community colleges may not be quite enough to solidify a strong sense of connectedness for students of color. Greater diversity among students may still be needed. Other participants expressed a desire for more diversity-related events on campus. Ling emphasized this through an illustration he created, describing each symbol as a representation of a student from a different racial background. In a follow-up discussion with Ling, he stated that more multicultural events on campus would assist students of color in meeting others from similar backgrounds, which would help them feel connected to the college.

Summary This research was undertaken to answer the following central question: How are minority students connected (or not connected) to their community college? The five themes that emerged from this study provide an answer to this question, illustrating where connections exist for the students and where they are lacking. The findings indicate that the participants feel a sense of connection to their instructors and the staff members at NCC as well as to their fellow students. The general feeling of the participants was that the community college instructors and staff are helpful, encouraging, and genuinely interested in their success. Enrollment Management Journal Winter 2011

137


The participants also indicated they feel a sense of camaraderie with fellow students. They’ve established friendships at their community college, and they don’t feel as if they have to hang out with certain groups. There seems to be a general feeling of unity among the students. While these were two prevalent themes, the findings also revealed that although the participants felt connected to college instructors, staff members, and students, they still felt a need for more diversity on campus. Some students cited an interest in diversity-related topics in their classes as well as having more multicultural events. Also, there was a clear desire for more instructors and students from diverse backgrounds. This corroborates other research showing the benefits for minority students of being on college campuses with diverse faculty and diverse students (DeFour & Hirsch, 1990). For example, Hagedorn et al., (2007) found that Latino community college students who attended campuses with higher numbers of Latino students and faculty experienced greater academic success (i.e. higher GPAs and course completion rates). This study revealed that the majority of the participants did not have a connection with student groups and organizations and the opportunities they provide for involvement. Participants cited a lack of information, impersonal recruiting attempts, and living off-campus as factors that made it difficult for them to become involved in student groups and organizations. Significant foundational research has been conducted on student involvement in campus life and the impact this has on student persistence and retention (Astin, 1984, 1985; Bean, 1980, 1983; Pascarella, Smart, & Ethington, 1986). The findings from this study indicate that the participants were not connected to this aspect of college life, suggesting that further questions could be explored related to this theme. Are the barriers participants experienced unique to the minority community college student experience? Or are they characteristic of the community college student experience in general? Finally, this study illustrates that the environment of the community college played an important role in helping participants feel connected to their institution. The participants described their campus environment as “friendly” and “welcoming”—a place where they felt comfortable. Participants emphasized that the open-door philosophy of the campus made them feel they could go to anyone for assistance. Recent studies reveal the impact that a college’s environment can have on minority student success. For example, in his study

138



on Florida community colleges, Jenkins (2007) found that minority students were more likely to succeed (persist, graduate, and/or transfer) at community colleges where they were made to feel welcome and where there was a “minorityinclusive campus environment” (p. 954).

Future Research More research in this area is needed to further our understanding of the minority student experience at the community college. This study was conducted on one campus of a multicampus community college system. Future research could involve similar explorations across multiple campuses of community colleges. Would community college minority students at other institutions have similar thoughts about their sense of connectedness? What could we learn through continued research into this idea of connectedness? These are questions worthy of further study and consideration. Certain themes that emerged from this study merit further investigation. For example, participants emphasized their interactions and relationships with instructors and staff and how this affected them as students. A deeper understanding is needed about the types of interactions with faculty/staff (informal communication or formal mentoring) that specifically benefit students of color in a community college. In addition, future research could explore the factors that make minority students feel “at home” and “a part of something” at the community college.

{

{

Implications

Without question, the issue of persistence is Community college faculty something that impacts all types of colleges and and staff play an important all types of students. However, since a growing role in fostering a sense of percentage of students of color are entering higher institutional connectedness for students of color. education through the doors of the community college, there are critical implications associated with the issue of persistence of minority students in community colleges. For example, the findings reveal that community college faculty and staff play an important role in fostering a sense of institutional connectedness for students of color. Thus, community college leaders and practitioners can gain valuable insights from this study for adopting practices that will assist minority students in establishing connections with instructors and staff. Enrollment Management Journal Winter 2011

139


This study is valuable for four-year institutional leaders and educators, as well. A greater understanding of how minority students connect (or don’t connect) with their community college will help four-year leaders be better prepared for the kind of programming, policies, and support services they will need to best serve these students after transfer. In addition, because a large percentage of minority students enter higher education through a community college, the success of the transfer function for these students is especially critical. Studies such as this that will help community colleges better serve minority students, propelling them toward graduation. This research also has important implications related to improving the graduation rates of minority students at community colleges. Graduation and attainment rates (for community college students in general) remain a pressing concern. The latest data reported by the National Center for Education Statistics revealed that in 2006, 45% of community college students (after three years of enrollment) left college without completing any type of degree or certificate program (Provasnik & Planty, 2008). Given the large numbers of minority students enrolled in community colleges, there is a need for studies that can inform community college leaders about ways to ensure greater persistence of students of color and increase their graduation rates. This study illuminates important factors that may impact whether minority students attending community colleges will persist in their educational goals. This study gives voice to students of color at the community college, and it reveals first-hand information about students’ feelings of institutional connectedness. Continued research on this topic will allow community college leaders to examine their own institutions and provide the services, policies, and programming that will lead to improved retention rates, increased graduation and transfer rates, and ultimately the success of community college minority students. About the author: Elizabeth Przymus is the Associate Dean of Students at Central Community College–Columbus. Address correspondence to: Elizabeth Przymus, 4500 63rd Street, P.O.B. 1027, Columbus, NE 68601, [email protected]

140



References Astin, A.W. (1984). Student involvement: A developmental theory for higher education. Journal of College Student Personnel, 25, 297–308. Astin, A.W. (1985). Achieving educational excellence. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Astin, A.W. (1993). What matters in college? San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Bean, J. P. (1980). Dropouts and turnover: The synthesis and test of a causal model of student attrition. Research in Higher Education, 12, 155–187. Bean, J. P. (1983). The application of a model of turnover in work organizations to the student attrition process. Review of Higher Education, 12, 155–182. Beatty-Guenter, P. (1994). Sorting, supporting, connecting, and transforming: Retention strategies at community colleges. Community College Journal of Research and Practice, 18(2), 113–129. Blau, J. (1999). Two-year college transfer rates of Black American students. Community College Journal of Research and Practice, 23, 525–531. Boswell, K., & Wilson, C. (2004). Keeping America’s promise: A report on the future of the community college. Denver, CO: Education Commission of the States. Braxton, J. M., Sullivan, A. V. S., & Johnson, R. M., Jr. (1997). Appraising Tinto’s theory of college student departure. In J. C. Smart (Ed.), Higher Education: Handbook of Theory and Research (Vol. XII, pp. 107–164). New York, NY: Agathon Press. Carnevale, A., & Desrochers, D. (2004). Why learning? The value of higher education to society and the individual. In K. Boswell and C. Wilson (Eds.), Keeping America’s Promise: A report on the future of the community college (pp. 39–45). Denver, CO: Education Commission of the States. Cofer, J., & Somers, P. (2001). What influences student persistence at two-year colleges? Community College Review, 29(3), 1–18. Creswell, J. W. (2007). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Creswell, J. W. (2009). Research Design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. DeFour, D. C., & Hirsch, B. J. (1990). The adaptation of Black graduate students: A social network approach. American Journal of Community Psychology, 18, 487–503. DesJardins, S. L., Ahlburg, D. A., & McCall, B. P. (2002). A temporal investigation of factors related to timely degree completion. Journal of Higher Education, 73(5), 555–581. Dougherty, K. (1992). Community colleges and baccalaureate attainment. Journal of Higher Education, 63(2), 188–214. Enrollment Management Journal Winter 2011

141


Dowd, A., & Coury, T. (2006). The effect of loans on the persistence and attainment of community college students. Research in Higher Education, 47(1), 33–62. Greene, T., Marti, C., & McClenney, K. (2008). The effort-outcome gap: Differences for African American and Hispanic community college students in student engagement and academic achievement. Journal of Higher Education, 79(5), 513–539. Grubb, W. N. (1991). The decline of community college transfer rates: Evidence from national longitudinal surveys. Journal of Higher Education, 62(2), 194–222. Hagedorn, L., Chi, W., Cepeda, R., & McLain, M. (2007). An investigation of critical mass: The role of Latino representation in the success of urban community college students. Research in Higher Education, 48(1), 73–91. Halpin, R. L. (1990). An application of the Tinto model to the analysis of freshman persistence in a community college. Community College Review, 17(4), 22–32. Hippensteel, D. G., St. John, E. P., & Starkey, J. B. (1996). Influence of tuition and student aid on within-year persistence by adults in two-year colleges. Community College Journal of Research and Practice, 20, 233–242. James, D. P. (1991). Minority student retention: The Prince George’s community college program. In D. Angel and A. Barrera (Eds.), Rekindling minority enrollment (pp. 57–62). New Directions for Community Colleges, No. 74. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Kern, C. (2000). College choice influences: Urban high school students respond. Community College Journal of Research and Practice, 24, 487–494. Jenkins, D. (2007). Institutional effectiveness and student success: A study of high- and low-impact community colleges. Community College Journal of Research and Practice, 31, 945–962. Lewis, C., & Middleton, V. (2003). African Americans in community colleges: A review of research reported in the community college journal of research and practice: 1990–2000. Community College Journal of Research and Practice, 27, 787–798. Mason, H. (1998). A persistence model for African American male urban community college students. Community College Journal of Research and Practice, 22, 751–760. Mallette, B. I. & Cabrera, A. F. (1991). Determinants of withdrawal behavior: An exploratory study. Research in Higher Education, 32(2), 179–194. McClenney, K. (2004). Keeping America’s promise: Challenges for community colleges. In K. Boswell and C. Wilson (Eds.), Keeping America’s Promise: A report on the future of the community college (pp. 7–20). Denver, CO: Education Commission of the States. Mohammadi, J. (1994). Exploring retention and attrition in a two-year public community College [Research report]. Martinsville, VA: Patrick Henry Community College, Martinsville, VA: Institutional Planning and Research Information Services. Retrieved from http://eric.ed.gov/ PDFS/ED382257.pdf 142



Morgan, D. (1997). Focus groups as qualitative research (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Nora, A. (2000). Reexamining the community college mission. New Expeditions Issues Paper no. 2. Washington, DC: Community College Press. Nora, A., & Cabrera, A. F. (1996). The role of perceptions of prejudice and discrimination on the adjustment of minority students to college. Journal of Higher Education, 67, 119–148. Nora, A. & Rendón, L. I. (1990). Determinants of predisposition to transfer among community college students: A structural model. Research in Higher Education, 31(3), 235–255. Pascarella, E., & Terenzini, P. (1977). Patterns of student-faculty informal interaction beyond the classroom and voluntary freshman attrition. Journal of Higher Education, 48(5), 540–552. Pascarella, E., & Terenzini, P. (1980). Predicting persistence and voluntary drop-out decisions from a theoretical model. Journal of Higher Education, 51, 60–75. Pascarella, E., & Terenzini, P. (1983). Predicting voluntary freshman year persistence/ withdrawal behavior in a residential university: A path analytic validation of Tinto’s model. Journal of Educational Psychology, 75(2), 215–226. Pascarella, E., Duby, P. B., & Iverson, B. K. (1983). A test and re-conceptualization of a theoretical model of college withdrawal in a commuter institution setting. Sociology of Education, 56, 88–100. Pascarella, E. T., Smart, J. C., & Ethington, C. (1986). Long term persistence of two-year college students. Research in Higher Education, 24(1), 47–71. Pope, M. L. (2002). Community college mentoring: Minority student perception. Community College Review, 3(3), 31–45. Price, D. (2004). Defining the gaps: Access and success at America’s community colleges. In K. Boswell & C. Wilson (Eds.), Keeping America’s promise: A report on the future of the community college (pp. 35–38). Denver, CO: Education Commission of the States. Provasnik, S., & Planty, M. (2008). Community colleges: Special supplement to the condition of education 2008. Statistical analysis report. NCES 2008-033, National Center for Education Statistics. Rendón, L. I., & Garza, H. (1996). Closing the gap between two- and four-year institutions. In L. I. Rendón & R. O. Hope (Eds.), Educating a new majority (pp. 289–308). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Spady, W. G. (1970). Dropouts from higher education: An interdisciplinary review and synthesis. Interchange, 1(1), 64–85. Spady, W. G. (1971). Dropouts from higher education: Toward an empirical model. Interchange, 2(3), 38–62.


143


St. John, E. P., & Starkey, J. B. (1994). The influence of costs on persistence by traditional college-age students in community colleges. Community College Journal of Research and Practice, 18, 201–213. St. John, E. P., & Starkey, J. B. (1995). An alternative to net price: Assessing the influence of prices and subsidies on within-year persistence. Journal of Higher Education, 66(2), 156–186. Strauss, L., & Volkwein, J. F. (2004). Predictors of student commitment at two-year and four-year institutions. Journal of Higher Education, 75(2), 203–227. Stromei, L. (2000). Increasing retention and success through mentoring. In S. R. Aragon (Ed.), Beyond access: Methods and models for increasing retention and learning among minority students, (pp. 55–62). New Directions for Community Colleges, No. 112. San Francisco, CA: Jossey Bass. Suarez, A. (2003). Forward transfer: Strengthening the educational pipeline for Latino community college students. Community College Journal of Research and Practice, 27, 95–117. Tierney, W. G. (1992). An anthropological analysis of student participation in college. Journal of Higher Education, 63(6), 603–618. Tinto, V. (1975). Dropout from higher education: A theoretical synthesis of recent research. Review of Educational Research, 45, 89–125. Tinto, V. (1988). Stages of student departure: Reflections on the longitudinal character of student leaving. Journal of Higher Education, 59(4), 438–455. Tinto, V. (1993). Leaving college: Rethinking the causes and cures of student attrition (2nd ed.). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

144


From the Field

Establishing a Tribal College and University Pre-Engineering Partnership Heidi M. Sherick Montana State University

Sheree J. Watson Montana State University

Abstract Tribal Colleges serve an important role in educating American Indian students. Many students want to fulfill general education requirements closer to home at Tribal Colleges and then transfer to a university to earn their four-year degree. Mutually beneficial partnerships must be cultivated to successfully matriculate students from Tribal Colleges to mainstream institutions. Programs at both Tribal Colleges and four-year universities that are focused on student success can serve as effective enrollment management efforts. The College of Engineering at Montana State University has been successful in garnering funds and providing support to promote, engage, educate, and, most importantly, graduate American Indians. Building relationships with Tribal Colleges throughout Montana has proved to be a crucial element in these efforts. This article outlines effective programs developed to increase the success of transfer students, especially American Indians, between two-year colleges and Montana State University.

The National Science Foundation (NSF) Directorate of Engineering and the Directorate of Education and Human Resources’ Tribal Colleges and Universities Program (TCUP) catalyzed a process to develop a national model to create pre-engineering and engineering partnerships between Tribal Colleges and Universities (TCUs) and mainstream universities. Some of the issues and potential challenges identified in relation to American Indian participation in engineering and associated with developing pre-engineering at TCUs include: • Low numbers of American Indians who enter engineering disciplines and low retention of American Indians in engineering colleges • Lack of prerequisite academic preparation of American Indian students • Limited faculty and resources • Low numbers of science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) students at TCUs 146


Establishing a Tribal College and University Pre-Engineering Partnership

TCU and mainstream institution faculty have identified key strategic elements that must be incorporated into an adaptable pre-engineering model: • Student should be organized in cohorts, as these are effective for retention and student matriculation • Stronger support programs at mainstream universities must be developed using formal articulation agreements • Mainstream faculty and staff must be engaged early in the transfer process Specifically, seven key areas were identified by the NSF workgroup as needed on some level in order to have successful pre-engineering degree programs. The seven essential components for STEM success are as follows: 1. Precollege or pipelining initiatives 2. Student support 3. Undergraduate research 4. Faculty development 5. Curriculum development 6. Physical infrastructure development 7. Linkages to mainstream institutions, graduate schools, and employment initiatives Dr. Tim Olson, a faculty member at Salish Kootenai College, outlined key success factors for building a pre-engineering program. He pointed to the need for senior administration and faculty leaders’ commitment to the goal of developing engineering programs. He also spoke about designing curriculum to mesh with specific main transfer institution partners. Grant funding was highlighted as a requirement for program startup and maintenance through the early years. Dr. Olson argued that because student demand does not happen automatically, the careful recruitment of faculty is vital for successful student recruitment and retention. His final point was that it takes time to build quality programs and student interest. Dr. Olson urged mainstream institutions and partner two-year colleges to be patient through the process. Montana State University (MSU) is a four-year institution located near Tribal Colleges that has consistently graduated American Indian students in engineering. The College of Engineering at MSU has found success in Enrollment Management Journal Winter 2011

147

Heidi M. Sherick, Sheree J. Watson

establishing relationships with two-year colleges in Montana primarily through the Designing Our Community (DOC) program and other related grant activities. The DOC program builds mutually beneficial relationships between Tribal Colleges and four-year partner institutions through several steps. The model involves efforts from the four-year institution as well as efforts from the Tribal College and includes: • Outreach by faculty and graduate students • Collaboration in curriculum development • Providing scholarships for transfer students • Formalization of transfer worksheets • Facilitation of Summer Bridge programs • Development of retention/mentor support programs As outlined in this article, the combination of preparation and communication at the Tribal College with acceptance and support at the four-year college promotes transfer student success. Effective collaboration across multiple areas on campus is also important.

Background Montana State University–Bozeman (MSU) serves as the flagship campus of the Montana State University System, with other campuses in Billings, Havre, and Great Falls. With four campuses, eight agricultural research centers, 60 extension locations and numerous outreach and continuing education programs, MSU continues to honor its land grant heritage by providing a vast range of services to all citizens. As the state’s only land grant institution, MSU is dedicated to providing access to education for all of Montana’s residents. The land grant mission establishes reason and significance to programs that support American Indians students at MSU. The university’s role and scope states that “Montana State University, as part of its land grant mission, takes an active interest in enhancing the educational and professional opportunities for all protected classes and has a special dedication to developing progressive options for Montana’s American Indian population.” MSU’s former President, Geoff Gamble, identified strengthening relationships with the American Indian community as one of his highest institutional priorities. 148



Further, Gamble set ambitious goals for increasing American Indian student enrollment to 7–8% of the undergraduate population. Training American Indian students in engineering and technology accords with the mission of MSU. Students trained in technological fields can provide reservation communities with much needed expertise. The College of Engineering has developed programs, including partnerships with two-year colleges, that provide a pathway for American Indian students to achieve training in engineering and technology, finish bachelor’s degrees in computer science, engineering, and technology fields, and provide a network of opportunities to enter the corporate world or return to their reservations. The College of Engineering at MSU has targeted the enhancement of American Indian education as a top priority. American Indians comprise 6.4% of the total population and almost 11% of the K–12 population in the state of Montana. American Indians are a young demographic, with an average age of less than 25 (U.S. Census Bureau, 2000). Montana is one of only six states in which American Indians exceed 5% of the total postsecondary enrollment (Pavel et. al., 2005). The state has seven Tribal Colleges and three community colleges, most of which are several hours to a long day’s drive from MSU. American Indian students are more likely to complete college if they begin their studies close to home. Thus, we have aimed to nurture our relationship with the two-year colleges to help prepare students to study engineering and ease the transfer process. Students from rural areas benefit from attending a local tribal or community college for the first two years. They can stay close to their families and communities, which is particularly important for American Indian students. By starting their academic careers at a Tribal College, 9 out of 10 Indian students will complete their course of study (American Indian College Fund, 2006). Tribal and community colleges also cost much less than four-year colleges: Some Tribal Colleges are free for tribal members who are recent high school graduates. Tribal Colleges combine personal attention with cultural relevance to meet the educational needs of their students and the broader needs of the tribal community. According to the American Indian Higher Education Consortium (AIHEC), “Tribal Colleges have a dual mission, (1) to provide excellence in education and to prepare their students for employment in the 21st century


149


and (2) [to] provide a place where American Indian language, culture, and the traditional wisdom of the Elders are infused into the curricula and extracurricular activities” (American Indian Higher Education Consortium [AIHEC], 1999). A primary goal of Tribal Colleges is to provide higher education for American Indian students without forcing them to assimilate into mainstream White culture. Montana has seven Tribal Community Colleges, one on each of the seven American Indian reservations serving more than twelve different tribal nations. Within the last few years, three of these Tribal Colleges in Montana have developed active pre-engineering programs. The College of Engineering at MSU has had success in the past several years in regard to increasing community and support for American Indian students. For example: • The enrollment of American Indian students in the College of Engineering has increased steadily from 1.6% in 2000 to 2.1% in 2010. • Forty-nine American Indian students have graduated with a B.S. from the College of Engineering since 2000. • American Indian students participating in the DOC program were retained at a higher rate (72%) than American Indian students as a group on campus. • Since the inception of the DOC program in 2003, enrollment of American Indian students in the College of Engineering has doubled. •

American Indians make up less than 0.5% of the engineers in the U.S. labor force (Chubin, May, & Babco, 2005). According to the American Society of Engineering Education, MSU ranked in the top ten institutions for graduating American Indians in fields of engineering in 2008 and 2009.

Designing Our Community (DOC) In December 2001 the MSU College of Engineering was awarded a three-year grant from the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation to support the DOC Program. The DOC Program has enhanced outreach, recruitment, and retention to increase the number of American Indians who graduate from MSU with engineering or computer science degrees. The College of Engineering targeted the enhancement of American Indian education as a top priority. The college’s vision was to become firmly established as the premier institution of choice for American Indian students in engineering, engineering technology, and computer science in

150



the northern Rockies and the northern Great Plains regions and to be a successful partner with American Indian communities in developing the future workforce. Specifically, the Hewlett Foundation grant allowed us to provide statewide outreach to middle schools and high schools in American Indian communities. It enabled us to build relationships with teachers, counselors, and administrators within Montana, which increased the knowledge of the fields of engineering and computer science and the steps involved in preparing for college and these types of careers. Students have directly benefited from these activities. The three primary goals of the DOC Program have been to: Goal 1: Increase the motivation and pre-entry academic preparation of American Indian students. Goal 2: Help shape the engineering, engineering technology, and computer science workforce by increasing the number of American Indian students graduating from the College of Engineering. Goal 3: Improve access to quality engineering and technology to rural and underserved populations by returning highly educated professionals to these communities.

The success of the DOC program has spawned related efforts that have helped build partnerships with Tribal Colleges, including the Providing Resources for Engineering Preparedness (PREP) program and the Enhancing Access Scholarships in Engineering & Computer Science (EASE) Transfer Program.

Providing Resources for Engineering Preparedness The Providing Resources for Engineering Preparedness (PREP) program funded by the United States Department of Education (under the Minority Science and Engineering Improvement Program [MSEIP]) enhanced partnerships with Tribal Colleges through faculty networking workshops and the creation of transfer agreements between institutions. These agreements outline classes that can be transferred to each academic program in the College of Engineering from the two-year college. The PREP program has made transferring into engineering and computer science programs easier for students. In addition, PREP provided technical training for Tribal College faculty through workshops. Enrollment Management Journal Winter 2011

151


The PREP grant’s target group was two-year college students, and two-year math, science, and engineering faculty. The objectives of the program were to (1) increase the visibility of MSU College of Engineering programs at tribal and community colleges; (2) increase the understanding of what engineers do and of available career opportunities; (3) enhance the connection that the College of Engineering faculty, staff, and students have with Montana tribal and community college students, faculty, and staff; and (4) better prepare tribal and community college students to study engineering at MSU, and, therefore, increase American Indian student completion of engineering degree programs. Twenty-one faculty members from the College of Engineering participated in PREP events over two years. PREP activities reached 61 Tribal College faculty and program staff along with 336 Tribal College students. Representatives from all seven Tribal Colleges and the three community colleges participated in PREP grant activities. The first year was dedicated to making connections with the state’s two-year schools, initially by visiting most of the schools and following up by inviting staff and faculty from those schools to a transfer workshop at MSU. During the workshop, articulation worksheets were completed so that students would have a better guide for courses to complete prior to transfer to engineering at MSU. We worked toward offering an introductory engineering course at every school, and to further our progress toward this goal we provided training and guidance on content for an introductory course for two-year college faculty. The PREP workshops proved to be a crucial facet of the partnership efforts. The value of the workshop extended beyond the day and a half the partner institutions visited the MSU campus. During the actual workshop an overview of the College of Engineering was provided to give participants a greater understanding of the engineering, engineering technology, and computer science programs. An existing successful pre-engineering program from Salish Kootenai College was highlighted and discussed, outlining strategies, lessons learned, and key success factors. A panel of current transfer students provided meaningful discussion on the realities of being a transfer student. In the spirit of emphasizing the mutuality of the partnership, we facilitated a panel of MSU College of Engineering transfer advisors who shared their experiences, followed by a panel of Tribal/two-year College faculty and staff who spoke about the challenges in transition from their perspectives. The crafting of transfer 152



articulation agreements was incredibly significant, however; the camaraderie and informal exchanges during meal times and breaks was immeasurably important. After the completion of the workshop, several conversations have taken place via e-mail and phone calls. It is important that key personnel have “go-to” people at the respective institutions for follow-up and maintenance of the partnership. Enhancing Access Scholarships in Engineering and Computer Science Montana State University’s College of Engineering was awarded an NSF Scholarships in Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (S-STEM) grant. The project, the Enhancing Access Scholarships in Engineering and Computer Science (EASE) Transfer Program, was a five-year grant (from 2006 through 2011) awarding scholarships and support programs for transfer students attending MSU in the College of Engineering. The overall goal of EASE was to help diminish financial and academic barriers to student success in engineering and computer science degree programs. The project benefited a broad spectrum of students; however, because of Montana’s unique demographics and geography, the EASE scholarships especially benefited Montana American Indians. Specific objectives were as follows: • Increase the number of academically talented, financial-aid-eligible students who transfer to MSU College of Engineering programs from Montana Tribal Colleges and community colleges • Increase the number of transfer students from Montana tribal and community colleges who graduate with engineering and computer science degrees The EASE program has collaborated with Montana’s two and four-year colleges to promote scholarships for students transferring into majors in the College of Engineering. In particular, EASE program staff visited and communicated with the following Montana Tribal Colleges: Little Big Horn College, Chief Dull Knife College, Stone Child College, and Blackfeet Community College. The EASE program coordinator also traveled to the American Indian Science and Engineering Society (AISES) conferences to promote programs to recruit, retain, and provide professional development to American Indian science and engineering students. Additionally, recruitment of students for the EASE scholarships has been accomplished by leveraging efforts of the DOC and PREP Enrollment Management Journal Winter 2011

153


programs. Scholarships have been awarded based on two-year college faculty recommendations, student academic progress, a statement of interest and goals, and individual financial aid eligibility. Recognizing that students recruited into engineering and computer science programs not only need financial support, but also academic support, EASE scholarship recipients received this support through a Bridge program, described below, prior to their first semester at MSU, along with supplemental instruction in math and other high-failure-rate courses. Another component of support has been in the form of community-building structures and activities. The Bridge program helped students begin to feel at home in the College of Engineering and connected them with each other as a cohort of students. Summer Bridge Program The EASE scholarships help diminish financial barriers for students; however, students also need academic support to succeed. A Bridge program for EASE transfer scholars new to MSU and the college allows these students to get a head start on their transition to MSU and their engineering and computer science programs. The summer orientation Bridge program for American Indian students is designed to (1) provide students with a welcome and an introduction to the American Indian community within the college and the campus; (2) help them build their campus, academic, and community connections; (3) encourage mentoring, support systems, and networking within the engineering academic community; (4) provide basic tools and brush up to help overcome common experiential barriers to academic success; and (5) give new students a head start to their college experience, infusing them with confidence and foreknowledge of the college engineering experience. One of the most important benefits of the Bridge orientation program, as reported by past student participants, is the connection students make with each other. Students also have described an increased awareness of campus resources and an ability to navigate their student accounts as highly valuable and most likely to be of benefit to them. During the Bridge program, EASE transfer scholars develop as a cohort and learn about requirements for their scholarships, including participation in supplemental instruction (SI) coursework and the college’s Engineering Minority Program (EMPower) Student Center. The EMPower Student Center provides a place for students to meet in study groups and just “hang out.” Scholarship recipients have 154



been required to attend study groups and monthly networking and mentoring events to further build their connection to the College of Engineering. One of the main reasons for the EASE program success in the college has been a student space located in the middle of MSU’s engineering complex. This space, the EMPower Student Center, has been of vital importance in developing a learning community among our students, particularly women and underrepresented minorities. The student center has a small computer center, copying and faxing capabilities, a meeting place for student groups, and a tutor room where students can receive help from fellow students. The student center has helped build community among cohorts of students quickly. New EASE transfer students have been introduced to the student center during the Bridge program. EASE scholars have used the room to meet with SI instructors outside of their assigned course. EASE scholars also have mingled with upper-division students in the EMPower Student Center in more of an informal mentoring network. Building a smaller community within the larger population of the university makes large schools feel a little smaller and has made the transition for a new student easier. Because of the success of the EASE transfer Bridge program, the College of Engineering decided to leverage its efforts to include all transfer students entering the college. The Transfer Student Luncheon includes guidance through student (electronic) accounts, a panel of current transfer students providing advice, information about the scholarship application process, career week information (internships and employment) including a talk by our Director of Career Services, student organization information, and finally, introduction to key staff members such as department transfer advisors as well as Dean’s Office staff. Supplemental Instruction/PASS EASE funding helped implement supplemental instruction courses for the first time at MSU in 2007. SI courses, or Peer Assisted Study Sessions (PASS) courses, have been offered concurrently with math, computer science, chemistry, physics, and engineering courses that have low pass rates for transfer students. SI courses have provided a cohort study group for EASE scholars and have helped strengthen study skills for future math, science, and engineering courses. This connection with peers and strengthening of study skills is helping to retain EASE scholars in engineering and computer science programs. Enrollment Management Journal Winter 2011

155


PASS instructors (upper-division engineering students) are recruited early in the academic year and go through training to become PASS leaders. They are required to work for ten to twelve hours per week, including attending the course for which they are providing PASS, holding available hours in the EMPower Student Center, and preparing for SI sessions. Two of the EASE scholarship recipients currently serve as the PASS instructors. Not only have each of these students benefited from participating as students in SI, the opportunity has provided excellent teaching experience as both of them plan to continue on in graduate school. This is the only program at MSU to implement SI offering to help with traditionally difficult courses with high failure rates. A major indirect benefit of the grant has been the ability for the EASE program to leverage other campus resources and capitalize on similar efforts. The College of Engineering’s EMPower has matched some funding to cover an additional PASS course. In addition, after a presentation and proposal to the university retention committee, two sections of SI were funded through a general university funding source. MSU has documented the retention success associated with supplemental instruction.

Established Relationships Because of the continued work with Tribal Colleges in Montana, the College of Engineering is collaborating with three of these colleges to help enhance their ability to offer pre-engineering courses. Blackfeet Community College, located on the Blackfeet reservation, received funding to hire an engineering faculty member as well as development funds to design courses for a two-year pre-Civil engineering program. The program has kicked off with an introduction to engineering course. Collaboration has also occurred with grant proposals at Chief Dull Knife College and Stone Child College to help develop curriculum to enhance and expand current coursework and further programs in pre-engineering. The programs highlighted in this article have served to strengthen relationships with MSU and Tribal Colleges in Montana and have allowed partnerships on developing pre-engineering programs at two Tribal Colleges to date. For the past few years the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission provided funding to get faculty and administration together from eight Tribal Colleges across the U.S. to discuss developing pre-engineering programs at their institutions. 156



To date the working group has meet several times and three Tribal Colleges were funded to begin work on developing pre-engineering programs in Civil Engineering Technology, Geospatial Engineering Technology, and Environmental Pre-engineering. Blackfeet Community College was the only Tribal College in Montana to receive initial funds to develop a civil engineering technology program. As part of their program they partnered with MSU to create an introduction to engineering course and a physics course for 2010–2011. Blackfeet Community College anticipates that their two-year program will be online by fall 2012. Chief Dull Knife College, on the Northern Cheyenne reservation, is also part of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission working group and has been collaborating with MSU to develop a two-year civil engineering technology program. Faculty from MSU and Chief Dull Knife College submitted a Tribal College Undergraduate Program grant early last year that was not funded but laid the ground work for developing a degree program with resource sharing between institutions. MSU will work together with Chief Dull Knife College to develop the pre-engineering program. Developing collaborations between a four-year institution and Tribal Colleges is not a well-driven path and takes patience and trust building. The time and effort to develop relationships between institutions are worth it however, as both benefit from the relationship.

Lessons Learned Early in the process of trying to establish effective programs, staff and faculty from MSU’s College of Engineering travelled to Tribal Colleges and reservation communities at least once a year and usually once a semester. It was important to build relationships and for people in the reservation communities to be able to “put a face with a name” when dealing with the university. Over time, through consistency and reliability, trust was built between the individuals engaged in the process. The effort to travel has been one of the most crucial lessons learned; it shows our interest and investment in the partnership. Additionally, the importance of a consistent, familiar advocate or key contact is vital to the partnership process. After five or six years of travelling to the reservation communities, collaborators started to pursue MSU and asked to work on projects together. In the realm of student support, providing academic assistance, especially in math and science, is an important element for transfer student success. The PASS supplemental instruction model at MSU has proven to be an effective Enrollment Management Journal Winter 2011

157


way to help the students who enter our programs with low competencies in math and science. Building a cohort of students is also very effective in giving transfer students a sense of belonging and a support system away from their home communities. In our experience, continuing students who are well established in their departments have the opportunity for scholarship funds, and highly recruited prospective freshmen are offered scholarship funds, but rarely do institutions invest scholarship funds specifically for transfer students. It is important to provide financial support for these students and actively recruit transfer students from the two-year programs, the way prospective students are recruited from high schools. Finally, results do not happen overnight. In order to establish solid partnerships, much time and effort is required. Administrators, faculty, and staff at both the four-year institutions and the two-year institutions must be patient and must try to provide as much consistency as possible while cultivating the crucial partnerships. About the authors: Heidi M. Sherick is the assistant dean, College of Engineering and director of the Engineering Minority Program (EmPower) at Montana State University. Sheree J. Watson is the interim director of the American Indian research Opportunities (AIRO) program at Montana State University. Address correspondence to: Heidi M. Sherick, 112 Mineral Ave, Bozeman, MT 59718, [email protected]

158



References American Indian College Fund. (2006). Retrieved from www.collegefund.org American Indian Higher Education Consortium. (1999). Tribal Colleges: An introduction. Alexandria, VA: Author. Chubin, D. E., May, G. S., & Babco, E. S. (2005). Diversifying the engineering workforce. Journal of Engineering Education 94(1), 73–86. Pavel, D. M., Skinner, R. R., Farris, E., Cahalan, M., Tippeconnic, J., & Stein, W. (2005). American Indians and Alaska Natives in Postsecondary Education [Electronic version]. Education Statistics Quarterly, 1(1), 1–10. Phelps, S. (2005, December). Engineering education in the nation’s Tribal Colleges and Universities. Powerpoint presented at the National Science Foundation Directorate for Engineering Advisory Committee Meeting, Arlington, VA. Retrieved from http://www.nsf.gov/ attachments/106803/public/SP_TCUPEngAdComPrsntMay06FNL4.pdf U.S. Census Bureau. (2000). The American Indian and Alaska Native Population: 2000, U.S. Census Bureau 2000 Brief (Publication No. C2KBR/01-15). Retrieved from http://www.census.gov/population/www/cen2000/briefs.html


159

Access to College Education (ACE): Metropolitan Community College’s Intervention for At-Risk Students Cynthia K. Gooch Metropolitan Community College

Abstract Successful intervention initiatives, such as the TRIO programs, are providing assistance to first-generation, low-income, and/or minority students. These programs often have enrollment caps and are not able to serve all potential participants in areas with lower minority high school graduation rates, higher poverty rates, or higher crime rates. The opportunity to serve greater numbers was a primary reason for the Access to a College Education (ACE) Program at Metropolitan Community College. Although funding has ended, the participation rates and preliminary results appear to justify program existence. The example of this pilot program can be valuable to others who wish to assist eligible first-generation, low-income high school graduates gain access to a college education.

Introduction and Background Successful intervention programs are providing assistance to first-generation, low-income, and/or minority students. The TRIO programs funded by The U.S. Department of Education are excellent examples. Programs are characterized by carefully planned programming, proper utilization of resources, and regularly applied evaluation tools. When these components are coupled with a caring staff, students who may not otherwise attend college are enrolling, persisting, and graduating. This is good news. For many high school graduates, however, college attendance is a dream deferred due to complications such as: • Being low income, • Having a disability, • Coming from a minority background, 160


Access to College Education (ACE)

• Speaking English as their second language, • Being the single parent of a child, • Having earned a high school equivalency diploma, • Being financially independent from their parents, • Delaying entry into postsecondary education after high school, and • Attending college closer to home. Obviously, countless communities have college prep programs, such as the aforementioned TRIO programs, in which thousands of students participate and reap the educational, cultural, and economical rewards of a college education. Nevertheless, communities exist that, while having the advantage of precollege projects and similar services, have substantially greater need than the programs provide. Urban communities have large populations of schoolaged children with high poverty and low high school graduation rates, many of which are from an economically challenged environment and are of a minority background. These students are in need of more programs that prepare them for the possibility of attending college and the subsequent profits from attaining at least a bachelor’s degree. Most students can benefit from precollege programs that prepare them for a successful transition to college. Average or slightly above average students can slip through the cracks because they are neither honors students nor demand the attention of a guidance counselor through disciplinary or academic problems. Low-income, first-generation, and minority status may be indicators of increased high school drop out rates, but are not analogous with ability and desire. Omaha, Nebraska, an urban Midwest community, has longstanding, successful precollege programs that prepare some students for college. More often than not, these students are high school graduates who enroll in college and subsequently graduate. Yet, a substantial number of academically above-average to average, out-of-the-information pipeline, low-income students who need more attention paid to their postsecondary education plans. Routinely, programs such as TRIO have enrollment caps of approximately 200 students. This cap, along with low minority high school graduation rates, high poverty rates, and high crime rates, precipitated the initiation of the Access to a College Education (ACE) Program at Metropolitan Community College (MCC). Enrollment Management Journal Winter 2011

161

Cynthia K. Gooch

Why Such a Program in the Heartland? The inequality of the ethnic split is apparent in every part of Omaha’s social and economic structure. The annual median income of Blacks in Omaha is 14% less than that of the national average for Blacks; therefore, if you are Black and live in Omaha, you are more likely to live in poverty than your White peers. If you live in a minority community, you are likely to pay more for credit than Whites. For the employed, the median income for Blacks is $31,969, versus $50,673 for White families. In Omaha, over 30% of African American families live in poverty, compared to 10% of White families. Of all children in the Omaha area, 20% live in poverty, while 40% of all Black children live in poverty (U.S. Census 2006). The college-going rate of inner city and minority students is certainly related to graduation rates. Local data suggest that African American students in Omaha have a slim chance of graduating from high school. Figure 1 displays percentages of Nebraska graduates and dropouts in 2009. figure 1 | Percentage of Graduates or Dropouts

100 80 60

83.5 54

40 20 0

1.7 1.1 White Asian/Pacific (non-Hispanic) Islander

8.3

20.1

Hispanic

5.4

1.1 4.6

20.2

Native Black American (non-Hispanic)

% of 2008–2009 public high school graduates % of dropouts from the class of 2008–2009 Data Source: Nebraska Department of Education and the National Student Clearinghouse Enrollment Records, April 7, 2009, from the Nebraska Higher Education Progress report, Nebraska’s Coordination Commission for Postsecondary Education, March 2010

Figure 2 displays continuation rates of Nebraska graduates by income status and gender.

162



figure 2 | Continuation Rates of Nebraska Graduates by Income Status and Gender

Total graduates Female Male

69 71.9 66.1

Non-low-income graduates Female Male

74.1 77.3 70.9

Low-income graduates Female Male

52 55 48.7 0.00%

100.00%

Data Source: Nebraska Department of Education and the National Student Clearinghouse Enrollment Records, April 7, 2009, from the Nebraska Higher Education Progress report, Nebraska’s Coordination Commission for Postsecondary Education, March 2010

Access to a College Education Far too often, community leaders and educators in Omaha encounter youth who have academic promise and post high school plans that are not well established. Nebraska has lost countless talented Omaha youth who consider out-of-state colleges to break the rotation of poverty in their environment or to escape surroundings contaminated with homicides of classmates and contemporaries and high-volume drug trafficking. The Access to a College Education (ACE) program is managed through the Nebraska Coordinating Commission on Postsecondary Education. Its focus is to improve college access by targeting underrepresented students, particularly low-income, first-generation students and English language learners. The twoyear ACE pilot program was implemented at MCC in 2008–2009 and targeted cohorts of at-risk high school students. Utilizing informational workshops offered on the campus of MCC via one-onone or group meetings, the ACE program provided information and technical assistance to economically challenged and underrepresented students and their families to make attending college within reach. The ACE program (a) arranged and provided accompaniment for students to college fairs and to college visits within the state; (b) prepared students for college entrance exams; (c) facilitated parents’ completion of the Free Application for Federal Student Aid (FAFSA); Enrollment Management Journal Winter 2011

163

Cynthia K. Gooch

and (d) provided counselor trainings on working more effectively with first generation, minority, and low-income students and parents. The program reinforced academic and social behaviors that promote college enrollment through differential reinforcement by using a token economy that allowed for the purchase of college school supplies at the completion of each semester. Figures 3 and 4 display information about ACE participants in 2009 at MCC by race and gender, respectively. figure 3 | 2009 ACE Participants by Ethnicity

80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 African American

Caucasian

Latino

Asian

figure 4 | 2009 ACE Participants by Gender

80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 Female

Male

The majority of ACE participants were African American (72.5%), followed by 15.4% Latino/a. More females (n = 68) than males (n = 32) participated in the 2009 program. Minimal assistance was provided in the 2010–2011 year, and ACE did not expect to be funded at all beyond January 2011. 164



Five Objectives The program objectives are as follows: • To increase low-income and underrepresented students’ and families’ knowledge of scholarships, financial literacy, and financing options for college, the college application process, and career planning • To provide guidance in the college application process and workshops that focus on college success strategies and a successful transition to college • To increase the number of underrepresented students who apply for or enroll in a postsecondary education institution in Nebraska • To improve outreach to underrepresented students and families, targeting first-generation students and students who may be at risk of not enrolling in or completing college • To provide training for high school guidance counselors for working more successfully with low-income, minority, and first-generation students, parents, and families

Major Outcomes Much success was garnered through the ACE pilot program. Survey results indicated that 100% of the ACE participants in year one and in year two and their parents/guardians were more knowledgeable about college readiness than before the workshop series. Parents/guardians expressed gratitude for the assistance their students received. Some of the parent comments included: • Provided access to financial aid information they would not have been aware of, • Distributed information on how to take college entrance exams, • Afforded opportunity for the participant to be the first in their family to go to college, • Presented the opportunity for the participant to be a role model to siblings/ other family members, • Shared helpful materials that the participant used to serve as role models to siblings/other family members, and • Shared helpful materials that the participants can use in the future (e.g., information on becoming a master student, writing a resume, and college housing). Enrollment Management Journal Winter 2011

165

Cynthia K. Gooch

Achievements included: • 91% of the participants took a college placement exam, • 95% of the participants applied to or enrolled in college, and • 85% of the participants completed financial aid or scholarship applications and forms.

Lessons Learned • The digital divide among households still exists. • Our program provided Internet access to parents when students were in sessions and when students needed college computer access to complete the FAFSA, college admission applications and scholarship applications. • More programs are needed; however, there was benefit in high school senior cohorts experiencing similar events at the same time. • A la carte workshop options should be made available to community members not officially enrolled in the program. • Students and parents benefited from being involved in a cohort group or learning community complete with educational information, cultural events, celebrations, and a supportive environment. •

Considering a parent involvement group may further engage parents of lowincome youth in the college planning process. They could photograph special events, serve on an end-of-year celebration planning committee, suggest parent workshops, research and provide parenting information to peers, etc.

Program Future No funding for the ACE program existed beyond January 2011. Community demographics, observations of effectiveness during the pilot program, and participation rates appear to justify program existence and support the need for a full-time ACE program and coordinator or equivalent interventions. It is our hope that the publication of this article will incite others to develop similar programming to assist eligible first-generation, low-income high school graduates gain access to a college education.

166



About the author: Cynthia K. Gooch is the associate vice president for equity and diversity at Metropolitan Community College. Address correspondence to: Dr. Cynthia K. Gooch, PO Box 3777, Omaha, NE 68103-0777, [email protected]

References The Nebraska Higher Education Progress Report, Nebraska’s Coordinating Commission for Postsecondary Education. (2010). Lincoln, NE: Nebraska Department of Education. United States Census Bureau. (2006). Higher education: Institutions and enrollment, college enrollment-summary by sex, race and Hispanic origin. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office. Retrieved from http://www.census.gov/statab


167

Upcoming Issues

Acknowledgements The Enrollment Management Journal: Student Access, Finance, and Success in Higher Education originated as the idea and initiative of the Council for Student Financial Success in Higher Education. Established in 1997, the Council for Student Financial Success in Higher Education is a consortium of higher education professionals whose objective is to develop default aversion and debt management initiatives that promote success in higher education. Other research publications available through TG • Ready, Willing, and Unable: How Financial Aid Barriers Obstruct Bachelor Degree Attainment in Texas • A Clear and Present Danger to Institutional and Student Success • Engaging Faculty and Staff: An Imperative for Fostering Retention, Advising, and Smart Borrowing • Effective Practices in Student Success • Breaking New Ground: The Texas Historically Black Colleges and Universities Default Management Consortium • Crisis Averted or Merely Postponed? Examining Long-Term Cohort Default Rates, Resolving Defaults, and Curing Delinquencies • Opening the Doors to Higher Education: Perspectives on the Higher Education Act 40 Years Later • First-Generation College Students: A Literature Review • Retention and Persistence in Postsecondary Education • Community College Faculty at Work • Education on the Installment Plan: The Rise of Student Loan Indebtedness in Texas • How to Graduate High-Risk Students: Lessons from Successful For-Profit Colleges and Schools in Texas • P-16 Strategic Planning: A Texas Pilot — What Was Planned and What Actually Happened • Paths to the Baccalaureate: A Study of Transfer and Native Students at a Hispanic Serving Institution • Profile of Minority-Serving Institutions in Texas • The Way the Future Was

Future Issues of Enrollment Management Journal The Enrollment Management Journal concludes with this issue. TG will continue to host EMJ online with all content available there. Additional information can be found on the EMJ website at www.tgslc.org/emj or by contacting the associate editor and supervisor. Elizabeth H. Stanley [email protected]

What Enrollment Management Structures Reveal about Institutional Priorities Scott Andrew Schulz, Jerome A. Lucido

Winter 2011

Volume 5 | Issue 4

Enrollment Management Journal:

How Does Money Help? Students’ Perceptions of the Effect of a Monetary Incentive on Completion of a Summer Bridge Program Heather D. Wathington, Joshua Pretlow, Claire Mitchell

International Graduate Students: How Do They Choose Academic Majors? Jia Ren, Linda Serra Hagedorn, Michael T. McGill Do Minority Students Ever Become Connected to Community Colleges? Elizabeth R. Przymus Establishing a Tribal College and University Pre-Engineering Partnership Heidi M. Sherick, Sheree J. Watson Access to College Education (ACE): Metropolitan Community College’s Intervention for At-Risk Students Cynthia K. Gooch

© 2011 Texas Guaranteed Student Loan Corporation To order additional copies, contact TG Communications at [email protected] 1107-53215

VOLUME 5 | ISSUE 4

A publication of TG and the University of Nebraska–Lincoln

Student Access, Finance, and Success in Higher Education

Enrollment Management Journal

Taking the Family to College: Understanding the Role of Family in the Resiliency of Hispanic Students at a Predominantly White Midwest University Monique Mendoza, Jeni Hart, Stephen Whitney

Winter 2011

VOLUME 5 | ISSUE 4