by 2006 (DuBois, Portillo, Rhodes, Silverthorn, and Valentine, 2011). In addition, researchers ...... Building on the success of Big Brothers. Big Sisters of America ...
EXPLORING THE GROUP PROCESSES, DYNAMICS, AND INDIVIDUAL AND COLLECTIVE EXPERIENCES OF ACADEMICALLY AT-RISK, ADOLESCENT LATINO MALES by Louise J. Santiago AMY GASKINS, PhD, Faculty Mentor and Chair THERESE KANAI, PhD, Committee Member GARY McDANIEL, PhD, Committee Member
James Wold, PhD, Interim Dean, School of Education
A Dissertation Presented in Partial Fulfillment Of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy
Capella University March 2016
ProQuest Number: 10096119
All rights reserved INFORMATION TO ALL USERS The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion.
ProQuest 10096119 Published by ProQuest LLC (2016). Copyright of the Dissertation is held by the Author. All rights reserved. This work is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code Microform Edition © ProQuest LLC. ProQuest LLC. 789 East Eisenhower Parkway P.O. Box 1346 Ann Arbor, MI 48106 - 1346
© Louise J Santiago, 2016
Abstract The attitudes of three academically-at-risk, adolescent, Latino males were examined for shifts in attitudes toward school during their participation in a peer support group. Qualitative data were collected via interviews, from participant journals, and through videotapes of the mentor-led support group. The participants had either attended multiple schools, been held back for one or more years of school, or were credit deficient in their progress toward high school graduation. The participants were all non-native English speakers. Results indicated that support group participants gained a deeper understanding of (a) how they could achieve their goals, (b) how to navigate school systems, and (c) how to engage with their teachers to gain the academic support they needed for success. Study participants found the support group to be a place where they were encouraged and supported as students. They reflected that participation in the group gave them tools to persist in their struggles. Further research should be conducted to examine the mentor preparation needed to work with mentees in a support group model rather than the traditional one-on-one mentoring model.
Dedication This dissertation is dedicated to the young men who inspired me through their resilience by staying in school, even when time seemed against them. After five, and sometimes six, years in high school, they succeeded. As I watched these young men pass through the support group and grow both as individuals and as part of their support group community, I knew I was witnessing a phenomenon worth studying. Their candor in sharing their thoughts was humbling. I am grateful for the opportunity to be able to share their perspectives.
iii
Acknowledgments Being a cancer survivor encouraged me to set higher goals and conceive new aspirations that I previously thought were beyond my ability. Dr. Chainarong Limvarapuss gave me a new desire to find ways to contribute to education as a cancer survivor. His meticulous and compassionate medical care extended to my husband. His continuity of care provided the foundation for our continued healing through this traumatic moment in our lives and allowed us to push for something more. My husband, Joe, always the writer, provided moral support when I needed it most. Writing is a lonelier journey than I expected and Joe helped me articulate that struggle. My parents are my perennial source of support and encouragement. This dissertation has been waiting to be written from the moment the 9th grade teacher told my mother that she should not study so hard because she was “just a Mexican.” The words of the boys in this study showed me that while some adults can damage a young person’s school aspirations, others can fan the flame. Much love to Devin Carberry for feeding the sparks within a group of young men, and for Ashanti Branch for taking the kindling and growing a movement. My editor, Dr. Mary Fusco, became more than my editor, she became my cheerleader, pushing me and encouraging me when I floundered. There are many other women who shared and supported me on this journey, whose compassion supported my persistence. Dr. Pamela Redmond, Tamarah Tilos, Mary Kelly, LaDietrich Miller, and Dr. JoRie Antuna, all current or future PhDs, were my virtual PhD support group. Thank
iv
you to Dr. Adrienne Gibson, Dr. Annie Johnston, and Dr. Justin Heard who provided great feedback in the development of my interview questions. Finally, thank you to my ancestors, the Santos and my Madrinas, Sandra Bofill and Cathy Butler, who walked with me on this difficult journey and continually encouraged me to find the way to completion.
v
Table of Contents Acknowledgments
iv
List of Tables
ix
CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION
1
Introduction to the Problem
1
Background, Context, and Theoretical Framework
3
Statement of the Problem
6
Purpose of the Study
7
Research Question
8
Rationale, Relevance, and Significance
8
Nature of the Study
13
Definition of Terms
14
Assumptions, Limitations, and Delimitations
14
Organization of the Remainder of the Study
15
CHAPTER 2. LITERATURE REVIEW
16
Introduction to the Literature Review
16
Theoretical Framework
17
Review of Research Literature and Methodological Literature
25
Chapter 2 Summary
43
CHAPTER 3. METHODOLOGY
49
Introduction
49
Statement of the Problem
50
Research Question
51 vi
Research Methodology
51
Research Design
52
Population and Sampling Procedure
54
Sources of Data
55
Credibility, Dependability, and Transferability
58
Reliability
60
Data Collection Procedures
61
Data Analysis Procedures
64
Ethical Considerations
66
Summary
67
CHAPTER 4. DATA ANALYSIS AND RESULTS
68
Introduction
68
Descriptive Data
69
Data Analysis
72
Results
74
Summary
90
CHAPTER 5. CONCLUSIONS AND DISCUSSION
91
Introduction
91
Summary of the Study
91
Summary of Findings and Conclusions
92
Limitations
94
Recommendations
95
Recommendations for Future Research
95
vii
Recommendations for Practice
97
Implications
99
Conclusion
100
REFERENCES
101
APPENDIX A. INTERVIEW PROTOCOL
110
APPENDIX B. JOURNAL PROMPTS
112
viii
List of Tables Table 1. Participant Demographics
70
Table 2. Journal Responses: What Participants Like About School
76
Table 3. Journal Response: What Participants Dislike About School
77
Table 4. Journal Response: Describe the Support Group
78
Table 5. Video Observation: Participant 1
79
Table 6. Video Observation: Participant 2
80
Table 7. Video Observation: Participant 3
81
Table 8. Video Observation Number 1: Participant Comparison
82
Table 9. Video Observation Number 2: Participant Comparison
82
Table 10. Interview Question: Describe Your School Experience Right Now
84
Table 11. Interview Question: What Schools Should Do to Help Latino Students Graduate from High School
85
ix
CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION Introduction to the Problem The high school dropout rate has been, and continues to be, a widespread challenge in the United States (US). Fully one-third of all students beginning high school in the US do not graduate (Bridgeland, Dilulio, & Balfanz, 2009). Adolescent males are dropping out of high school at rates as high as 37% per year (Laird, Cataldi, KewalRamani, & Chapman, 2008). The negative effects of a high dropout rate on society include unemployment, poor health, and incarceration (Bridgeland et al., 2009). Scholars and educators have focused attention on reducing high school dropout rates, and what has become clear is the current high school completion rate continues to be a serious concern in the field of education (Swanson, 2008). Further research is necessary to better understand the factors affecting dropout rates in order to effect change. Becoming a high school dropout does not happen quickly; it is the culmination of a history of negative academic experiences (Rotermund, 2010). Neild (2009) indicated that when boys experience academic struggles in the ninth grade the consequences have long-term implications resulting in the failure to complete high school. It is possible that peer support groups can be a resource to stem academic failure. The focus of the current research was to understand the group processes, dynamics, and individual and collective experiences that emerge from academically at-risk, adolescent Latino males in an urban
1
West Coast high school who take part in a peer support group designed to improve attitudes toward school and learning. Understanding what influences at-risk-students to stay in school and earn a high school diploma has been an area of scholarly inquiry, and mentoring has emerged as a possible answer, particularly for young men. According to Prevatt and Kelly (2003), young men continue to fail out of school in large numbers. In their seminal research on mentoring, Flaxman and Ascher (1992) presented evidence of the importance of providing mentors for young men (Komosa-Hawkins, 2009; Reagan-Porras, 2013;). Schwartz, Rhodes, Spencer and Grosman (2013) investigated the role mentors play in helping mentees feel motivated to remain in school rather than drop out. Dappen and Isernhagen’s research (2005) indicated mentoring has reduced but not eliminated the problem of high school dropouts. The extant research in the area of support groups has emerged from the field of psychology (Chapin & Yang, 2009). Existing research on support groups has focused on the possible mental health benefits students receive when provided group support opportunities at school (Chapin & Yang, 2009). Just as becoming a dropout occurs over a relatively long period of time, reversing the path to dropping out also takes time. Whether through mentoring, through support groups, or through other means, developing the motivation to remain in school is a challenging task with positive results (Bridgeland et al., 2009). The economic benefit to improving the outcomes for academically struggling young men includes interrupting the cycle of poverty, poor health, and incarceration (Bridgeland et al., 2009). The same effect can be achieved by putting young men on the right path academically, whereby society acquires a stronger labor force, income levels 2
are increased, and social mobility is improved (Karcher, Kuperminc, Portwood, Sipe. & Taylor, 2006). The current study was undertaken to determine the group processes, dynamics, and individual and collective experiences that emerge from academically atrisk, adolescent Latino males in order to address the high rate of dropout.
Background, Context, and Theoretical Framework The high school dropout problem has persisted through every attempt at school reform, innovation, and intervention (Knesting, 2008). Particularly noticeable is the gap in dropout rates between males and females (Neild, 2009). Males continue to drop out of high school at higher rates than females (National Center for Education Statistics [NCES], 2012). Research indicated females respond to many different types of interventions (Neild, 2009). The downward academic spiral has been more apparent for young men of color in socio-economically challenged areas (Taylor & Graham, 2007). In a typical urban neighborhood, adolescent males are leaving schools and joining gangs, going to prison, or fathering children without the capacity to support them, which adds to social welfare costs (Karcher et al., 2006). The high school dropout rate is not a singular event caused by a single factor; the process of dropping out is a long-term process (Bridgeland et al., 2009; Knesting, 2008; Neild, 2009). Closer examination of the high school experiences of adolescent Latino males is required to continue to develop additional strategies to address a problem that is a culmination of several factors over many years. From a sociological and institutional perspective, the adolescent years represent an important period of time for academic success or failure. From the institutional 3
perspective, Marzano (2004) showed that teachers must adapt their approach to accommodate the students’ lack of background knowledge in order to address the dilemma of the different levels of academic achievement in a classroom. By the time students enter high school, the subsequent impact of academic gaps such as the lack of background knowledge on learning has set students on the path to dropping out of high school (Knesting, 2008; Neild, 2009). While school reform efforts have focused on instruction, curriculum, and pedagogy, the question of what sociological support young men need to remain in school long enough to experience the educational reforms has been inadequately addressed (Rotermund, 2010). The trajectory to a high school diploma can alter for many sociological reasons. A student can have a life-changing event that can either motivate them to improve their educational efforts or encourage them to drop out, such as being arrested (Rios, 2010). Some students may feel pushed or counseled out of high school because there is an incompatibility between the school and the student, or because the student is expelled once their academic struggles evolve into behavioral problems (Bridgeland et al., 2009; Podsiadlo & Philliber, 2003). Eventually, struggling students move to dropout status or continue in alternative forms of school (Rios, 2010). Race may also be a factor in dropout rates. A problem exists when a minority student associates academic success with race, which Cokley, McClain, Jones, & Johnson, 2011; Osborne & Jones (2011) described as acting white. Researchers described this academic misidentification, as a contributing factor in the academic failure rate for young men of color (Bailey & Bradbury-Bailey, 2007; Osborne & Jones, 2011). Wyatt (2009) determined there was a need to reconnect young men of color with academic 4
achievement. According to Chiessi et al. (2010), one way to reconnect young men of color was to establish a sense of belonging rooted in a school connection. During the period of adolescence, humans have a need for a sense of belonging, which assists in identity definition (Elkind, 1998). Peer support groups, the focus of the current study, provide an avenue to allow adolescent males a way to access relationships that may foster a sense of belonging (Bailey and Bradbury-Bailey, 2007; Gordon, Iwamoto, Ward, Potts, & Boyd, 2009; Wyatt, 2009). The peer support group concept is based on the idea of mentoring. Rather than providing an individual mentor for each student in the support group, peers mentor each other and the mentor facilitates the group. The history of mentoring includes its use as an intervention to address the dropout problem. Mentoring emerged as a key strategy for decreasing dropout rates for minority males in the 1980s (Komosa-Hawkins, 2009). Research indicated a multitude of mentoring programs were actively supporting some three million young people in the US by 2006 (DuBois, Portillo, Rhodes, Silverthorn, and Valentine, 2011). In addition, researchers established there was a connection between mentoring and academic success (Gordon et al., 2009). The dropout problem, however, has not been eliminated (ReaganPorras, 2013). Miller, Barnes, Miller, and McKinnon (2012) proposed that more research is needed to examine programmatic aspects such as the correlation between successful mentoring and effective mentoring relationships; thus, there was a need to more fully examine mentoring. The focus of the current study was the peer support group. The support group is a relatively new intervention used to support students at risk of dropping out of high school. The use of support groups to reduce dropout rates 5
emerged from the field of psychology (Chapin & Yang, 2009). Support groups allow students with similar challenges to develop a sense of belonging based on commonalities, and participants can strategize ways to change their situation (Bailey & Bradbury-Bailey, 2007). In a discussion of social learning theory, Bandura (1997) posited people learn through observing others. Support groups are a place where students can experience and practice what Bandura (1979) described as reciprocal determinism. Through repeated interaction in a trusted social environment, students can observe and imitate behavior (Bailey & Bradbury-Bailey, 2007). In the case of a peer support group for young men in high school, a change in attitude toward school and learning may be a motivator toward improvement. If peer support groups do motivate toward improvement, participation may positively impact the achievement trajectory for academically struggling young men. Thus, it is important to study any shift in attitudes experienced by peer support group participants.
Statement of the Problem The high school dropout rate for Latino males has been a persistent problem in American education (NCES, 2012). Data from the National Center for Education Statistics illustrate the varying dropout levels over the past 20 years for different sub groups with a constant average of 10%. Interventions such as mentoring have been a common strategy to counter school failure (Deutsch & Spencer, 2009; Smith & Stormont, 2011). Support groups offer a new model of mentoring as an intervention for decreasing dropout rates, and they deserve further research (Bailey & Bradbury-Bailey, 2007). While 6
the support group format is from the field of psychology (Chapin & Yang, 2009), the support group as an academic intervention tool has not been examined to determine its efficacy (Bailey & Bradbury-Bailey, 2007). The current study addresses this gap. The specific problem addressed was that not enough qualitative research has been conducted to understand the group processes, dynamics, and individual and collective experiences that emerge from academically at-risk, adolescent Latino males taking part in a group mentoring program. This study was designed to determine how a mentoring program affected adolescent Latino males in order to gain information to address the high dropout rate of this group. The purpose was to determine how a peer support group affected the individual and collective experiences of academically-at-risk, adolescent Latino males in one West Coast urban high school.
Purpose of the Study The purpose of this exploratory qualitative case study was to uncover and illuminate the group processes, dynamics, and individual and collective experiences that emerged from a peer support group for academically at-risk, adolescent Latino males in a high school in an urban West Coast US state. The dropout rate for young Latino males, however, continues to be approximately 10% (NCES, 2012). A question is whether mentoring is a successful intervention that decreases dropout rates for adolescent Latino males. Research conducted in the 1980s and 1990s indicated mentoring was a useful intervention for academically struggling males (Anastasia et al., 2012; Gordon et al., 2009). Additionally, the lens of social learning theory allows for an understanding of the
7
impact of reciprocal determinism in a support group, thereby increasing the effect of mentoring in broader applications than a 1:1 setting.
Research Question The research question posed for the current study was: RQ1. What are the group processes, dynamics, and individual and collective experiences that emerge from academically at-risk, adolescent Latino males in an urban West Coast high school who take part in a peer support group designed to improve attitudes toward school and learning?
Rationale, Relevance, and Significance The American high school dropout rate for males remains high (NCES, 2012). Numerous interventions have been attempted; the most fruitful intervention has been mentoring (DuBois et al., 2011). While mentoring has positively impacted dropout rates, high dropout levels persist for specific subgroups, especially in densely populated settings (Swanson, 2008). Newer interventions include the support group, which are typically carried out within school settings (Bailey & Bradbury-Bailey, 2007). Insufficient research has been done to measure the effectiveness of the support group mentoring approach (Schwartz et al., 2013). The current study addresses this gap by examining the perceptions of adolescent Latino male support group participants. Previous research has not been theory-based; thus, the current exploration utilized social learning theory as a theoretical lens (Bandura, 1979).
8
Rationale for the Study This study extended the existing research on mentoring as summarized by DuBois et al. (2011). The influence of the peer support group on academically at-risk, adolescent Latino male attitudes toward school were measured. The high school dropout rate has been a persistent problem in American education, particularly for adolescent males (NCES, 2012). Bridgeland et al. (2009) explained the connection between dropping out of high school and negative results such as incarceration, unemployment and poor health. Swanson (2008) described how earning a high school diploma must become the norm and dropping out of high school must become the rare exception. Relevance of the Study National statistics indicated that the dropout rate for young Latino males remains at approximately 10% (NCES, 2012). According to Swanson (2008), when the data is disaggregated into large urban settings, the rates are often tripled. An early intervention implemented to reverse the dropout rate was mentoring (Gordon et al., 2009). Dappen and Isernhagen’s research (2005) indicated mentoring has reduced but not eliminated the problem of high school dropouts. In order to reverse the high dropout rate of young men, additional supports beyond those currently used are needed (Wyatt, 2009). Rather than leaving school, adolescent Latino males need to acquire skills to help them remain in school (Reagan-Porras, 2013). The purpose of this exploratory case study was to uncover and illuminate the group processes, dynamics, and individual and collective experiences that emerged from a peer support group for academically at-risk, adolescent Latino males in an urban high school in a West Coast US state.
9
Karcher et al. (2006) pointed out that whether or not young male Latinos succeed in high school could affect communities and economies. Without a multitude of successful strategies, educators and community members may be perpetuating an unnecessary underclass (Karcher et al., 2006). More research was necessary to determine the impact of a group mentoring approach (Bailey & Bradbury-Bailey, 2007; DuBois & Rhodes, 2006; Miller et al., 2012). An exploratory case study approach allowed for insight into the attitudes of young men, their experiences in the mentoring program, and the shift in attitudes toward school and learning they may experience while participating. The information that emerged from the current study may provide additional understanding about the individual and collective processes that young Latino males experience in a support group. Significance of the Study Researchers have shown that mentors are important role models for adolescents, and they can provide powerful physical proof that it is possible to challenge one’s current status and excel in school rather than drop out (Komosa-Hawkins, 2009; Reagan-Porras, 2013). In other words, mentoring can provide young men with the support they need to believe in their own abilities. However, research on the impact of group mentoring has not been conducted (Bailey & Bradbury-Bailey, 2007; Schwartz et al., 2013). Additionally, theory was largely missing in the research literature regarding the dropout rate of adolescent Latino males. While the overall dropout rate for adolescent males in the US has been reduced by more than two-thirds in the last two decades, the decrease for young, Latino males has not kept pace (NCES, 2012). Thus, the dropout rate for academically at-risk adolescent Latino males is still too high (Laird et al., 2008). New 10
strategies are required to effectively intervene and provide support for academically disengaged adolescent Latino males. If mentoring works, providing a support group for young men in similar circumstances could have exponential impact. The peer support group model could accelerate the rate at which educators reduce the dropout problem. Peer support groups have not received the same scrutiny as the one-on-one mentoring programs from the 1990s (Chapin & Yang, 2009; Komosa-Hawkins, 2009). While high school dropout rates and related one-to-one mentor initiatives have been the focus of much research, there had been no previous research conducted to determine the efficacy of a peer support group for adolescent Latino males in an urban setting (Gallagher, 2001; Knesting, 2008). The focus was a peer support group, which provided an opportunity to explore the group processes, dynamics, and individual and collective experiences of young men with similar academic deficiencies. Peer support groups may provide educators with an additional intervention that addresses groups of students rather than one student at a time. In the one-to-one mentor setting, a mismatch can occur between mentor and mentee. A disconnect can occur when the young person identified for mentoring is not interested in a mentoring relationship, or when the mentor and mentee have differing perspectives (Grossman, Chan, Schwartz, & Rhodes, 2012; Schwartz et al., 2013). The peer support group may present a different approach to intervention and support allowing for the positive influence of peers to reengage the student academically. Results of the current study add to what is known about the impact of peer support groups as an intervention to shift attitudes towards school and learning for adolescent Latino males who have become disengaged from the educational process. 11
The current study provided insight into the school experience of adolescent males and the challenges they face navigating high school. Reagan-Porras (2013) reminded readers of the importance that adolescents place on the feeling of belonging (2007). With this in mind, results from the current study provide a glimpse into the thoughts of adolescent Latino males. Researchers had previously examined the impact of peer support groups on behavior problems (Reagan-Porras, 2013), counseling approaches (Chapin & Yang, 2009), and empowerment theory (Wyatt, 2009). By training the lens on the affective experience of adolescent Latino males, and utilizing social learning theory as a lens, the current study provided an opportunity to understand the construct of the academically at-risk adolescent Latino male and what supports he considered essential for progress. An examination of the individual and group experiences within peer support groups provides insight into the benefits of mentoring as a means of decreasing the dropout rate of adolescent Latino males in an urban setting. If the peer support group approach can effect positive attitudes toward school and learning, the intervention may be a viable option for schools to implement. Support groups may be an effective intervention for schools to more quickly reach a broad group of students at risk of dropping out, rather than a one-on- one mentoring model. As an exploratory study, the results inform practitioners who facilitator support groups. Specifically, the results add to the extant literature regarding what is known about the effects of a mentoring program for academically at-risk adolescent Latino males.
12
Nature of the Study This qualitative case study was undertaken to uncover and illuminate the group processes, dynamics, and individual and collective experiences that emerged from a peer support group for academically at-risk adolescent Latino males in an urban West Coast US high school. The support group was designed to improve their attitudes toward school and learning. Case studies are qualitative inquiries designed to examine a program or person in depth (Creswell, 2009). In the current study, a small number of participants were the focus of the investigation. Data were obtained from whole group observations, individual interviews, and from the journal entries made by members of a peer support group. The support group included ten adolescent males, nine of Latino descent, and one African American whose data was excluded from the study. All participants were from low socio-economic status families. The focus was the reflections of the Latino males in the group gathered through pre- and post-study interviews and weekly journal entries. Periodic videotaping was conducted of the support group sessions, and the videotapes were used to observe and record shifts in attitudes. Maslow’s (1943) theory of self-actualization and Bandura’s (1977a) social learning theory provided the theoretical framework. Maslow described a growth process where the experience of belonging is essential to human development. Bandura examined the reciprocal interaction between people described as a process of observation, imitation, and modeling. The environment created within a support group may provide a context for the participants to experience safety and belonging. The support group provides an environment where members can practice, through reciprocal interaction, what are often new behaviors. Thus, the combination of theories of humanism and behaviorism provides 13
the theoretical framework to study how adolescent Latino males, at risk of dropping out of high school, operate in a peer support group.
Definition of Terms At-risk adolescent Latino males. For the purpose of the current study, at-risk adolescent Latino males are those between the ages of 14-24 living in a large, urban neighborhood in a West Coast US city who have repeated one or more grades during their k-12 years (Swanson, 2008). Mentoring. Mentoring refers to the relationship between a young person and an adult, other than a parent or guardian who contributes positively to the development of the young person (Dubois & Rhodes, 2006). Support group. Support groups are small groups of people meeting regularly to reinforce particular ideas or values (Podsiadlo & Philliber, 2003). High school dropout. A high school dropout is a student who leaves high school without earning a diploma (National High School Center, 2011). Reciprocal determinism. Reciprocal determinism means that a person’s behavior influences his or her environment and the environment mutually influences the individual (Bandura, 1979).
Assumptions, Limitations, and Delimitations Assumptions This study is based on the assumption that the high school dropout problem, specifically for Latino males, is of critical importance. Reducing the dropout problem 14
benefits society economically and reduces risk of incarceration, poverty, and poor health for at-risk, adolescent Latino male. The incentive to participate were designed to create as inviting a process for journal reflections as possible based on the assumption that journaling is not a common form of reflection for at-risk adolescent Latino males. The research subjects were part of a support group led by a male mentor. Limitations This is a qualitative study of a small group. There is no way to generalize the results of the study. Other limitations in this study include the inability to control whether or not research participants attended the support group or completed the weekly journal activity. Since not all members of the mentor-led support group agreed to be part of the research study, there is also the possibility that one student might complete the journal reflection on behalf of another student. Additionally, the support group that was the focus of this study was exclusively for males and the person conducting the study is female. To preserve the gender focus of the group, the data collection was designed to incur minimal interaction between the research subjects and the female researcher. Delimitations This research study did not include female students. The focus of the study was high school experience of at-risk adolescent Latino males. Latino males who are not in high school were not included; males in the group who were not Latino were not included. No discussion of conditions or academic experiences leading to the high school years was included.
15
Organization of the Remainder of the Study The information offered in Chapter 1 provided an overview of the problem, the research questions, and a description of how the current study was designed to answer the research questions. What follows is a review of the extant literature in Chapter 2, and an explanation of the methodology in Chapter 3. Chapter 4 includes a presentation of the data and related findings, and the results and conclusions will be presented in Chapter 5.
16
CHAPTER 2. LITERATURE REVIEW Introduction to the Literature Review A review of the literature regarding the theoretical foundation, the literature regarding high school dropouts, mentoring, and the chosen methodology is provided in Chapter 2. Bandura’s (1971, 1978) social learning theory provided the foundation for understanding the impact of mentoring. The literature review continues with a discussion of high school dropouts (Laird et al., 2006), the research about the early identifiers of high school dropouts (National High School, 2011), academic disidentification (Bailey & Bradbury-Bailey, 2007; Cokley et al., 2011; Osborne & Jones, 2011), and the idea of mentoring and support group membership for intervention as a response to students at risk of becoming high school dropouts (Chapin & Yang, 2009; Knesting, 2008). The review of the literature concludes with a section describing the relevant literature regarding research methodology and a summary of Chapter 2.
Theoretical Framework The theoretical framework for the current study was based on the work of psychologist, Bandura (1977a). According to Bandura (1978), social learning theory grew out of what was known about operant conditioning. Bandura (1977b) posited the reasons for human behavior are multi-faceted, and earlier theories were not good for predicting future behavior; they only described factors influencing behavior that had 17
already occurred. Bandura believed that outside influencing factors were important to understand and predict human behavior, which was a switch from earlier psychological theorists who were focused on inner causes for behavior explanation. He believed that theories needed to be predictive, and he was aware that measuring results was key to determining a predictive theory’s reliability. Key to the foundation for the current study was Bandura’s social learning theory. Social Learning Theory Bandura (1977b) introduced the concepts of social learning theory as a means to explain, predict, and determine ways to effectively modify human behavior. The author explained how a person’s actions are dictated by both internal and external conditions. Instead of simply responding to stimuli, humans have the capacity to observe and learn from how others experience their world, and they can think through possible actions symbolically to determine possible outcomes. Additionally, Bandura noted how humans develop patterns of behavior and how continuous interactions with others and the world act to regulate personal behavior. At the heart of the theory is the understanding that one learns through the positive or negative outcomes of direct experience or by witnessing the positive or negative outcomes of the experiences of others. Actions are positively or negatively reinforced by not only continued interactions and outcomes or consequences, but by the cognitive processes associated with how humans are able to anticipate outcomes. Bandura warned that one cannot ignore cognitive factors that mediate learning. What a person knows or feels about what is being learned is an example of a cognitive mediating factor. In a lead up to a discussion of learning through modeling, Bandura (1977b) described how scholars had previously tried to understand the 18
ineffectiveness of reinforcement in some cases. He illustrated how people reacted to a learning situation according to the value they placed on the outcome. If an outcome was valued, the learning produced behavior change, but if it was not valued, the learning could actually have the opposite effect. Learning Through Modeling Learning does not occur simply through experience. Bandura (1977b, 1978) described the importance of learning through modeling, and how, through the lens of social learning theory researchers are provided a new way of understanding how learning occurs. Having the ability to cognitively assess a behavior being modeled prior to attempting the activity is what makes human learning unique. Bandura pointed out that the modeled behavior must be attended to in order for someone to want to personally carry out the same behavior; thus, observation alone is inadequate for learning. The desire to attend to one behavior over another is dependent upon a number of functions, including the need to see something enacted repeatedly. Therefore, one’s social group becomes vitally important, as is one’s ability to retain the information for cognitive processing. According to Bandura (1971), remembering or cognitively storing observed behaviors allows for learning through the ability to code the retained information. The stored information becomes symbolic information when it is stored, and humans apply further meaning to the modeled behavior retained. The behaviors that we see modeled by others becomes a story in our minds that can be repeated by us in some form, sometimes verbally, or sometimes written, which also aids retention. Practicing or repeating the behavior either in one’s mind or through physical movement also aids in retention and 19
learning. Bandura described how immediate imitation does not take much thought, but that if something is to be repeated much after some time since the initial modeling, it had to have been thought about to some degree in order to be carried out. One can more easily draw a representation of a car if they have a car in front of them, versus waiting until they have to rely on memory to create the drawing. Along with the ability to remember, social learning is dependent upon the observer’s motor skills. Bandura pointed out that many of the processes in an activity are often unobservable, such as the fine motor skills necessary to hold a pencil to draw a picture. One cannot see these skills, and it is impossible to know whether or not he or she has the motor skills necessary to draw a straight line, for example. Finally, one may observe behavior, remember it, and have the ability to repeat it, but the behavior may not be reinforced by popular opinion. Bandura (1971) discussed the role of positive reinforcement and social learning theory. There must be some form of reinforcement for behavior to be repeated. The learner must view the activity favorably for some reason in order for them to want to carry it out. To summarize, in his discussion of social learning theory, Bandura (1971, 1978) posited that humans see behavior modeled, first, and store that information cognitively. The author described this as observational learning. After a behavior is observed, it is stored and thought about symbolically. The behavior is modeled based on whether someone has the skills to carry out the behavior, and whether or not the behavior is reinforced in some way. Interestingly, Bandura noted that the behavior may not be carried out for some time after it is modeled, and humans are uniquely capable of storing information for use later. Key to whether or not the behavior is carried out is the 20
expectance of either negative or positive consequences tied to the behavior, which was described as reinforcement. Examples used to describe social learning theory were the use of language as an infant grows, and the ability to watch others perform difficult tasks in order to model the behavior and accomplish those tasks one one’s own. It was mentioned that modeling occurs within a broader situation, so when there is more than one model offered, amalgams of learned behavior are created when learning new behaviors. Another function of modeling, beyond learning new behaviors, is to provide cues for behavioral restraint. Social learning theory has also been used to help explain behavior regulatory processes. Bandura (1971), conducted a review of the literature regarding stimulus control, reinforcement control, and self-reinforcement. The review provided an understanding for how behavior is moderated within social environments. As described by the author, simply having the opportunity to observe a behavior does not mean the behavior will be repeated. The observed behavior must be cognitively understood or realized for what it is, and the observer must have the ability to carry out the behavior (motor skills was the example provided). Additionally, there are mediating factors of stimuli reinforcing behaviors, along with self-reinforcement factors. The author also described the reciprocal nature between social environments and individual behavior. In a discussion of the progress of knowledge of social learning theory over time, Bandura (2005) described how the theory, also called social cognitive theory, grew from the field of psychology, particularly behaviorism. The author described the core features of human agency, which included intentionality, an understanding of function of forethought, and self-regulation through self-censure and self-awareness. He explained 21
how early behaviorists determined learning was about the outcomes of actions, which was a stimulus and response understanding of learning. Bandura’s (1965) earlier research, however, had shown the importance of modeling, particularly symbolic modeling. The author described modeling as central to learning; modeling serves as a guide for enactment, and enacted behavior can then be reinforced. Bandura described how the concept of modeling had come under fire from other researchers, which required social learning theorists such as himself, to “elucidate the determinants and mechanisms of social modeling (2005, p. 13). Modeling is not simply the mimicking the actions of others (Bandura, 1986; Rosenthal & Zimmerman, 1978), and modeling can elicit creative and new ways of doing and thinking (Bandura, Ross, & Ross, 1963). Bandura (2005) reported that social learning theory detractors had said that modeling did not lead to cognitive skill development, a stand debunked by the work of Meichenbaum (1984). Self Efficacy in Social Learning Theory A major addition to social cognitive theory was the construct of self-efficacy. Bandura (2005) described his initial understanding of the importance of self-efficacy as fortuitous in that its discovery was a by-product of conducting research into phobias. The people he worked with to overcome phobias began reporting that they felt a sense of well-being that they associated with their ability to overcome. The participants developed a sense of capability that influenced other areas of their lives, not just the ability to overcome a phobia. According to Bandura (1982), self-efficacy mediates learning and action. Bandura’s (1982) explanation of self-efficacy provided understanding for the basic precepts of self-efficacy as part of learning, which led the way for researchers 22
studying the effects of self-efficacy in education. An example was the work of Rosenstock, Strecher, and Becker (1988) who described how social learning theory grew out of cognitive theory and stimulus response theory. The authors provided an overview of how expectations and consequences or incentives were at the heart of earlier learning theories, and social learning theorists such as Bandura (1977b, 1978) added the important concept of self-efficacy for understanding human behavior. Rosenstock et al. (1988), who were interested in advancing understanding about the health belief model, pointed out the difference between locus of control and self-efficacy; self-efficacy is situation specific. They explained how Bandura’s (1977b, 1978) social learning theory, allowed them to realize self-efficacy was a missing ingredient in health belief theory. Components to selfefficacy theory were described as, “enactive or performance attainments; vicarious experience; verbal persuasion; and physiological state” (Rosenstock et al., 1988). Many other researchers continued to study self-efficacy throughout the latter part of the 20th Century (Ames, 1992; Bandura, 1982; 1993; 1997; Bandura & Schunk, 1981; Pajares & Miller, 1994; Pintrich & De Groot, 1990; Schunk, 1989, 1996; Wigfield & Eccles, 1992; Zimmerman, 1995; Zimmerman, Bandura, & Martinez-Pons, 1992; Zimmerman & Martinez-Pons, 1990). Bandura (1993) described the four processes by which self-efficacy exerts influence: cognitive, motivational, affective, and selection. Cognitive processes, such as math skills, were found to be powerfully affected by self-efficacy. In fact, success was better predicted by self-efficacy than by actual ability. Bandura also described how social comparison is an influence of self-efficacy. Humans use social comparisons to judge their abilities, and the example provided was how children know where they stand in 23
class by reading the cues from teachers, and by finding out how others did on standardized tests. Bandura noted how damaging negative feedback can be, and pointed out that changing the message to a positive created increased self-efficacy and elevated self-esteem. “Learning environments that construe ability as an acquirable skill deemphasize competitive social comparison, and highlight self-comparison of progress and personal accomplishments are well suited for building a sense of efficacy that promotes academic achievement” (Bandura, 1993, p 125). In a discussion of student cognitive self-efficacy, Bandura (1993) pointed to the importance of social factors in children’s beliefs about their own intellectual capabilities. Setting goals for children to achieve is important, but increasing their self-efficacy to achieve goals was more important. Bandura also pointed out that self-efficacy did not only apply to academics, but in order for a child to succeed, she or he also needed to have regulatory and social self-efficacy. In other words, they need to be able to overcome negative peer pressure and refrain from high risk behavior such as drug and alcohol use. If a child had low self-efficacy toward their academic attainment, it was likely the results would also affect their self-efficacy with regard to social engagement, making it more likely they would see themselves as less popular and not fitting in. Bandura suggested guided mastery could serve to help students gain competency and increase self-efficacy, and he described the importance of self-efficacy in those who guide students. Teachers, schools, and parents must all have self-efficacy in order for optimal student self-efficacy attainment. As previously discussed, Bandura’s (1977a, 1978) defined social learning theory provided the theoretical foundation for the current study. Since its inception, social 24
learning theory scholarship has progressed to include further understanding of learning through modeled behavior. A review of the extant literature regarding social learning theory and its use in different fields of study is provided next. Social Learning Theory in Practice Since the 60s, social learning theory has been utilized by scholars to attempt to explain, predict, and modify behavior with a noted emphasis in studies on aggression and deviant behavior. An example is the research on aggression by Bandura, Ross, and Ross (1961), in what has become commonly known as the Bobo study. This study began an inquiry into social learning theory and aggression that continues today (Akers, 2011; Ferguson & Rueda, 2010; Lefkowitz, Eron, & Walder, 2013; Marshall, Laws, & Barbaree, 2013). The focus on aggression and social learning theory progressed with inquiry into the role of the media in aggression (Heath, Kruttschnitt, & Ward, 1986; Livingstone, 1996; Mehraj, Bhat, & Mehraj, 2014; Reiner, 1997). Beyond the study of aggression, social learning theory has been utilized as theoretical lens for many other areas of scholarly inquiry, including mentoring. What follows is a review of the extant literature on the the high school dropout rate, mentoring, and how social learning theory has been used as a lens to better understand mentoring in education.
Review of Research Literature and Methodological Literature High School Dropout Rates and Reasons Dropping out of high school and high dropout rates continues to be a topic of considerable concern in the US chiefly because of the impact on our society as a whole. According to the National High School Center (2011), a high school dropout is a student 25
between the ages of 16 and 24 who leaves high school without earning a diploma. While the US dropout rate has declined over the period from 1990 to 2013, the rate of decline has slowed, showing no measurable difference in recent years. The current dropout rate for all students is just under 10% (NCES, 2012). When the data is disaggregated, a clear gap emerges between White, African American, and Latino students and the dropout rate for these subgroups is higher in densely populated, urban areas (Swanson, 2008). Latino students have the highest dropout rate and males drop out in higher numbers than females (http://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=16). For Latinos, the difference between male and female dropout rates is nearly 2%. What is known is that Latino young men continue to fail out of high school in large numbers (Prevatt & Kelly, 2003). Student attitudes about themselves and school are a factor. Knesting (2008) described self-perceptions about school as overwhelming (2008). Students are regularly confronted with factors that discourage them and make them feel overwhelmed including everything from the size of the school to academic challenges. A way to support students is to provide a sense of belonging (Knesting, 2008). Knesting described the importance of providing teachers who care about student success, positive relationships with the school principal, a means for student voices to be heard, and a caring school community. Podsiadlo & Philliber’s (2003) focused on Latino boys who maintain the highest dropout rate of all groups measured. The behavior response of this group was to avoid school when they failed academically. Thus, absenteeism was a primary indicator for becoming a dropout, a data point also found in the research of Bridgeland et al. (2009). Continued absenteeism contributes to the rate of academic failure (Podsiadlo & Philliber, 2003), and a school’s response is often to either suspend a student as behavioral 26
punishment or retain a student as a way to address the academic deficiencies. Both actions result in Latino boys becoming disengaged from school and they refrain from attending altogether (2003); the downward cycle is fueled rather than interrupted. Other factors include feelings of trust. Rios (2010) dove deeper into the issues faced by Latino males and school, and he described a reason for school detachment as distrust. Those participating in the Rios study indicated they felt no one at school could be trusted. Due to regular negative interactions, the Latino males interviewed saw school as a place where they were unsafe and stigmatized. The importance of school and community members reshaping their approach with these young men and building positive relationships was highlighted. Rather than placing the burden on the student to change their attitude, Rios placed the responsibility on institutions and community members to create systems and protocols where at-risk youth are treated positively. The attention to the negative academic experience of Latino youth continues in the research of Taylor and Graham (2007). Taylor and Graham (2007, p. 52) described the underachievement of African American and Latino students as a “well-documented and pervasive problem in contemporary American public schools.” The authors indicated the academic struggle is more apparent for young men of color in socio-economically challenged areas. They describe stereotypes, disciplinary practices, and instances of teacher bias as factors impeding the motivation for boys to stay in school and academically persist. They examined the issue from the perspective of gender and ethnicity and consistently found that females do better and have better attitudes about school than males. Additionally, they found Caucasian youth perceive, experience, and demonstrate better academic 27
outcomes than minority youth. Other researchers have studied how minority experiences of education differ from Caucasian experiences. Further contributing to the experience of academic failure for young men of color is what researchers called academic misidentification (Baily & Bradbury-Bailey, 2007; Cokley et al., 2011). Cokley et al., (2011, p. 64) described academic misidentification as “acting white.” In other words, minority students associate academic success with race, specifically with being Caucasian. Not identifying with the perceived successful race creates a problem of motivation. Minority youth are less interested in acting a certain way or producing a certain outcome that does not correlate with their sense of self, especially at adolescence (Cokley et al., 2011). By examining self-concept and self-esteem, Osborne & Jones (2011) correlated academic competence with self-concept, and feelings about competence correlated with self-esteem. In other words, how a student performed was separate from how a student felt about how they performed. The distinction, they go on to argue, is to isolate academic performance as separate from student perceptions about academic performance. Rather than approach the two as interchangeable aspects, students can maintain a perspective that includes possible selves alongside the day-to-day experience of academic struggles without losing motivation for academics (Osborne & Jones, 2011). Belief becomes a potent regulator for academic experiences, positive or negative. The negative effects of the high dropout rate on future generations include unemployment, poor health, and incarceration (Bridgeland et al., 2009). Researchers continue to examine how to reduce or eliminate the problem so that our society is not negatively impacted. While scholars and educators have focused their attention on 28
reducing high school dropout rates, it is clear the current high school completion rate is a serious concern (Swanson, 2008). Obviously, many factors contribute to dropping out, and race and socio-economic status are big factors. Bridgeland et al. (2009) reported schools can predict who is at risk of dropping out of high school as early as elementary school. Indicators such as attendance, behavior, and grades can predict ninth grade dropouts with 85% accuracy. A diagnostic tool exists called the National High School Center Early Warning System Tool (2011). Results from the tool’s use indicate from ninth grade to senior year, the attrition rate averages 60%; thus, ninth grade achievement is identified as a critical predictor of high school completion (Bridgeland et al., 2009). Neild (2009) focused on the importance of building academic success. Whether by shoring up academic preparation for high school or intense support during the ninth grade, the transition period from ninth grade of a student’s academic journey is critical. Neild found that “one-third of high school dropouts were never promoted past the ninth grade.” (p. 55). Neild looked at ways to support students in the transition into high school, both before and during ninth grade, to prevent students from failing ninth grade courses. Failing any course in the ninth grade automatically changed a student’s trajectory through high school, including retaking classes, delaying graduation date, or increasing efforts to make up for a shortfall in high school graduation credits. Mentoring to Reduce Dropout Since the 1980s, one of the most noticeable efforts to decrease the dropout rate was the practice of mentoring (DuBois, 2011). Building on the success of Big Brothers Big Sisters of America (BBBSA), one-on-one mentoring became an established 29
intervention model for at-risk youth (Grossman, Chan, Schwartz, & Rhodes, 2012). Today, group mentoring is a newer variation of the model but it has not been as closely examined as traditional one-on-one mentoring (Chapin & Yang, 2009). Mentoring Historically, mentoring stems from the tradition of apprenticeship. Apprentices, usually young boys, learned a trade, craft, or vocation from an older, experienced tradesman (Anastasia et al., 2012; Gordon et al., 2009). In the early 1900s, BBBSA modernized the apprenticeship by providing adult mentors to act as guides or friends of young boys who did not otherwise have an older male role model (Flaxman et al., 1992). Mentorship outside that offered through the BBBSA organization was not actively present in America until the late 1980s. In the 1980s, mentorship reappears as an academic intervention with a focus of school reform, especially for young men who continued to drop out of school in large numbers. By the early 2000s, mentoring in public schools was viewed as a common intervention despite the fact that its efficacy had not been thoroughly studied (DuBois, Portillo, Rhodes, Silverthorn, and Valentine, 2011). In a meta-analysis of mentoring programs, DuBois et al. (2011) determined that mentoring positively impacts youth affectively and academically. Additionally, mentoring is successful as both an intervention and an enhancement throughout all periods of youth from pre-school to adolescence. Effective mentors ranged from older peers to older adults. DuBois et al. also point out areas of concern regarding mentoring. Limitations included the measurement of improvement. Some studies showed marginal improvement but were still considered successful. Additionally, progress had not been measured over time, and it was unknown if the gains were sustained beyond the 30
mentoring experience. Regardless, DuBois et al. recommend continued support for mentoring, with a focus on key populations. They described areas of “policy interest” such as “juvenile offenders or obesity prevention” (p.57). In evaluating programs for target populations, scholars recommend that attention be paid to measurable aspects such as the recruitment and training practices used with mentors, mentoring relationships, and program outcomes. Karcher et al. (2010) examined mentoring for male, African American, middleschool students from an Afrocentric perspective. He suggested academic success was connected with a sense of self. Karcher et al. suggested intentionally coupling identity and positive reinforcement as a dropout intervention that warranted further investigation. Anastasia et al. (2012) posited successful mentoring is possible when the mentor respects the background of the mentee; thus, the mentor need not come from the same background. The mentor must (a) have adequate training as a mentor, (b) meet regularly with the mentee, and (c) meet with the mentee for at least one year. The overarching goals for successful mentoring to occur, Anastasia et al. concluded, are trust, mutuality, respect, and empathy. Other researchers pointed to the length of time necessary for effective mentoring Rhodes (2008) examined the difference in mentoring approaches including variables such as length of mentoring, integration of mentor program with other programs and services, target populations for mentor programs, and the intensity of the mentoring provided. Of these attributes, Rhodes noted the significance of duration by comparing school-based programs to community-based programs. Because school based mentor programs are anchored in a school-year calendar, the mentoring relationships are not as 31
enduring as those fostered in community based programs. The author found that mentees benefitted more from long-lasting relationships that are more sustainable in communitybased mentoring programs and do not have stops and starts the way a school year does. Thus, the challenge for school-based mentoring programs is to provide high-quality mentoring relationships that can be scaled and replicated. Not everyone found that school-based programs were lacking, however. Wyatt (2009) provided evidence that mentoring programs in schools can significantly impact the academic achievement of African-American males. School is a natural setting for mentoring relationships to develop because youth and adults are together every day. Wyatt studied a support group that met after school that was facilitated by a school counselor. The results indicated that young people understood the connection between belonging to the mentoring group and an increase in their academic achievement. Karcher et al. (2006) reviewed various mentoring contexts such as cross-age peer mentoring, site based mentoring, e-mentoring, and intergenerational mentoring. Group mentoring was described as having “several advantages [and provided] unique outcomes” (p. 712). Students experienced positive peer interactions through group mentoring. The positive interactions contributed to improved relationships between mentees and other adults in their lives; thus, experiences from mentoring were transferred to other relationships. It was found that a group setting also helped to support cultural identity. The ideal group size was between six to ten young people.
32
Belonging, Support Groups, and Peer Networks According to the research of Newman, Lohman, and Newman (2007), group belonging is important to adolescents. While the relative importance differed between genders, Newman et al. showed that a negative experience of belonging correlated with behavior problems. The experience of belonging to peer groups impacted a young person’s sense of purpose, self-worth, and social capacity. Newman et al. defined “successful negotiation of peer relationships” as an essential task of youth (p. 259). The researchers found that adults at school, at home, and in the community can promote success at this stage by nurturing feelings of group belonging and by helping young people develop social competencies. In a study of how group work can promote academic success for AfricanAmerican high school males, Bailey and Bradbury-Bailey (2007) underscored the effect of low academic achievement. They described the connection between academic achievement and future earning potential, and they pointed out that lower academic achievement correlated with lower future earning potential. The researchers examined group work as a useful intervention. Bailey and Bradbury-Bailey associated academic disengagement with adolescent tasks of defining self-identity. According to the authors, the transitional space between childhood and adulthood allowed for a new awareness of limits leading to frustration and disengagement. Schools can provide a safe environment through group counseling. A group counseling intervention can help young men better understand their social dilemmas and help them work toward solutions. The work of Bailey and Bradbury-Bailey (2007) supported the findings of Cokley et al. (2011) who found academic achievement was associated with what it meant to be Caucasian. It 33
appears students can counter the images they have constructed about their understanding of race and academic success. Specifically, through association with a like group, they can construct a new narrative and identify for themselves in which race can be associated with academic success. While Bailey and Bradbury-Bailey focused on how group counseling can help reshape beliefs about race and academics, other scholars focused on the concept of social support and resiliency. Students build confidence in their abilities, and confidence increases levels of competence, when essential social supports are in place. Chapin and Yang (2009) examined the importance of social supports for building resiliency in school-age children. Essential social supports included positive relationships with peers, family, parents, and teachers. Chapin and Yang specifically identified the importance of the social support building process for low-income and minority youth. They also pointed out the differences in the experience of social support between boys and girls; boys preferred larger group settings for support networks, while girls preferred more intimate settings. Copeland and Peck Beins (2013) described a mentoring program to show how resilience can be built. Although the information presented was informational only, the authors pointed to research indicating young people regard mentoring relationships as positive influences. In the program described, university students provided activities that fostered perseverance, and they taught their mentees about how to have control over their emotions. The university student mentors also helped their mentees learn how journaling can help them learn a process toward achieving goals. While Copeland and Peck Beins (2013) simply described a mentoring program, Sandin Esteban and Sánchez Martí (2014) conducted survey research concerning resilience. 34
Sandín Esteban and Sánchez Martí (2014) set out to determine if there was a relationship between school completion rates of immigrant children and resilience. They defined resilience as “an effective coping competence in response to a risky or adverse situation” (Sandín Esteban & Sánchez Martí, p. 20). Both quantitative and qualitative data were collected. They utilized a tool that measured resilience developed by Saavedra and Villalta (2008). Sandín Esteban and Sánchez Martí (2014) conducted their research with high school students in Spain. Results indicated that self-concept played an important role in which students succeeded, as did persistence. Positive role models were also found to be a significant factor in self-perceptions of success, as were student aspirations for the future. While some researchers focused on high school aged children and resilience, others focused on younger children. Drexler, Borrmann, and Müller-Kohlenberg (2012) set out to determine if there was an association between health-related outcomes and a resiliency mentoring program for disadvantaged children in German elementary schools. The authors tied mentoring to informal learning, which was described as an authentic byproduct of the mentoring relationship. Mentoring, it was posited, acts to even the playing field for children who were disadvantaged. In their discussion of an induction of values, the authors described the cognitive aspect of learning, similar to Bandura’s (1977b, 1978) discussion of the importance of social learning. The authors used tests and questionnaires that were developed specifically for the study, and there was a control group (Drexler et al., 2012). They found the children being mentored were better able to concentrate, were better able to empathize with others, and had realistic self-assessments. Overall, health outcomes were positively correlated with the mentoring program. 35
Zand et al. (2009) examined the importance of relationships in the process of successfully mentoring youth. Their work dissected the qualities of the relationship as the key element in an effective mentoring program. Specifically, they set out to identify a connection between mentoring relationships and positive youth outcomes. Most research on mentoring, they pointed out, has compared mentored youth to non-mentored youth and has provided evidence that mentoring has a positive impact. What Zand et al. examined was how the mentoring relationship impacted competency levels of youth. Competency included relationship with family and adults, connection to school, and life skills. Zand et al. found that higher quality relationships, as reported by the mentee, correlated with increased competency. DeAnda (2001) conducted a case study of four mentees and described the importance of the relationship between the mentor and mentee. In mentor programs, DeAnda pointed out, the primary intervention is the relationship between the mentor and mentee. To measure the relationship, mentees were interviewed at the beginning and end of the school year. Mentees reported they valued their relationship with their mentor, and that the mentor provided them with a range of supports that helped them grow in both concrete and affective ways. Mentees reported the main difficulty was not having enough time to spend with a mentor. The connection each mentee made with their mentor helped them make significant and positive developmental changes that moved the mentees forward in their goals (DeAnda, 2001). Deutsch and Spencer (2009) pointed out that previous research on mentoring examined youth outcomes at specific points in time rather than the process of mentoring. In other words, the focus was on the dyadic relationship, and what constitutes effective 36
practices in a mentoring program. Mentoring programs are also situated within a larger context, such as a school or community-based organization. The broader setting provides another dimension for further study. The different elements of mentoring including the mentor, the mentee, the mentoring program, and the context in which the mentoring program exists, are interconnected in individual and collective ways. Deutsch and Spencer made the point that additional research is needed from multiple angles. Deutsch and Spencer purported that the relationship between the mentor and mentee can be defined as individual settings. When viewed in this way, each setting, nested within the next, can be measured with similar measures to yield programmatic recommendations. The authors examined various measures including surveys, interviews, focus groups, observations, logs, and administrative records. The goal of all measurement for mentoring programs should be to define successful conditions that produce strong mentoring outcomes. The criteria for high quality programs must be explicit to ensure that mentoring programs are helpful and do no harm to the youth they serve. Smith and Stormont (2011) reminded readers that mentoring is not a new idea. Mentoring is also prolific due to the seeming simplicity of the program and the potential for positive interventions for at-risk youth. However, implementation, funding, and standards vary widely, making it difficult to measure effectiveness of mentoring programs. The research base for mentoring suffers from a lack of empirical data yet the gains from mentor programs are evidenced in many schools and communities. Smith and Stormont attempted to identify the sustainable factors as guidance for effective mentor program implementation. The three components they identified were that programs have (a) a clear target group, (b) adequate infrastructure including a consistent place to meet 37
and training for mentors, and (c) financial sustainability beyond the pilot years. The key feature to develop and sustain was provision of ways for mentors and mentees to meet regularly and over a long period of time. Dappen and Isernhagen’s (2005) analysis of mentoring programs provided important recommendations and cautions for school-based mentoring. The authors concluded that mentoring programs must be six months in length or longer; anything less may do students more harm than good. Length of the program was of particular concern for communities with a high mobility rate and lack of transportation options. Other obstacles that prevented long-lasting mentor-mentee relationships were mentioned, such as insufficient mentor commitment. Attention to adequate program development, infrastructure, and ongoing support before launching a mentor program were important; however, the program plan was the core element needed to ensure that stable, trusting relationships were sustained. When stable, trusting relationships were sustained, successful outcomes from mentoring could be expected. Another area of interest has become what is called natural mentoring. Greeson (2013) described the significant developmental stage of moving from adolescence to adulthood, and how foster children are at risk because they often do not have strong support systems in place. Greeson reviewed the extant literature on natural mentoring and resilience for insights into what factors might help foster children transition from adolescence to adulthood. The author concluded that some foster children gained the necessary resilience to withstand difficulties, in part, by having at least one healthy attachment to a competent and caring adult. Mentoring, particularly natural mentoring, was mentioned as one means by which an adolescent can gain access to a 38
competent and caring adult. A natural mentor is someone who is already in the sphere of influence of the child, rather than someone brought in from the outside through a program such as BBBSA. Review of Methodological Issues As previously discussed, an exploratory qualitative case study approach was chosen for the current study. As described by Creswell (2009) case studies are qualitative inquiries designed to examine a program or person in depth. Ritchie, Lewis, Nicholls, and Ormston (2013) pointed out that qualitative research allows one to gain authentic information from real-life events, and to interpret those events to determine meaning. A qualitative approach was particularly useful for the current study because it allowed for the gathering of rich and contextual data from the frame of reference, or perspectives, of participants. According to Ritchie et al., the role of the researcher in a qualitative case study approach is that of an empathetic, neutral, non-judgmental observer who adopts a flexible strategy in a real-world setting. Data is generated in a method that requires researcher contact with the subjects through observation and often through in-depth interviews to gain the perspectives of participants in natural social settings. Samples are usually small and purposively selected, and the data gathered is rich in context and can be quite extensive. Themes and patterns emerge, and the resulting patterns allow for analysis an explanation. Ritchie et al. described case studies as one case where a specific phenomenon is studied in-depth from a multiplicity of perspectives and in context often using multiple data collection methods. For the current study, data collection methods included journaling and recorded semi-structured participant interviews.
39
This qualitative case study research was conducted from a constructivist viewpoint, with accompanying knowledge assumptions. Creswell (2009) pointed out that it is important for the researcher to understand their own assumptions as they move into the research process. Assumptions are related to epistemological and ontological stances or tautologies. Creswell described the constructivist stance as the understanding that knowledge is socially constructed. In other words, those who ascribe to a constructivist stance hold to the ontological assumption that knowledge is socially constructed. Epistemologically, the constructivist believes knowledge is generated socially and it is important to recognize context and relation. From a constructivist perspective, the researcher realizes the interpretation of events will ultimately be shaped, at least in part, by their own background and life experience. A review of the extant literature revealed researchers interested in studying the effects of mentoring used several different research methods and perspectives. Several studies were conducted using both qualitative and quantitative methods including surveys and researcher developed questionnaires (Deutsch & Spencer, 2009; Drexler et al., 2012; Sandín Esteban & Sánchez Martí, 2014; Smith & Stormont, 2011). Copeland and Peck Beins (2013) described their study as descriptive and exploratory, and Karcher et al. (2006) described his study as conducted from an Afrocentric perspective. Rhodes (2008) and Chapin and Yang (2009) conducted quantitative factor analyses in their inquiries on the effects of mentoring. Smith and Stormont (2011) described the lack of available empirical data on the effects of mentoring. Dubois et al. (2011) also mentioned the difficulties researchers have had effectively measuring improvement that can be directly attributed to mentoring, and they called for future longitudinal studies. 40
DuBois, Doolittle, Yates, Silverthorn, and Tebes (2006) completed a review of various research methodologies utilized when studying youth mentoring. They noted that mentor programs most often value approaches to mentoring associated with the field of community psychology. They listed program values such as citizen participation, human diversity, and community strengths. As DuBois et al. pointed out, mentoring efforts began slowly, but mentoring is now a popular intervention for youth (Rhodes, 2008). While examining the intervention cycle as the primary focus of youth mentoring research, DuBois et al. (2006) noted that research about youth mentoring still has only begun. There are dimensions of youth mentoring that have not been studied as well as research methodologies that have not been utilized. The authors also noted that investigations have not yet studied the effect of relationships within the young person’s social network. In addition, DuBois et al. (2006) and Rhodes (2008) called for more research to examine, among other aspects, community contexts, interaction among multiple contexts, supports and resources. The qualitative case study approach has been utilized in studies on mentoring in order to gain insight into the community context, which was an important aspect of the current study. Straus, Johnson, Marquez, and Feldman (2013) for example, utilized a qualitative case study approach to determine characteristics of good mentoring in faculty mentoring relationships in two universities implementing formal mentoring programs. A random stratified sampling technique was used for inclusion, demographic information was collected, and a professional interviewer conducted semi-structured interviews. A content analysis of the transcribed interviews was conducted, and themes were identified. The themes were coded and categorized, and a computer software system was used for 41
the analysis. Results yielded information about the characteristics of an effective mentor and effective mentees, along with information about what constituted a successful mentoring relationship. Other scholars were also interested in faculty mentoring programs, and they utilized qualitative methodologies. Eller, Lev, and Feurer (2014), for example, utilized a qualitative approach to identify components of effective mentoring relationships. This study included 12 universities, whereas Straus et al. (2013) had included only two universities. Eller et al. (2014) used a purposive sampling technique to identify members who took part in a workshop with the expressed purpose of determining factors of effective mentoring. The facilitated workshop was audiotaped and statistical software was used for categorizing coded themes, which was a technique similar to that used by Straus et al. (2013). Key components of effective mentoring relationships were identified. In summary, a qualitative case study approach was the appropriate methodological choice for the current study. While research into mentoring with regard to student success has been conducted utilizing both quantitative and qualitative methodologies from different perspectives (Chapin and Yang, 2009; Copeland & Peck Beins, 2013; Deutsch & Spencer, 2009; Drexler et al., 2012; Dubois et al., 2011; Karcher et al., 2006; Rhodes, 2008; Sandín Esteban & Sánchez Martí, 2014; Smith & Stormont, 2011), researchers have successfully used a qualitative case study methodology in inquiries about mentoring (Eller et al., 2014; Straus et al., 2013). The qualitative case study approach allowed for the gathering of rich, contextual data about the lived experiences of the participants, which fit with the goal to determine whether mentoring is a successful intervention that decreases dropout rates for adolescent Latino males. 42
Chapter 2 Summary Synthesis of Research Findings The dropout rate has persisted in US high schools, with Latino males maintaining the highest rate (NCES, 2012). Knesting (2008) described the experience of dropouts as overwhelming and discouraging and identified a sense of belonging as important for academically-at-risk students to remain in school. Podsiadlo & Philliber (2003) identified four success factors for potential dropouts: (a) a positive relationship with the principal, (b) supportive teachers, (c) the perception that student voices are heard, and (d) a caring school community. When a school response is negative, such as suspending student, feelings of mistrust increase (Rios, 2010). Taylor and Graham (2007) pointed out that this negative, downward spiral is especially true for young males of color from low socioeconomic backgrounds. The negative downward spiral trend for young men of color results in a phenomena Cokley et al. (2011) and Bailey and Bradbury-Bailey (2007) described as academic disidentification; academic success is associated with white students and young men of color reject academic success for fear of being accused of acting white. Osborne and Jones (2011) identified belief as an important influence in young men’s capacity to see other possible selves. Bridgeland et al. (2009) identified a discernable trajectory toward becoming a dropout and introduced diagnostic tools to predict students at risk of dropping out of high school in Grade 9. Neild (2009) examined the success of Grade 9 transition programs as a countermeasure. The theoretical framework for the current study was social learning theory. Bandura (1978) theorized that rather than influences coming only from internal causes, as noted in the operant conditioning theory of his day, there were external influences that 43
caused a change in behavior as well. He researched the human capacity to observe others, learn from their experiences, both positive and negative, and shift behaviors as a result. The cognitive process that mediates this type of social learning is triggered when the subject places value on the outcome of the desired behavior. In social learning theory, others are an important component of learning. Modeled behavior is attended to and reflected on, and the observer learns from the modeled behavior. In a group context, modeled behaviors are retained in memory and possibly practiced in some form in the future. A group setting allows the observer to practice desired behaviors, build skills, and increase self-efficacy. Mentoring has a long history as part of a process toward behavior change. Historically, the mentor was part of an apprenticeship, where an older and more experienced adult taught a younger, less experienced person a specific trade or skill (Anastasia et al., 2012; Gordon et al., 2009). In the early 1900s BBBSA modernized the idea of apprenticeship, targeted young people who lacked older role models, and matched them with a mentor (Flaxman et al., 1992). In the 1980s, mentoring was used as an academic intervention that became commonplace by the 2000s (DuBois et al., 2011). DuBois et al. were able to show the positive effect of mentoring on mentee academic and affective skills. The authors also suggest that more research on mentoring was needed, particularly on mentor recruitment and training, as well as program outcomes. Anastasia et al. (2012) identified mentoring success factors as the length of time and quality of relationship between the mentor and mentee. Besides length of the relationship (Rhodes, 2008), other factors included integration with other programs, the target population, and the intensity of the mentoring. Rhodes also pointed out that longer lasting mentor/mentee 44
relationships are better, and school year programs are not as conducive to long term relationships as community based programs. Wyatt (2009) countered that schools are the perfect setting for mentoring because youth and adults are together every day. Drexler et al. (2012) identified the informal learning that occurs as a byproduct of mentoring. Zand et al. (2009) focused on relationship as the critical factor in mentorship, stating that a successful mentorship results in positive outcomes for youth. Karcher et al. (2006) examined the effect of group mentoring and showed that the transfer of experiences and skills support cultural identity. Newman et al. (2007) described the importance of group belonging to the adolescent identity. The development of a positive identity, they posited, is crucial to developing social competency. Bailey and Bradbury-Bailey (2007) examined the support group and determined that it is a positive intervention. The support group allows young people to counter the images and experiences they have had in their life and build a new narrative for themselves. According to Chapin and Yang (2009), the support group builds resiliency, especially for youth from low socio-economic backgrounds, minority youth, and males. Smith and Stormont (2011) theorized that measurement of mentoring programs is difficult because of the multiplicity of programs and the variance in resources. The critical components, they concluded, are that programs have a clear target group, solid infrastructure, and stable funding. Deutsch and Spencer (2009) posited that all elements of mentoring are interconnected and research is needed from multiple angles. Critique of Previous Research This literature review included a review of the research about high school dropout rates and reasons (Bailey & Bradbury-Bailey, 2007; Bridgeland et al., 2009; Cokley et 45
al., 2011; Knesting, 2008; NCES, 2012; Neild, 2009; Osborne & Jones, 2011; Podsiadlo & Phillibar, 2003; Prevatt & Kelly, 2003; Rios, 2010; Swanson, 2008; Taylor & Graham, 2007), mentoring (Anastasia et al., 2012; Chapin & Yang, 2009; Copeland & Peck Beins, 2013; Dappen & Isernhagen, 2005; DeAnda, 2001; Deutsch & Spencer, 2009; DuBois et al., 2011; Flaxman et al., 1992; Gordon et al., 2009; Greeson, 2013; Grossman et al., 2012; Karcher et al., 2009; Newman et al., 2007; Rhodes, 2008; Smith & Stormont, 2011; Wyatt, 2009; Zand et al., 2009), and social learning theory (Bandura, 1965, 1971, 1977a, 1978, 1982, 1986, 1993, 2005; Bandura, Ross, & Ross, 1963; Meichenbaum, 1984; Rosenthal & Zimmerman, 1978; Rosenstock et al., 1988). Most of the studies about dropouts and mentoring were quantitative, (Chapin & Yang, 2009; Deutsch & Spencer, 2009, Flaxman et al., 1992; Gordon et al., 2009; Grossman et al., 2012; Karcher et al., 2010, 2006; Rhodes, 2008; Smith & Stormont, 2011; Zand et al., 2009) and there were a few conducted using qualitative methods (DeAnda, 2001; Newman et al., 2007; Wyatt, 2009). A recurring finding of the mentoring studies was the need for extended relationships between mentor and mentee to produce a positive and sustainable impact (Anastasia et al., 2012; Deutsch & Spencer, 2009; DuBois et al., 2011; Smith & Stormont, 2011). Most of the studies reviewed failed to provide a theoretical framework tied to social learning theory to support their examinations. The current study, thus, advances what is known about social learning theory as it applies to academically-at risk, adolescent, Latino-males through the use of a qualitative methodology using social learning theory as a theoretical lens. The problem identified was the persistently high dropout rate for Latino males in high school (NCES, 2012). Research indicated mentoring interventions have been a common
46
strategy to counter school failure, but more research was necessary to understand the various forms of mentoring program (Deutsch & Spencer, 2009; Smith & Stormont, 2011).
Support groups offer a new model of mentoring as an intervention for decreasing dropout rates, and they deserve further research (Bailey & Bradbury-Bailey, 2007). While the support group format is from the field of psychology (Chapin & Yang, 2009), the support group as an academic intervention tool has not been examined to determine its efficacy (Bailey & Bradbury-Bailey, 2007). From a methodological perspective, most mentoring studies involved large numbers of mentors and mentees in large programs such as BBSA (Flaxman et al., 1992; Grossman et al., 2012). The data collection focused primarily on mentors and programs and measured outcomes for youth. Only a few, such as Wyatt’s (2009) study, examined mentoring from the lens of the mentee. The absence of the mentee’s voice provided the impetus for this study. The goal was to interview, observe, and gather the personal reflections of participants. The closest work that comes to this approach is from the field of psychology, where the research centered on the efficacy of support groups (Chapin & Yang, 2009). The current study, by contrast, provided an internal look at attitudes and perceptions of participants to determine the effect of mentoring.
Conclusion Chapter 2 contains a review of the extant literature regarding high school dropouts, the research about the early identifiers of high school dropouts, an overview of the idea of academic disidentification, and the idea of mentoring and support group membership for intervention as a response to students at risk of becoming high school 47
dropouts. Bandura’s (1971, 1978) social learning theory provided the foundation for understanding the impact of mentoring. What follows in Chapter 3 is a statement of the problem addressed in this research, and an overview of the research questions, methodology, and sample.
48
CHAPTER 3. METHODOLOGY Introduction The purpose of this study was to uncover and illuminate the group processes, dynamics, and individual and collective experiences that emerge from a peer support group for academically at-risk, adolescent Latino males in an urban West Coast state’s high school. The peer-support group was designed to improve attitudes toward school and learning. There was a great deal of research conducted in the 1980s and 1990s about the usefulness of mentoring as a one-to-one intervention for academically struggling males (Anastasia et al., 2012; Gordon et al., 2009). The result was the expansion of mentoring without sufficient research into the effectiveness of mentoring as an intervention for academically struggling youth (DuBois et al., 2011). The dropout problem for young men, however, persists (NCES, 2012). Educators need innovative interventions to combat the high dropout rate of adolescent Latino males. DuBois et al. (2006, p. 649) stated “insufficient scholarship … on some of the newest modalities of mentoring (e.g. group mentoring).” There was a need, thus, to focus on how a peer support group could contribute to the support-base needed for young Latino men at risk of dropping out of high school. The statement of the problem and research questions are reviewed, and an explanation of the research methodology and design is provided. This chapter includes detailed information about the target population, instrumentation, data collection, and 49
related field testing. An explanation of data analysis procedures, limitations of the research design, internal and external validity, expected findings, and ethical issues are also discussed.
Statement of the Problem The high school dropout rate for Latino males has been a persistent problem in American education (NCES, 2012). Data from the NCES (2012) illustrated that while dropout levels varied over the past 20 years, the average remained at approximately 10%. Interventions such as mentoring have been a common strategy to counter school failure (Deutsch & Spencer, 2009; Smith & Stormont, 2011). Support groups offer a new model of mentoring as an intervention for decreasing dropout rates, and they deserve further research (Bailey & Bradbury-Bailey, 2007). The support group has been largely unexamined to determine its efficacy as an academic intervention tool (Bailey & Bradbury-Bailey, 2007). The current study addressed this gap. The specific problem addressed was that not enough qualitative research has been conducted to understand the group processes, dynamics, and individual and collective experiences that emerge from academically at-risk, adolescent Latino males taking part in a group mentoring program. This study was designed to determine how a mentoring program affected adolescent Latino males in order to gain information to address the high dropout rate of this group. The purpose of this exploratory qualitative case study was to uncover and illuminate the group processes, dynamics, and individual and collective experiences that emerged from a peer support group for academically at-risk, adolescent Latino males in a high school in an urban West Coast US state. 50
Research Question There was one main research question posed for the current study. RQ1. What are the group processes, dynamics, and individual and collective experiences that emerge from academically at-risk, adolescent, Latino males in an urban West Coast high school who take part in a peer support group designed to improve attitudes toward school and learning?
Research Methodology The methodology selected for this qualitative research was an exploratory case study. A qualitative exploratory case study methodology allowed for insight into the meaning behind individual attitudes toward school and learning (Creswell, 2009; Lodico, Spaulding, & Voegtle, 2010; McMillan & Schumacher, 2014). The experiences of academically struggling, adolescent Latino males in an urban West Coast high school were examined. Interviews, observations, and journals provided a lens into the individual and collective experiences of the young men in the peer support group intervention program. The support group was sponsored by a program that targets young men of color who have experienced chronic academic failure. The majority of studies about mentoring programs were conducted using quantitative methodologies (Chapin & Yang, 2009; Deutsch & Spencer, 2009; Flaxman et al., 1992; Gordon et al., 2009; Grossman et al., 2012; Karcher et al., 2010, 2006; Rhodes, 2008; Smith & Stormont, 2011; Zand et al., 2009). Researchers examined outcomes of students in large programs such as BBBSA (DuBois et al., 2011). Outcomes researched focused on program effectiveness as gauged by an increase in student 51
academic achievement (Gordon et al., 2009; Karcher et al., 2006). Researchers determined more research was needed on mentoring relationships (Deutsch & Spencer, 2009; Zand et al., 2009) and that there was a dearth of research from the perspective of the young person’s experience (Newman et al., 2007). A qualitative method is appropriate for describing and analyzing “individual and collective social actions, beliefs, thoughts, and perceptions” (McMillan & Schumaker, 2014, p. 315). A qualitative approach allows a researcher to take a constructivist stance and understand a phenomenon from the perspective of the research subject. A critical task of the qualitative researcher is to understand the experience from the research subject’s point of view, and to base interpretations on the meaning the research subject assigns to the experience (McMillan & Schumaker, 2014). The qualitative exploratory case study methodology chosen allowed for the examination of attitudes; academic achievement indicators cannot measure attitudes.
Research Design A holistic, single case study was conducted (Baxter & Jack, 2008), and the case was a peer support group. The participants in the study were determined by: (a) the ability to obtain parent permission, (b) ethnicity, (c) gender, and (d) academic achievement level. Only academically at-risk adolescent Latino males whose parents or legal guardians consented were the focus of the study. The mentor was not included in data collection because the focus was to obtain information about the attitudes of the members of the group. The case was bound by time and activity; the peer support group
52
for academically at-risk, high-school, Latino males operated during the school year and functioned primarily from February through June. A single case study design was selected to capture the individual experiences of the group phenomena: a support group for academically at-risk, high-school, Latino males. Data collection included participant journal entries, interviews, and video-taped observations of the group meetings during a four-month spring semester to explore participant attitudes about learning as a result of participating in the support group. Support group sessions were video-taped by the mentor leading the group. Pre- and post-study interviews were conducted to gather the data necessary to determine participant perceptions about academic achievement and participation in the support group. Participants maintained a weekly journal via an online survey tool to document their thoughts about how the peer support group did or did not impact their attitudes toward school and learning. Journal entries were reviewed each week, and the following week’s journal prompts were adjusted to support an iterative cycle of reflection on the focus of the relationship between the peer-support group and participant attitudes toward school and learning. A single case study design was appropriate because it allowed for examination of a single phenomenon without regard to number of participants (McMillan & Schumaker, 2014). As previously mentioned, there was a lack of research about mentoring from the perspective of the young person (Newman et al., 2007). The exploratory design utilized a data collection plan designed to explore the experience of the support group from the participant perspective.
53
Population and Sampling Procedure The research was conducted in a densely populated urban area known for gang activity, and where there were several homicides annually. In a recent study the area was listed as the fourth most dangerous place in the US. A large interstate freeway bisects the city and all of the homicides have been concentrated on the eastern side of the freeway. The western side of the freeway is almost entirely violence free. Students living east of the freeway are categorized as having complex post traumatic stress disorder (DuncanAdrade, 2009). Unlike soldiers who escape the violence of their deployment when they return home, students in this school district re-experienced trauma daily. The high school dropout rate in this area exceeded state and national averages. Immigrant families were the predominant population in the neighborhood; parents were typically non-English speaking, and students were bilingual. At the high schools where the support group met, the students typified the local statistics. Most students entered high school with middle school reading levels, and they were even further behind in their math skills. The support group targeted academically at-risk young men on the path to becoming high school dropouts, and the group provided an opportunity to understand the larger world and possibilities existing outside the immediate environment. A typical convenience sampling method was utilized (Lodico et al., 2010). The number of participants varied annually and included up to 10 members. There was one mentor. Group membership reflected the demographics of the area; thus, the majority of participants were academically at-risk, adolescent, Latino males. Participants had been retained more than once in their educational experience, were over-age for their grade
54
level, or were credit deficient. Each of these factors have been linked with dropout (Reagan-Porras, 2013). The study was introduced to parents and students at an informational meeting about the peer support group. The meeting offered the opportunity to explain the study, meet parents and students, and answer questions. Participants self-selected as both a parent permission slip and youth assent form were required to participate in the study. Study participants, thus, included three support group members who were academically at risk adolescent Latino males in high school who returned both the signed parental consent and the signed student participation agreement.
Sources of Data Data were obtained from whole group observations, individual interviews, and from the journal entries made by members of the peer support group. The pre- and poststudy interviews and individual journal entries provided insight into each participant’s attitudes about their experiences in the support group. Periodic videotaping of the support group sessions was conducted, and the videos were used to observe and record shifts in attitudes. Interviews Participants were interviewed in one-on-one, private settings, using the school counselor’s office, a small room designed to support meetings of up to four people and has no windows, to ensure confidentiality. Participants were interviewed at the beginning and end of the research study. The interview questions were open-ended to allow for
55
reflection (Merriam & Tisdell, 2015). The questions are adapted from a qualitative study of experiential learning (Lerma, 2012). Journals Participants were asked to keep a journal to record their thoughts immediately after peer support group meetings. The goal was to capture participant reflections of their experiences participating in the peer support group. Journaling was done via an online survey tool to support data analysis. Participants were provided tablet devices to create the online journal entries. The support group mentor kept the tablets in a convenientlylocated, locked cabinet during the data collection period. At the end of the study, participants were given their assigned tablet to keep. This was the incentive provided to research participants. The incentive was described at the family meeting to launch the study. Parent permission letters and student assent forms included this information. Journal entries were used to capture student attitudes and experiences in the moment to be able to determine if the experience of peer support group participation influenced their thoughts or perspectives about their high school education. Using Phelps (2005) work as a model, guidelines for journaling were left open. Each week, students received an electronic link to an online survey tool for them to create their journal reflection. The questions for the first three weeks were developed with the assistance of an expert panel, and the following week’s prompts were written as the journal entries were reviewed; thus, an iterative cycle of reflection about the support group’s impact on school and learning was created. The journal prompts were based on an experiential study (Eichler, 2009).
56
Observations To preserve the gender focus of the groups, the group’s mentor was trained to act as videographer based on Meier’s protocol (2010). Regularly scheduled meetings were video recorded once each month; thus, a total of four meetings were video recorded. Students were arranged so that only consenting participants were in the camera frame. Dialogue captured from non-consenting participants was not coded or included in any data analysis. Beginning attitudes, shifting attitudes, and any change in attitudes were indicators identified for coding purposes when viewing the video recordings. These indicators are detailed in the data analysis section. The videos, stored on memory chips, will be shredded after seven years. Panel of Experts The interview questions and journal prompts were field-tested by a panel of two experts in education and qualitative research. The experts selected for the field test of the interview questions and journal prompts had backgrounds in teaching, educational administration, coaching, and supporting other teachers. The experts were all university instructors in doctoral programs. One panel member was a qualitative methods instructor for a major West Coast university in the US. The other was a university instructor for a major online university in the area of secondary instruction. Panel members received the instruments electronically and provided written recommendations to change language that was unclear, and perfect the instructions to align with to the vocabulary level of the participants. The experts also made suggestions for how the journal questions could be modified over time based on participant responses. 57
The panel only reviewed initial journal prompts because it was made clear the journal prompts would change based on the journal reflections of the participants as the study unfolded. Based on their feedback, the interview questions and journal prompts were modified to maintain the focus on the group process, group dynamics, and the individual and collective experiences.
Credibility, Dependability, and Transferability In their meta-analysis validity, reliability, and generalizability in qualitative studies, Ali and Yusof (2011, p. 62) concluded that credibility is best defined as “authentic representations of experience.” The authors went on to describe credibility as a reflective commentary wherein the researcher provides thick descriptions of the phenomena and utilizes iterative questioning in data collection. The data collected for this study were authentic representations that came from pre- and post-study interviews with participants, 10 weekly journal entries, and from three video-taped participant observations of peer support group meetings. The data analysis process for this study, therefore, was based on thick descriptions, which included the social context (Morgan & Drury, 2003). The journal prompts were iterative in nature. Participants were presented with journal prompt questions each week that directed them to reflect on the impact of the support group experience on their attitude toward school and learning. According to Ali and Yusof (2011), typical measures to ensure credibility were purposeful sampling, prolonged engagement, persistent observation, triangulation and member checking. The video-recorded observations were conducted over a school semester to meet the
58
persistent observation criteria. Data convergence was uncovered, which formed themes (Creswell & Miller, 2000). Dependability is another type of research-related reliability (Ali & Yusof, 2011). The goal is to minimize idiosyncrasies in interpretation, and to have the ability to track variability to identifiable sources. A unique code was maintained for each participant to both ensure dependability and support triangulation by looking for convergence within each research participant’s data set. Additionally, all interviews, observations, and journal entries were collected using electronic audio recording equipment, digital video recording equipment, and electronic data collection software for the journal entries. According to McMillan and Schumaker (2014), transferability “enables others to understand similar situations and apply the findings in subsequent research or practical situations” (p. 330). Design components that support transferability include: (a) recognition of the researcher as an outsider, (b) a clear description of the social context, (c) capture of authentic narrative, and (d) development of a clear theoretical framework. Additionally, a case study is one of five recommended strategies for transferability of a qualitative study. The researcher’s position for the current study was that of an outsider because the support group was for high-school age males only. The mentor leading the group was also male. The person conducting the study was female. The data analysis included a thorough description of the people, time, place, and purpose for the gathering of the support group. Data analysis relies on thick descriptions of the research data rather than an analytical approach. Finally, the literature review contained an extensive review of the theoretical framework for this study.
59
Reliability Reliability is described as the replicability of the study (Merriam & Tisdell, 2015). In a quantitative study, numerical density establishes reliability to demonstrate that research participants have experienced the same or similar results (Merriam & Tisdell, 2015). The way to achieve reliability in a qualitative study is to provide detailed descriptions of the methodology and the range of data collection strategies using within the study (Morgan & Drury, 2003). The methodology and data collection strategies are described in detail above. The interview questions and journal prompts were field tested by a panel of experts. The video observation protocol was based on an approved data tool. Reliability is, thus, supported through the use of field tested questions and a documented video observation protocol. Triangulation is another way to ensure reliability in a qualitative study. Triangulation is defined as a “procedure where researchers search for convergence among multiple and different sources of information to form themes or categories in a study (Creswell & Miller, 2000, p.126). The use of multiple data sources, i.e. participant interviews, written journals, and video recorded observations, support the reliability of the study. Had the results of these data collection tools provided dissonant results, the study would not have been reliable. Convergence was apparent in the data analysis provided in Chapter 4, for example, when the data indicated study participants shared positive reflections of the support group. The positive reflections were apparent in the interviews and in the journal entries, and the behavior exhibited in the video observations indicated similar, positive attitudes during the support group sessions.
60
Data Collection Procedures Appropriate permissions were obtained from the school and program coordinator in order to conduct research with the peer support group for academically at-risk, highschool, Latino males. The Capella institutional review board (IRB) application included all letters of permission, samples of parent consent and youth assent forms, contact information and vitae of the panel of experts for the field test of the interview and journal prompts, and the video recording observation protocol. Also included was an explanation of the study, a restatement of the research question, and data collection and analysis procedures. Once Capella IRB approval was granted, the study commenced. As previously described, the study was introduced at an initial support group meeting when parents were in attendance. The program leader provided an overview of the support group that included participant expectations and program goals, and the research study was also introduced. There was time for parents and students to ask questions and review the required parent permission and student assent forms. Parent and potential participant questions were answered during and immediately following the initial meeting. Two parents and their students completed and returned the forms at the informational meeting. Two more complete sets were returned the week after the meeting. Data collection began once all forms were returned from interested parents and students. Both parent and student forms were required for participation in the study. Those students who returned only the parent or the student form were excluded from the study. One set of forms came from a non-Latino member of the support group and was excluded from the study.
61
Interviews Each participant was interviewed twice in a one-to-one, private setting. Interviews were conducted once at the beginning of the research study when the peer support group sessions launched, and again when all the peer support group sessions ended three and a half months later. Both pre- and post-interviews were carried out at the school site, using a private office. The interviews began with a review of the study and an opportunity for the participant to ask any questions about the study. Interviews were audio-recorded using a tablet with recording software and a table-top microphone to ensure a high quality recording. Participants were individually interviewed for a second time at the end of the peer support group session, which was at the end of the school year. These interviews also took place on campus in a private administrative office. Participant demographic data was collected, and participants were asked a series of questions about their attitudes toward school to provide a baseline of student attitudes. The second interview also included questions about participant attitudes toward school. Finally, participants were asked to share any final reflections or thoughts about the study. Journal Process Once the initial interviews concluded, each of the three study participants received an assigned, electronic tablet from the group mentor who explained how to enter their first journal entry. At the end of the support group meeting each week, participants were provided their assigned tablet and given a new hyperlink to submit their journal entry for the week. Participants provided journal entries for 10 weeks. The participants returned their tablet to the group mentor each week for the mentor to store in a locked 62
cabinet. The number of journal entries captured each week was verified, the hyperlink was locked to prevent any extraneous journal entries, and a new hyperlink for the next meeting was created. The journal prompt was adjusted each week; the goal was to gain a deeper understanding of the participant’s attitudes toward school in order to determine if their attitudes toward school shift over the course of participating in the peer support group. At the conclusion of the research study, participants kept their assigned tablet to take home as their personal device. Using Phelps (2005) work as a model, the journal guidelines were left open to allow participants to record any changes in their attitudes. The journal prompts were based on an experiential study conducted by Eichler (2009), and they were altered during the course of the study based on participant responses. Videotaped Observations Three support group meetings were videotaped by the mentor who had received training to use the equipment and position the participants effectively. Two sessions were successfully recorded, one at the outset of the study and one at the conclusion of the study. One other session had a bad memory card resulting in a loss of the video recording from that session. The mentor tried to secure one additional recording but it was impossible to convene the group because the school ran an alternate session for four weeks where students were off campus every day. The recordings were classified as preand post-study data. The process for videotaping was taken from Meier’s (2010) protocol. The mentor created a seating chart for each video recorded session so that each participant was identified. Dialogue captured from non-consenting participants was not coded or included in the data. The mentor kept the camera’s memory card for the 63
recorded sessions in the same locked cabinet with the tablets. The memory card was collected after each session, and the mentor was provided with a new memory card for each session. The collected memory cards were kept in a designated locked drawer in a locked office.
Data Analysis Procedures An overarching goal was to gain thick, rich descriptions from the participants (McMillan & Schumaker, 2014). As the journaling data analysis unfolded, themes emerged to describe the participants’ range of attitudes toward school and learning. Video recorded observations were analyzed following the protocol developed by Meier (2010) to measure any shift in attitudes. Interviews were analyzed using an inductive data analysis process. Interviews Following McMillan and Schumaker’s (2014) inductive analysis, interviews were transcribed and analyzed for key words and themes. Structured questions were utilized during the interview process to probe for both positive and negative perceptions and to allow the participants to share any reflections. Initial interviews were analyzed separately from final interviews to identify themes within each set of interviews. Themes from the two sets of interviews were compared to identify any shift in attitude and experience over time. Following the inductive analysis process, noting codes in the margin, patterns emerged to produce generalizations. Selected excerpts are included in the analysis that supported the general summary of the patterns that emerged. Demographic information was gathered during the initial interview to identify participant similarities and 64
differences. The interviews were audio-recorded to capture the information verbatim. Use of the participant’s words is important to the validity of a study (Ali & Yusof, 2011). Video recorded Observations Video-tapes of meetings were examined using Meier’s (2010) video observation protocol to identify any noticeable shift in attitudes. The analysis followed the guidelines of a typological analysis as described by Hatch (2002). Video recorded observations were coded based on a three-step definition (typology) of levels of attitude toward school experiences. The three typologies for the video recorded observations were beginning, shifting, and changed attitudes. The typological coding offered an important focus to prevent the data collection from becoming unfocused and unwieldy. 1. Beginning attitudes were reflected by students who talked about school with disinterest, as though they were an observer. They may, for example, simply have reported how they were doing (good, bad, passing, failing) or how often they were at school or absent. They may have identified a high absentee rate or reported that they attended school regularly, were doing well or struggling in their classes, or any number of indicators that simply provided a perfunctory report of their relationship to school. 2. Shifting attitudes were those actions or comments that illustrated they were more engaged or self-reflective or further disengaged from the group. Deeper engagement or self-reflection was measured by active participation postures such as attentive listening or comments about why they were doing good or bad in school. To exhibit further disengagement, they may have refused to
65
participate, they may have distracted others, or they may not have attended the support group sessions. 3. A change in attitude was observable when participants were more self-
reflective, or when they exhibited disengagement. They may have, on the one hand, talked openly about their experiences, asked questions about college, career and future goals that required high school completion, or they may not have participated, showed continued disinterest in the group and discussion, or they may have stopped attending altogether. Journals Inductive analysis (Hatch, 2002) was applied to the participant journal entries. The inductive process allowed the themes to emerge from the data set. Journal entries were submitted electronically allowing for easy export and analysis. As each week’s entries were reviewed, the following week’s journal entry was adjusted to ensure focus on the participant’s attitudes about school as impacted by their experience in the support group. The entire data set was read to identify initial themes. Semantic relationships were identified within the themes to establish domains, i.e., categories of meaning (Hatch, 2002). Next, codes were assigned to the domains and isolated those domains that were supported by specific excerpts from the data set. Semantic relationships within and among the domains were identified to ascertain themes.
Ethical Considerations All of the consent forms were obtained prior to the study. Participation was voluntary, requiring the submission of the parent consent form and student assent form. 66
Two participants were excluded from the study because they did not bring back one of the required forms. All participants were assigned a code, P1, P2, etc. to label all interviews, journal entries and video analysis. All data was stored electronically on external memory storage devices maintained in a locked cabinet. The main point of contact was the school secretary who also signed a confidentiality agreement for the study.
Summary This was a qualitative exploratory case study of the experiences of academically struggling, adolescent Latino males in an urban West Coast high school in a peer support group. As DuBois et al. (2006) indicated, there was insufficient research on newer versions of mentoring, such as group mentoring. The design was based on a single case of a peer support group as previously described. Data collection consisted of (a) pre- and post-interviews conducted individually with research participants, (b) weekly journal entries, and (c) monthly video recorded observations of group meetings. Data analysis focused on a shift in attitudes of participants toward school and learning as related to their experience in the support group. Findings of the data analysis are presented in Chapter 4.
67
CHAPTER 4. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS Introduction The purpose of this study was to uncover and illuminate the group processes, dynamics, and individual and collective experiences that emerge from a peer support group for academically at-risk, adolescent Latino males in an urban West Coast state’s high school. In the US, the dropout rate is currently just above 10% (NCES, 2012). When the data is disaggregated, the dropout rate is much higher in low socio-economic, urban areas (Swanson, 2008). There was a great deal of research conducted in the 1980s and 1990s about the usefulness of mentoring as a one-to-one intervention for academically struggling males (Anastasia et al., 2012; Gordon et al., 2009). DuBois et al. (2006) stated there was a lack of research into newer forms of mentoring, such as group mentoring. A qualitative exploratory case study methodology was used to gather insight into the group processes and individual and collective experiences of academically at-risk, adolescent Latino males who participated in a peer support group. Through pre- and postindividual interviews, weekly journal entries, and monthly video recorded observations, gathered data was analyzed to determine if any shift in attitude or experience occurred over the course of the study. Chapter 4 contains information about the setting and participants in the study, along with an analysis of the data yielded from each of the collection instruments. A conclusion, limitations, implications, and recommendations for further research based on the summary and discussion of the results follows in Chapter 5. 68
Descriptive Data The case study focused on a school-based support group for academically at-risk males in a low socio-economic urban high school on the West Coast. The group membership varied each year. The group for the current study consisted of 10 students, primarily of Latino descent. Once the group launched, members and their parents were invited to an informational meeting about the group. At that meeting, the research study was presented. Forms and information about the study were provided in both English and Spanish. Two students and parents returned all signed consent forms that night. The other two sets of forms were returned in the two weeks following the meeting. Although six students expressed interest in participating in the study, only four students were able to produce the required student assent and parent permission slips. Of the four students, only three were Latino, so the fourth was excluded from the study to maintain the focus on academically at-risk, Latino male students. For the purpose of this study, the term academically at-risk refers to young men of color who have either repeated a grade level, are over age for their current grade, have been suspended or expelled, or identified as struggling in school. A description of each study participant is provided following this summary chart.
69
Table 1. Participant Demographics
Grade Age Birth Country Number of years in US Languages spoken Age at entry into US public school Grade at entry into US public school States attended school Number of schools attended Parent level of education Number of school suspensions Grade(s) repeated
P1 9 14 US 14 English, Spanish
P2 10 16 US 16 English, Spanish
P3 11 17 Guatemala 8 English, Mam (a Guatemalan dialect), Spanish
4
4
9
pre-K CA
pre-K CA
2nd WA, CA
3 10th grade
5 elementary school
3 1st
0 NA
3 9th
0 NA
Participant 1 Participant 1 (P1) was in Grade 9 and was 14 years of age. He was born in the US and started pre-Kindergarten at the age of 4. This participant had only lived in one state and had attended a total of three schools. He spoke English and Spanish, the highest grade his parents completed was tenth grade, and he had one younger brother and one older sister. None of the three children had completed high school yet. Participant 1 had never been suspended or expelled from school, and he did not repeat any grades in school. He struggled with school and was concerned that he would not succeed in high school.
70
Participant 2 Participant 2 (P2) was in Grade 10 and was 16 years of age. He was born in the US, and he started pre-kindergarten at the age of four. Participant 2 had only lived in one state, and he had attended a total of five schools. Participant 2 spoke English and Spanish, the highest grade his parents completed was elementary school, and he had two sisters and one brother. His siblings were all older, and two of them had competed high school. Participant 2 had been suspended four times and was barred from attending his previous school for carrying a bullet. He had repeated the ninth grade. Participant 3 Participant 3 (P3) was in Grade 11, and he was 17 years of age. He was born in Guatemala and started second grade in the US when he was nine years old. Prior to moving to the US, he had no formal education. And the highest grade his parents completed was the equivalent of first grade. Participant 3 had lived in two different states, and he had attended a total of three schools. Participant 3 spoke English, Spanish, and a Mayan dialect. He had two younger siblings, and none of the children had completed high school yet. Participant 3 had never been suspended or expelled from school and had not repeated a grade. Academically, P3 had been chronically below grade level. The group was a local support group started by a former teacher at the school who had since been promoted to an administrative role at a nearby middle school. The group continued to meet following the former teacher’s promotion, and the founder of the group identified a mentor to lead the group. The mentor was one of the teachers at the school site. The beginning of the year involved identification and preparation of the mentor to launch the group, followed by a recruitment period for participants, after which time the 71
group began meeting weekly. The support group targeted young men of color who were academically at-risk, having either repeated a grade level, were over age for their current grade, or had been suspended, expelled, or identified as struggling in school.
Data Analysis Data analysis for this qualitative case study followed different procedures for each of the data sets. First, inductive data analysis (McMillan & Schumacher, 2014) guided the pre- and post-interview analysis. Second, the video observations were a blend of the protocol developed by Meier (2010) within a typological framework. Third, the journal analysis followed Hatch’s (2002) process for inductive data analysis. Inductive data analysis was applied to both the interviews and the participant journals. Inductive analysis allowed the themes to emerge from the data through iterative reflection (McMillan & Schumaker, 20014). The process of inductive analysis begins with the specific and moves toward general statements based on patterns of meaning identified within the data (Hatch, 2002). This process involves looking at the data set as a whole, identifying codes in the margin as the data is read and refining the codes into general themes (McMillan & Schumaker, 2014). Thus, the categories “emerge from the data, rather than being imposed on them prior to collection” (McMillan & Schumaker, 2014, p. 364). Meier’s (2010) video observation protocol was applied for the video recordings of support group meetings. Video recorded observations were coded based on three typologies that described the participants’ levels of attitudes toward school experiences. Video recordings of meetings were examined to identify any noticeable shift in attitudes. 72
•
Beginning attitudes were noted for participants who talked about school with disinterest, as though they were an observer. They may have, for example, simply reported how they were doing (good, bad, passing, failing) or how often they attended school or were absent. They may have: (a) identified a high absentee rate or reported attending school regularly, (b) reported they were doing well in their classes or were struggling, or (c) reported any number of indicators that simply provided a perfunctory report of their relationship to school.
•
Shifting attitudes were noted for participants when they were reflective about their school experiences or became disengaged from the group. Reflective participation was noted for participants who went beyond simply reporting; they began to identify why they were doing good or bad, or why they were passing or failing. The reasons were focused on actions, either theirs or others (such as teachers or peers), and how those actions were influencing them, either positively or negatively (acknowledging or blaming). Shifts exhibiting disengagement were noted for participants who refused to participate, distracted others, or did not attend.
•
A change in attitude was measured when participants began to be more selfreflective or exhibited disengagement. They may have, on the one hand, talked openly about their experiences by asking questions about college, or discussing career and future goals that required high school completion. Disengagement was noted for those who did not participate, for those who
73
showed continued disinterest in the group or discussion, or for those who stopped attending altogether. Once the initial coding was complete, the typology framework was applied to search for patterns, find non-examples, create generalizations, and select excerpts that exemplified the general summary of each pattern.
Results The American high school dropout rate for males remains high (NCES, 2012). Numerous interventions have been attempted; the most fruitful intervention has been mentoring (DuBois et al., 2011). While mentoring has positively impacted dropout rates, high dropout levels persist for specific subgroups, especially in densely populated settings (Swanson, 2008). Newer interventions include the support group, which are typically carried out within school settings (Bailey & Bradbury-Bailey, 2007). Insufficient research has been done to measure the effectiveness of the support group mentoring approach (Schwartz et al., 2013). Social learning theory was the theoretical framework for the study. Bandura (1977b) noted that human beings are able to observe and learn from the way others experience their world. In addition, Bandura found that continuous interactions with others regulate individual behavior. Support groups provide the context for this type of interaction and learning. Thus, the research question posed for the current study was: RQ. What are the group processes, dynamics, and individual and collective experiences that emerge from academically at-risk, adolescent Latino males
74
in an urban West Coast high school who take part in a peer support group designed to improve attitudes toward school and learning? A review of the data collected in this study yielded the following results. Journals Participants submitted journal entries electronically every week for a 10-week period. Journal participation was inconsistent with rates varying from 30% to 60%. Participant 2 had the highest participation rate and completed journal entries 60% of the time. Participant 1 and P3 participated at the middle and end of the study with half as many journal entries as P2. Table 2 contains a summary of their comments and attitudes about school. When asked about the positive aspects of school, P1 reported liking school “because of the people who support me,” and “because I enjoy lunch.” Participant 2 initially stated that he liked school because it was fun. Mid-way through the study he reported that he liked school because it was a place to learn, and toward the end of the study he reportedly liked school because it provided a place to learn and be with friends. Comments from both P1 and P2 reflected tenets of social learning theory. Bandura (1978) stated that one’s social group is of critical importance in the learning process. For P1, the people who supported him were a positive connection with school and, for P2, school was a place to be with his social group. Participant 3 made a singular comment about school mid-way through the study. He reported that he liked school because it helped him "get an education because it's something other people around the world lack.” He skipped this question in the other journal entries. Bandura (1977b) showed that interaction with the world produces behavioral changes. In P3’s comment, it was evident that he observed 75
his world, noted the lack of education, and this observation produced a behavioral reaction on his part. Table 2. Journal Responses: What Participants Like About School Date
Participant
Journal Logs
3
It was fun today just relaxing hearing music doing work too one of the better days
2
I think its (sic) OK I have fun when I'm in it
3/28/15
2
[this] high school
4/12/15
3
That I get to learn more and expand my thinking skills
2
It killes (sic) time
1
I like that there is (sic) people who support me
4/26/15
3
Just learning new things in school and being with my friends
5/3/15
3
Same as last week
2
Same as last week
1
The best part of school lunch because i (sic) learn about different types of foods
3/21/15
5/16/15
At a mid-point of the study, when asked about the negative aspects of school, P1 reported that school was stressful. By the end of the study he reported that “English class was boring.” Participant 2 reported that he was trying to pass biology but that he needed "to try harder.” His next entry stated that he was frustrated by the "stupid" people who "say they want to be successful" and he has to "tell them to do some work and stop talking in class.” This frustration was repeated in subsequent journal entries. Early in the study, P3 simply reported that he “wanted more time for lunch” and there were no entries on this question in his subsequent journal entries. For P2, the change in behavior seemed related to interaction with the world that produced a change in behavior. Bandura (1977b, 1978) described how continuous interactions with others and the world regulate personal behavior. Following Bandura’s theory, P2 was learning through these interactions with 76
others. Bandura (1977b) pointed out that people learn from both the positive and negative interactions with others. Table 3. Journal Response: What Participants Dislike About School Date
Participant
3/21/15
3
trying to pass bio so close but need to try harder
2
Trying to pass biology and that's it really
2 3
The homework That some people are so fucking stupid and they say they want to be successful in life well I tell them to do some work and stop talking in class stupid people or fake people who promise to be there for u but leave u when it counts
3/28/15 4/12/15
2 1 3
It is really stressful The stupid people that say they want to accomplish something in life but don't put the work in to do that
3
Same as last week
2
Same as last week The worst part of school is going to English (sic) class because it is really boring.
4/26/15 5/3/15
5/16/15
Journal Log Entries
1
Participants were asked, as part of the weekly journal entry, to discuss the purpose of the peer support group. Participant 1 reported that he joined the group to "get peer help.” At the end of the study he reported that "its easy to give up, but it takes a real man to keep going and work hard.” Participant 2 reported that the group was a place to relax, meet new people and learn more about how people struggle. He reported that he joined the group "because a teacher told me it was cool.” Participant 3 reported he was “recommended to join [the group] in freshman year.” He was told "it would help him through the struggle.” Again, the critical importance of peers was apparent in the comments. 77
Table 4. Journal Response: Describe the Support Group Date
Participant
3/21/15
3
A fun place to relax and learn more about people struggle
2
[The support group] is a place I can meet new people and learn how We all struggle in life and learn how to make it better No responses
3/28/15
2
4/12/15
3
Journal Log Entries
2
I join (sic) [the support group] because some one because a teacher told me it was cool My teacher forced me to come here when I was walking home
1
To get peer help
4/26/15
3
No responses
5/3/15
3
Same as last week
2
Same as last week
1
its easy to give up, but it takes a real man to keep going and work hard.
5/16/15
In their journal responses, as well as in the interviews, the participants each reflected the importance of support, education, and experiences of frustration or stress related to school. Influences of others, as described by Bandura (1997), whether positive or negative were a factor in the participants’ experiences of school and the peer support group. They each related reasons for joining the group that were based on information from someone else, which suggested that influences of others were important in the decision to participate. Bandura (1977b) showed that the value of an outcome and the resulting behavior were directly connected. If the outcome was valued, the learning produced a behavior change. Observations Two support group sessions were successfully recorded; one at the second week of the support group, and one at the end of the 10-week study. One memory card was corrupted resulting in a loss of data. The video recorded support group sessions were 78
analyzed for participant behavior. The analysis was undertaken as described in the Meier (2010) observation protocol. At the initial support group observation, P1 showed beginning behaviors, which were characterized by the fact that he was easily distracted, he was off task, and he left early. Participant 2 showed both beginning behaviors and shifting behaviors. He was focused and outwardly participative at the beginning of the meeting, became distracted and was off task during the meeting, and then returned to active participation. He repeated this cycle twice during this video-recorded support group meeting. Participant 3 was highly participative during this first video-recorded session, and he displayed the third level behaviors as described in the observation protocol. He remained focused and participatory during the entire meeting. Table 5. Video Observation: Participant 1 Level 1: Beginning Observation 1 Observation 2
Level 2: Shifting
8 9
5 9
Level 3: Changing 0 0
There was a guest speaker for the first 10 minutes of the follow-up observation meeting. Participant 1 showed beginning behaviors at the start of the support group meeting; he was occasionally off-task and distracted and played with his skateboard. After a correction by a fellow support group member, he transitioned to shifting behaviors and became more participatory. After the guest speaker departed, he was distracted a couple of times, but he returned to full participation quickly each time. Bandura (1971) called this type of interaction modeling. Modeling, according to Bandura, provides cues for behavioral restraint. Participant 1 had a reciprocal interaction with a peer that produced a change in his behavior. While P1 varied his behavior, he returned to 79
the new behavioral norm each time, which was supported by his peer. This is an example of why social learning theory is also called reciprocal learning theory. The exchange between peers sets the context for a change in behavior or a new understanding for how to behave. Until that exchange, P1 displayed beginning behaviors. After the exchange, P1 displayed shifting behaviors, occasionally moving between beginning behaviors and shifting behaviors. Table 6. Video Observation: Participant 2 Level 1: Beginning Observation 1 Observation 2
11 6
Level 2: Shifting
Level 3: Changing
25 14
0 2
Participant 2 started the second meeting by displaying beginning behaviors. He was easily distracted, playful, and unfocused while the guest speaker was present. After the guest speaker departed, he transitioned to shifting behaviors, becoming outwardly participatory, and remained actively engaged for the remainder of the meeting. His behavior was an example of Bandura’s (1977b) explanation that the outcome correlates to the learned behavior. For P2, it appeared no value was placed on the guest speaker. When the guest speaker left, however, and only participants of the support group remained, P2 demonstrated a clear shift in behavior. The shift reflected the importance of the social group as compared to an outsider, the speaker, who had limited importance for P2 as compared to his response to his peer.
80
Table 7. Video Observation: Participant 3 Level 1: Beginning Observation 1 Observation 2
0 0
Level 2: Shifting
Level 3: Changing
1 2
7 10
Participant 3 immediately displayed active engagement. He spoke to the group with authority and appeared to co-facilitate during the guest speaker’s presentation. Participant 3’s contributions continually validated the speaker’s comments. Members regularly looked back and forth between P3 and the speaker. When the guest speaker left, P3 continued to display a high level of focus and participation. Participant 3 displayed reciprocal behavior in his multiple comments that validated the guest speaker’s presentation and caused others to focus on both P3 and the guest speaker. The behavior of P3 exemplified the modeling that Bandura (1971) described in his research on social learning theory. According to Bandura, a function of modeling is to provide behavioral cues. Thus, P3 provided the cues that signaled to others the importance of the guest speaker’s presentation. The transition that P1 displayed during the follow-up observation also reflects the modeling described by Bandura (1971). Participant 1 observed others and adjusted his behavior accordingly in the second video-recorded observation. The participant’s observation, followed by a shift in his behavior, directly illustrated Bandura’s theory of reciprocal learning. Noteworthy is the fact that P1, P2, and P3 were each one grade level apart; they were in Grade 9, Grade 10, and Grade 11, respectively. A comparison of their shift in behaviors can be viewed in the comparison tables (see Table 8 and Table 9). 81
Table 8. Video Observation Number 1: Participant Comparison Level 1: Beginning Participant 1 Participant 2 Participant 3
Level 2: Shifting
8 11 0
Level 3: Changing
5 25 1
0 0 7
Table 9. Video Observation Number 2: Participant Comparison Level 1: Beginning Participant 1 Participant 2 Participant 3
Level 2: Shifting
Level 3: Changing
9 14 2
0 2 10
9 6 0
The difference in behaviors could be aligned to developmental differences of the different grade levels. DuBois et al. (2011, p. 63) pointed out that “the capacity and willingness of youth to forge close connections with nonparent adults may also vary as a function of their developmental status.” Thus, while social learning theory provides the theoretical framework, it is important to state that other factors may influence support group members’ behaviors and learning. Interviews When asked to describe school, there was not a noticeable shift in descriptions of how participants felt about school. Responses ranged from “easy,” “fun,” “boring,” and “hard.” Participant 1, for example, first described school in this way: “So far it has been pretty easy. Not a lot of challenging things. But every now and then, there’s like something new I gotta learn. It makes it a little bit difficult.” During the post-study interview, P1 described school as “pretty fun [but] it gets harder [over] time. It doesn’t 82
get easier, it gets harder. So we have to put more effort in it.” In similar fashion, each participant provided a general description of school as fun, easy, or important at the beginning of the study followed by a reflection on the increase in difficulty or workload, but not a change in the level of interest. Participant 1’s description began as “pretty easy” and ended as “pretty fun.” Participant 2 stated he liked school, and at the end of the study he said he was “happy in school.” Participant 3 stated his appreciation for school initially, and at the post-study interview he stated his appreciation for the help he received at his current school to make sure he graduates. There was, thus, no noticeable shift in participant attitudes about school while they participated in the peer support group.
83
Table 10. Interview Question: Describe Your School Experience Right Now Participant P1
Pre-Interview So far it has been pretty easy. Not a lot of challenging things. But every now and then, there’s like something new I gotta learn. It makes it a little bit difficult. Mmmm, like when there is a new subject.
Post-Interview My school experience right now is pretty fun, I’d say. Yeah. Fun as in, like, we’re, like, doing things that are not really boring. Keeps me interested in the subject
P2
I like school, some moments where I hated it but school is very important to me. If I don’t have education, I won’t be able to succeed in life. That’s what my parents always tell me. And school, I want to be the first generation to graduate out of high school, the first generation to graduate out of college. So I am going to try as hard as I can to graduate.
I am really happy in school. I’ve been trying to get my grades up and I got two As and two Bs.
P3
School for me has taught me a lot of stuff you know, if I would have stayed in Guatemala, I probably would have never gone to school. I wouldn’t know any history about how people started from when the world was first created, you know. Yeah you know it’s a lot of stuff. Its pretty cool being in school because you learn stuff that you wouldn’t have known.
Um, my school experience is better than the one when I was at [my last school]. They helped more but, they had four presentations throughout our junior and senior year. I’ve done two of them but, I’ve tried to do three. But, I failed two of them. But, I had a chance to do one over. So, I passed that one. Which is, it’s really good, you know, because they give you chances to do things over and over again until you get it right. Because they don’t want you to fail or not graduate. That’s my school experience and school itself like me going around, its really cool because I get to see people like people I know, talk to them and stuff like that. Yah, its pretty good for me, you know.
When asked to describe the type of supports that Latino students need, each participant referred to the need for additional or special classes for Latino students to learn English so as to not fall behind in school. At the end of the study, participant recommendations included (a) additional help in other classes to catch up due to English 84
language difficulties, (b) more Latino teachers who could understand the struggle of Latino students, and (c) more individualized attention, specifically hiring more people so that individualized attention could be provided to every student, “even people with [good grades because] there are problems everywhere.” Table 11. Interview Question: What Schools Should Do to Help Latino Students Graduate from High School Participant P1
Pre-Interview I think they could give them extra classes because sometimes they come in not knowing English and that brings them back, that makes them fall behind in their classes.
Post-Interview I think they should like have, like, a special class to help them out more. They might not understand; to help them out a little bit more so they won’t fall behind too much.
P2
What they should do is like help us like give us more options. Help us figure out what colleges to go. Like what’s a mainly Latino college? Like at some schools, they don’t even tell you. They just tell the white kids that they can make it to college. [to the] the latinos (sic) they are like, you’re gonna be in the streets forever. So, that’s one thing.
I think like for schools, they should hire more Latino teachers. But, this school is full of Latino teachers. They understand you and your struggle, where you come from. So, that could be one thing.
P3
Well, right now, here, like here, here there is a lot of help. They give you a lot of opportunities, they tell you about things that are going on. They tell you about different programs and so I’m going to leave next week to go to my old school and ask them if they provide that type of help. Because my parents want to leave. Like at the end of the school year.
We should get more teachers, like if it’s a bigger school. We should get more teachers or counselors to be able to pay attention to every single student. Instead of just paying attention to those who are just like, um, the ones who are acting bad or always getting in trouble. They should pay more attention to them, not just a group of people. I think even the people with As, they should pay attention to them ‘cause there are problems everywhere.
Participants initially described their relationships with teachers as friendly and respectful based on their perception of themselves as a being a “pretty good kid” (Participant 1), or a “good student” (Participant 3). By the end of the study, participants 85
reflected a shift in how they perceived themselves. Participants described their relationships with teachers as positive because the participants “put hard work in” (Participant 1) or found teachers, the counselor, and the principal helpful. Participant 2 described an important moment with a teacher who had a significant impact on the participant’s outlook. The participant relayed a story the teacher shared with him: He’s like, ‘there’s a guy on the fence whose taller and there’s some other person who needs a little boost to see the sunset.’ That helped me out a lot. It changed my view of school, the person I was with, the teacher (Participant 2). Table 12. Interview Question: How Participants Feel About School Staff (Teachers, Principals, and Counselors) Participant P1
Pre-Interview Most teachers are pretty helpful.
Post-Interview I think teachers, I mean, they’re cool but sometimes, they can get annoying.
P2
I respect everybody in the school. I think every single teacher is unique in one way. I can’t hate a teacher; if I hate a teacher then I might say it’s his fault like if I don’t do an essay. You can’t hate the teachers here, cuz they are all friendly, they all respect you.
I think the teachers help me out a lot cuz my English teacher helped me out a lot. He helped me learn a lot of things. All the teachers are helpful, like, when I was very down. The first part of the year, I was very mad at myself because this is my third year in high school. I’m I should be graduating next year and I’m stuck with these 10th graders, people younger than me. Somebody drew me out a picture he’s like there’s a guy on the fence who’s taller and there’s some other person who needs a little boost to see the sunset. That helped me out a lot. It changed my view of school, the person I was with, the teacher.
P3
I only check in with my teachers. So and with my teachers, they help a lot. If you need help, you just got to make an appointment because sometimes they might have other students coming in to get help so you got to make an appointment when to come in and be able to handle it.
Well, my counselor here, she helps a lot, getting applications, we have to fill out applications for [college]. And she helps a lot with that and she always like supports us to get us in there. Always on us to turn our stuff in. And if not, that’s a bummer for us. Because she keeps telling us to turn it in or fill it out. Then the principal, she’s always talking to everybody in the class. Yeah, they keep track of us. The teachers, ask us, “oh, this is your grade.” Its up to you to ask what else you gotta do to get your grades up.
86
A positive relationship or experience with a teacher was the recurring theme. In DeAnda’s research (2001), and echoed in the work of DuBois et al. (2011), the role of the mentor produced major changes that helped the mentee move forward toward their goals. Anastasia et al. (2012) focused on the integral components of a mentor setting determined that those elements are trust, mutuality, respect, and empathy. Each of the participants in the study relayed different stories of the adults at school, which reflected a deeper connection. Wyatt (2009), thus, described school as a natural setting for mentoring. Yet, Rhodes (2008) found that school-based programs were not as efficacious as communitybased programs because school programs were not long enough to create enduring change for the participants. All authors agreed on the role of the mentor as a critical component for an effective program.
87
Table 13. Describe Any Effect The Support Group Has On Your Attitude Toward School and Life Participant P1
Pre-Interview [The support group] has helped me because I get peer help from friends and it makes things easier and it helps me understand my role in life for right now.
Post-Interview I would only depend on myself only and, with [the support group], to experience new people, I would talk to them but I would not ask them for help and after I joined [the support group], now, I started asking people for help, more and more.
P2
I think it makes a difference in my attitude towards school. Sometimes I feel like crap like at school. And they just tell me what’s happening? I’m like this class got me and I suck. And they just tell me well keep it up and talk with your teachers and stuff. In life, it has been helping me a little bit more because I’ve been a little bit more social lately. Like with the club, cuz what I do after school, I just go home. Just close my door and do nothing like homework or something. I don’t talk to my friends outside of school. That’s one thing, I never talk to my friends outside of school.
It helped me share my feelings. I get to talk about my day. People are like we, “we hear you”, to each other. We understand about each other because we are all Latinos. We all come from the same background mostly. We all have struggles in life. Its not like a white kid who has no problems. He’s just trying to (be mean?) to his parents because he thinks he’s cool. I hope that made sense.
P3
Well, to me, and to be honest, I think it does. You know, my mentor, the actual leader of it, when I need help, like, I ask him. Or, if I need help, I ask the students, it hasn’t happened yet because I am on top of my work right now. And, like, if they need help from me, I’ll help them out. Like, its not a problem you know.
Before, even though I kept my grades up in school, I didn’t pay attention to college until we started visiting colleges down in LA and it got me like, it got me interested in college. He also talked about like even though schools did it, I didn’t really pay attention to it. Like everybody should go to college because they will have a better life, better job. So, it made me like understand and get a deeper understanding of the future. Yeah, my future.
In analyzing the interviews, the change in the description of the peer support group was the most noticeable outcome. Participants began with general descriptions of the support group, its purpose, and what happens in the group. Similar to Bandura’s (1977a) descriptions of reciprocal learning, Participant 1 described the group as 88
“supporting other kids like me and those kids supporting me,” and Participant 3 stated, “Instead of having to get to know the whole school [you can] get to know others through support group members.” By the end of the study, participant reflections focused on the individual meaning they derived from the group. Participant 1 stated he was “starting to become an individual.” Participant 2 focused on being able to share feelings, meeting new people, and gaining new experiences. Participant 3 stated, “So, it’s like about getting a deeper understanding of the school or outside of school, my future, yeah.” This shift reflected a sense of agency, not just a sense of belonging (DuBois, 2011). A sense of agency refers to the process of viewing one’s life, actions and outcomes; a person is their own agent (Haggard & Chambon, 2012). In describing the effects of the peer support group, participants again reflected a shift in their perspectives of self. Participant 1 began by stating the effect of the group was that he could get help and “it makes things easier.” By the end of the study, Participant 1 stated, “I would only depend on myself only…now I started asking people for help, more and more.” Participant 2 described the effect of the group as helpful, especially on bad days. At the post interview, Participant 2 described himself as a person who helped others out, especially when they were struggling with schoolwork. He felt proud that he was able to motivate others to do better in school. Participant 3 focused on the importance of the mentor as a source of support for him and other students. At the end of the study, Participant 3 powerfully stated, “I’m not just a member, I help the other students who joined it.” He saw himself as equally important; as a mentor who helped others. This shift in the identity of the participants 89
reflected a deep effect of the group that is difficult to measure or articulate. While participants understood they were struggling when they joined the group, they were able to reciprocate (Bandura, 1979) the support they received and help others on a similar journey.
Summary The research question for this study was: What are the group processes, dynamics, and individual and collective experiences that emerge from academically at-risk, adolescent Latino males in an urban West Coast high school who take part in a peer support group designed to improve attitudes toward school and learning? The data collected in this study answered the research question by illuminating participant attitudes about school and provided insights into the reciprocal learning processes that occur within the support group. The use of journals produced insight into the individual experiences over time. The video observations were more fruitful for observing individual and group engagement. The interviews provided the deepest insight into understanding the individual and collective experiences as well as group processes and dynamics. The results displayed the emergence of individual identity, self-efficacy, and agency, most notably in the interview reflections. The combination of data provided insights resulting recommendations for future studies, which are discussed in Chapter 5.
90
CHAPTER 5. RESULTS, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS Introduction This is a qualitative exploratory case study of the experiences of academically struggling, adolescent Latino males in an urban West Coast high school in a peer support group. There is a large body of research about the importance and impact of mentoring for academically-at-risk youth, particularly young men of color (DuBois et al., 2006). However, DuBois et al. (2006) also point out that the research falls short for the newer versions of mentoring that are developing, such as group mentoring. The design of this study was a single case study of a peer support group that serves academically-at-risk young men in an urban high school. Data collection included individual pre- and postinterviews, weekly journal entries, and pre and post video recorded observations of group meetings. Qualitative data analysis procedures were used to examine any shift in attitudes of participants toward school and learning as related to their experiences in the support group. This chapter provides a discussion and summary of the results, the relationship of the results to the literature review, limitations of the study, and implications and recommendations for practice.
Summary of the Study The problem identified for this study was the high dropout rate for Latino males in high school (NCES, 2012). When the data is disaggregated, the dropout rate for Latino males
91
in urban areas is more than double national averages (Swanson, 2008). Mentoring interventions have become commonly applied to the dropout problem (DuBois et al., 2011). Mentoring interventions have evolved to include newer formats other than the one-to-one model of mentoring, but there is insufficient research on these new iterations (Deutsch &
Spencer, 2009; Smith & Stormont, 2011). The focus of the current study was the support group, which is a new model of mentoring to decrease dropout rates. The support group has not been examined for efficacy as an academic intervention tool (Bailey & BradburyBailey, 2007). The purpose, therefore, of the current study was to uncover and illuminate the group processes, dynamics, and individual and collective experiences that emerge from a peer support group for academically at-risk, adolescent Latino males in an urban West Coast state’s high school. An existing peer-support group was the focus of the study. The group was designed to improve the high school completion rate of urban males at risk of dropping out of high school. A tremendous amount of research was produced in the 1980s and 1990s about the success of mentoring for academically struggling males (Anastasia et al., 2012; Gordon et al., 2009). The research resulted in an increase in mentoring programs without sufficient research to support newer iterations of mentoring programs (DuBois et al., 2011). Thus, the current study was needed to focus on a peer support group for adolescent Latino males at risk of dropping out of high school.
Summary of Findings and Conclusions The data collected in this study focused on understanding the group processes, dynamics, and individual and collective experiences that emerged from academically at92
risk, adolescent Latino males in an urban West Coast high school who took part in a peer support group designed to improve attitudes toward school and learning. Journals, video recorded observations of support group meetings, and individual pre- and post-interviews were used for data collection. The interviews provided insight into the individual experiences of the participants, and the video recordings illustrated aspects of Bandura’s (1977b) social learning theory when participants observed one another and adjusted behavior. The journals were the least successful in yielding meaningful data. What emerged from the data sets can be summarized in the following themes: identity, selfefficacy, and a sense of agency. Identity Beginning in the journals and ending in the final interview, study participants described their struggles to persist in school. They found the support group a place to validate the struggle and support them to overcome their difficulties with school. Their comments reflected their feelings about how the support group provided a safe place where it was okay to struggle; it helped them understand that they were not alone in the struggle. Rather than feeling inadequate as students, they found the support group to be a place where they were encouraged and supported as students. Self-Efficacy Study participants described themselves as more capable by the end of the study. The key influence was having a place where others validated and helped them, and a place where they, in turn, could feel they were helping others. Their comments indicated they felt proud of being able to ask for help, and they were invested in helping others. Participants described how, prior to joining the support group, they did not feel they 93
should ask for help. The support group helped them see that it was normal to struggle in school, and participation in the group gave them tools to persist in their struggles. Sense of Agency Study participants expressed a deeper understanding of (a) how they could achieve their goals, (b) how to navigate school systems, and (c) how to engage with their teachers to gain the academic support they needed for success. In the initial journal entries and pre-interviews, participants expressed their disdain for school and work. Statements about school being hard and teachers forcing them to attend the group disappeared from the reflections by the end of the study. Instead, they described teachers, peers, and the broader community as systems to navigate with resources to access on their journey to their future.
Limitations Limitations of this study are tied to three factors. First, there was a small number of participants; three members participated in the study. Merriam & Tisdell (2015) suggest that fewer participants may limit the richness of the information to be gathered. For example, some video recorded interactions in this study were not included in data analysis because they occurred between members of the group who were not research participants. In addition, one of the memory cards with a recorded observation was corrupted resulting in a loss of data. Due to time constraints, the mentor was unable to convene the group to record an additional session. Second, the journals produced limited responses. 10 journal prompts were provided and study participants did not complete a response for each scheduled session. Thus, only six responses were recorded. 94
Participants, also, reported during the final interview that it was boring to write down their thoughts. Finally, due to the late launch of the group, the size of the group was significantly smaller than usual. In a typical year, the group size averages 30. The year of the study, the group size was 10. The group could not be launched until a mentor was secured and trained. Recruitment began in late fall resulting in a spring launch. This also limited the window for data collection resulting in fewer data points. Recommendations for future use of capturing post-meeting reflections are discussed in the following section.
Recommendations Recommendations for future research and practice include a focus on the role of the mentor, the relevance of a school or community setting, and different uses of the data collection tools used in this study. The interviews yielded valuable results and can be increased. Journaling produced limited results and could be replaced with another tool such as a focus group. Meeting with research participants was not difficult; thus, additional opportunities to solicit their thoughts would increase the amount of data for analysis. A richer data set could provide additional insights into the collective and individual experiences being measured. A focus group would offer more insights into the collective experience of support group members. The data in this study provided insight into individual experiences more than collective experiences.
Recommendations for Future Research Future research should include more interviews and observations. Journal participation was limited and inhibited the capacity for drawing conclusions. Participants 95
were most engaged in the interview process; they were comfortable answering questions and providing their insights. Rather than a weekly journal, a weekly interview may have provided more insight into a shift in attitudes toward learning, and more interviews might have provided deeper understanding of the collective and individual processes active within the experiences of the support group. Video observations provided good information about group interaction. For future research, each week’s video observation could be made part of the interview to allow for direct questions of participants. Having a dialogue about the video observations might provide insight into participant experiences and perspectives. As participants adjust to the reflective cycle of discussing their own behavior, they may become more aware, in the moment, of their thoughts and attitudes. This could provide richer reflective feedback during the follow-up interview from each recorded session. Video recordings are extremely helpful for observational purposes. Simultaneously observing multiple members of a group would be difficult in real time without a video recording. The use of the video allows repeated watching and the observer can focus on one participant rather than trying to record notes about multiple participants during a physical observation. An interview with the mentor would add value to the data set. The mentor could share reflections on the indicators that he perceives reflect any shift in attitudes or behaviors. The video observations could be viewed with the mentor to probe for possible interpretations about the collective processes within the support group. Adding interview, journal, or survey questions about the mentor could be added in future studies. The resulting information could provide another participant perspective 96
about the impact of the group on their attitudes and academic achievement. Participant 3 shared critical insight about his perspective of the role of the mentor and his own development as a peer mentor. Participant 3 was able to envision himself as a peer of the group mentor. Such a powerful description indicates a level of efficacy not adequately captured in the data collection tools used in this study; thus the impact of the mentor should be explored further.
Recommendations for Practice A description of the role of the mentor was not a part of the support group construct. A mentor is (a) recruited, (b) typically someone interested in sponsoring a space for the participants to assemble, and (c) there is not a structured orientation or training for the mentor. As discussed by DuBois and Rhodes (2006), mentor training is a critical aspect of the success of a mentoring program. Since one mentor supports multiple mentees via the support group model may increase the importance of providing training and ongoing support for the group’s mentor. Anastasia et al. (2012) discussed the importance of trust, mutuality, respect, and empathy with regard to the mentor/mentee relationship. Support group sponsors could screen for those dispositions and train mentors to develop the necessary skill set. The challenge for school-based mentoring, according to Rhodes (2008), is to provide high quality mentoring relationships that can be scaled and replicated. Critical to the ability to replicate is creating a targeted mentor recruitment and training strategy. A recruitment and training strategy based on best practices would provide a level of fidelity to ensure participants experience the same opportunities to increase self-efficacy. 97
Following mentor recruitment and training, the participant recruitment process is another critical step in the launch of the support group. Each of the participants in this study joined because someone else invited or directed them to join. The recruitment process could extend to all adult members of a school community to help them understand what the benefits of the group are and what types of students might be candidates for the group. The recruitment process should also include a clear process to refer students into the group. Additionally, parent outreach could help engage parents in supporting student participation. A discrepancy in the literature is the role of a school-based mentoring program as compared to a community-based program. The results of the study warrant a closer look at the viability of school-year programs. The findings in this study do not support Rhodes (2008) conclusion that school-based mentoring is not as enduring. At issue is the meaning behind the term enduring. Participant 3 was able to view himself as equal to the mentor. This level of self-efficacy could be the precursor to enduring impact. Further research beyond the timeframe of the support group is needed to determine enduring nature of the impact. By contrast, Wyatt (2009) found that school is a natural setting for mentoring relationships because youth and adults are together every day. The results of his study indicated that young people understood the connection between their participation in a mentoring group and the increase in their academic achievement; therefore, the results of this study align with Wyatt’s findings.
98
Implications Participants experienced positive outcomes through group mentoring. They increased their understanding of how to navigate school, help others, and improve their own academic outcomes. As Karcher et al. (2006) found, group mentoring has advantages and unique outcomes compared to one-to-one mentoring. A school-based setting provides an opportunity for mentoring programs to organize around a support group model and increase the benefits of their organized programs by reaching more young people with the same amount of resources. Rather than having an individual mentor for each mentee, programs should scale according to the recommendations of Karcher et al. who advocated for six to ten mentees per mentor. According to Newman et al. (2007), it is essential for youth to develop the capacity to successfully negotiate peer relationships. The peer support group provides a context for that to occur. Within a support group, participants can gain new skills, behaviors, and dispositions through reciprocal interactions encouraged in the context of the support group. These reciprocal interactions encourage opportunities to model behavior that the participant carries out into his larger world. Additional research into the support group construct would provide a deeper research base for organizations that provide support groups. By engaging the student in activities that provide opportunities for reciprocal learning, mentors support the student’s developing capacity to question and understand social conditions and gain a deeper understanding of how these conditions influence the current lived experience of the student. The reciprocal process of modeling and observing behaviors as described by Bandura (1977b) allows for an understanding of how the 99
student frames new perspectives. The new behaviors are practiced in the safe environment of the support group, enabling the student to be more confident before trying them out in the larger world. The inductive process of moving from internal thoughts to external expression is dependent on the success of the reciprocal learning environment established in the support group. The group and the student, thus, are in a symbiotic relationship of self-discovery. In a high school support group setting, self-discovery can support the process for participants to shift their attitudes toward learning by practicing new behaviors with their peers focused on academic achievement rather than academic disidentification.
Conclusion This study examined the group processes, dynamics, and individual and collective experiences that emerged from a peer support group for academically at-risk, adolescent Latino males in a high school in an urban West Coast US state. The data in this study reflects the thoughts and attitudes of the participants toward school, their teachers, and the effect of the support group on their attitudes toward school and learning. Participants shared their reflections about what schools might do differently to help Latino males graduate from high school. A recurring theme was the positive relationship with their peers in the support group and each participant’s personal shift to being able to both ask for and give help. This study examined the reciprocal learning among peers. Further research needs to be done to examine the reciprocal learning that occurs between a single mentor and members of a support group. As mentoring continues to grow, the support group model might become a preferred model to increase the reach of each mentor. 100
REFERENCES Akers, R. L. (2011). Social learning and social structure: A general theory of crime and deviance. Retrieved from https://play.google.com/books/reader?id=zjBDZT0WMgC&printsec=frontcover&output=reader&hl=en&pg=GBS.PA3 Ali, A. & Yusof, H. (2011). Quality in qualitative studies: the case of validity, reliability and generalizability. Issues in Social & Environmental Accounting, 5(1/2). 25-64. Retrieved from http://www.scribd.com/doc/135072994/Quality-in-QualitativeStudies-the-Case-of-Validity-Reliability-and-Generalizability#scribd Ames, C. (1992). Classrooms: Goals, structures, and student motivation. Journal of Educational Psychology, 84(3), 261-271. Anastasia, T. T., Skinner, R. L., & Mundhenk, S. E. (2012). Youth mentoring: Program and mentor best practices. Journal of Family and Consumer Sciences, 104(2), 38. Bailey, D. F., & Bradbury-Bailey, M. E. (2007). Promoting Achievement for African American Males through Group Work. Journal for Specialists in Group Work, 32(1), 83-96. Bandura, A. (1965). Vicarious processes: A case of no-trial learning. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 2, 1-55. Bandura, A. (1971). Vicarious and self-reinforcement processes. The nature of reinforcement. Retrieved from http://web.stanford.edu/dept/psychology/ bandura/pajares/Bandura1971.pdf Bandura, A. (1977a). Social learning theory. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall. Bandura A. (1977b). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review 84, 191-215. Bandura, A. (1978). The self system in reciprocal determinism. American Psychologist, 33(4), 344-358. doi: 10.1037/0003-066X.33.4.344 Bandura, A. (1982). Self-efficacy mechanism in human agency. American Psychologist, 37(2), 122.
101
Bandura A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action. Englewood Cliffs, NJ, Prentice Hall. Bandura, A. (1993). Perceived self-efficacy in cognitive development and functioning. Educational Psychologist, 28(2), 117-148. Bandura, A. (1997). Editorial. American Journal of Health Promotion, 12(1), 8-10. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.4278/0890-1171-12.1.8 Bandura, A. (2005). The evolution of social cognitive theory. In K. G. Smith and M. A. Hitt (Eds.), Great minds in management. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Retrieved from http://vmarpad.shaanan.ac.il/efficacy/עצמית%2 0חולל ות/ Albert%20Bandura/Evolution%20of%20social%20cognitive%20theory.Bandura2005.pdf Bandura, A., Ross, D., & Ross, S. A. (1961). Transmission of aggression through imitation of aggressive models. The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 63(3), 575–582. doi: 10.1037/h0045925 Bandura, A., Ross, D., & Ross, S. A. (1963). Vicarious reinforcement and imitative learning. The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 67(6), 601. Bandura, A., & Schunk, D. H. (1981). Cultivating competence, self-efficacy, and intrinsic interest through proximal self-motivation. Journal of personality and social psychology, 41(3), 586. Retrieved from http://web.stanford.edu/dept/psychology/ bandura/pajares/Bandura1981JPSP.pdf Baxter, P., & Jack, S. (2008). Qualitative case study methodology: Study design and implementation for novice researchers. The qualitative report, 13(4), 544-559. Bridgeland, J. M., Dilulio, John J. Jr., & Balfanz, R. (2009). The high school dropout problem: Perspectives of teachers and principals. The Education Digest, 75(3), 20-26. Retrieved from https://www.eddigest.com Chapin, L. A., & Yang, R. K. (2009). Perceptions of social support in urban at-risk boys and girls. Journal of At-Risk Issues, 15(1), 1-7. Chiessi, M., Cicognani, E., & Sonn, C. (2010). Assessing sense of community on adolescents: Validating the brief scale of sense of community in adolescents (SOC-A). Journal of Community Psychology, 38(3), 276-292. Cokley, K., McClain, S., Jones, M., & Johnson, S. (2011). A preliminary investigation of academic disidentification, racial identity, and academic achievement among African American adolescents. High School Journal, 95(2), 54-68. 102
Copeland, L., & Beins, N. P. (2013). A resilience model for school-based mentoring programs. Journal of Border Educational Research, 4(2), 47-52. Retrieved from https://jber-ojs-tamiu.tdl.org/jber/index.php/jber/article/viewFile/7144/6394 Creswell, J. W. (2009). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative and mixed methods approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Creswell, J. W., & Miller, D. L. (2000). Determining validity in qualitative inquiry. Theory into Practice, 39(3), 124-130. Dappen, L. D., & Isernhagen, J. C. (2005). Developing a student mentoring program: Building connections for at-risk students. Preventing School Failure, 49(3), 2125. de Anda, D. (2001). A qualitative evaluation of a mentor program for at-risk youth: the participants' perspective. Child & Adolescent Social Work Journal, 18(2), 97-117. Deutsch, N. L., & Spencer, R. (2009). Capturing the magic: Assessing the quality of youth mentoring relationships. New Directions for Youth Development (121), 4770. doi: 10.1002/yd.296 Drexler, S., Borrmann, B., Müller-Kohlenberg, H. (2012). Learning life skills strengthening basic competencies and health-related quality of life of socially disadvantaged elementary school children through the mentoring program “Balu und Du.” Journal of Public Health 20, 141-149. doi: 10.1007/P10389-011-04587. DuBois, D. L., Doolittle, F., Yates, B. T., Silverthorn, N., & Tebes, J. (2006). Research methodology and youth mentoring. Journal of Community Psychology, 34(6), 657-676 DuBois, D. L., Portillo, N., Rhodes, J. E., Silverthorn, N., & Valentine, J. C. (2011). How effective are mentoring programs for youth? A systematic assessment of the evidence. Psychological Science in The Public Interest, 12(2), 57-91. doi: 10.1177/1529100611414806
DuBois, D. L., & Rhodes, J. E. (2006). Introduction to the special issue: Youth mentoring: Bridging science with practice. Journal of Community Psychology, 34(6), 647-655. Duncan-Andrade, Jeff (2009). Note to educators: Hope required when growing roses in concrete. Harvard Business Review, 79(2), 181-194. Eichler, D. F. (2009). The experience of using reflective journals on an outward bound course (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from Proquest. (Order No. 3374483) 103
Elkind, D. (1998). All grown up and no place to go: Teenagers in crisis. Da Capo Press. Ferguson, C. J. & Rueda, S. M. (2010). The hitman study. The European Psychologist 15(2), 99-108. doi: 10.1027/1016-9040/a000010 Eller, L. S., Lev, E. L., & Feurer, A. (2014). Key components of an effective mentoring relationship: A qualitative study. Nurse Education Today, 34(5), 815-820. Flaxman, E. & Ascher, C. (1992). Mentoring in action: The efforts of programs in New York City. Columbia Univ., New York, NY. Institute for Urban and Minority Education. April 1992: 65 Gordon, D. M., Iwamoto, D. K., Ward, N., Potts, R., & Boyd, E. (2009). Mentoring urban black middle school male students: Implications for academic achievement. Journal of Negro Education, 78(3), 277-289. Greeson, J. K. P. (2013). Foster youth and the transition to adulthood: The theoretical and conceptual basis for natural mentoring. Emerging Adulthood 1(1), 40-51. doi: 10.1177/2167696812467780 Grossman, J., Chan, C., Schwartz, S., & Rhodes, J. (2012). The test of time in schoolbased mentoring: The role of relationship duration and re-matching on academic outcomes. American Journal of Community Psychology, 49(1/2), 43-54. doi: 10.1007/s10464-011-9435-0 Haggard, P., & Chambon, V. (2012). Sense of agency. Current Biology, 22(10), R390R392. Hatch, J. A. (2002). Doing qualitative research in education settings. Albany: State University of New York Press. Heath, L., Kruttschnitt, C., & Ward, D. (1986). Television and violent criminal behavior: Beyond the Bobo doll. Violence and Victims, 1(3), 177-190. Karcher, M. J., Kuperminc, G. P., Portwood, S. G., Sipe, C. L., & Taylor, A. S. (2006). Mentoring programs: A framework to inform program development, research, and evaluation. Journal of Community Psychology, 34(6), 709-725. Karcher, M. J., Davidson, A. J., Rhodes, J. E., & Herrera, C. (2010). Pygmalion in the orogram: The role of teenage peer mentors' attitudes in shaping their mentees' outcomes. Applied Developmental Science, 14(4), 212-227. doi: 10.1080/ 10888691.2010.516188
104
Kena, G., Aud, S., Johnson, F., Wang, X., Zhang, J., Rathbun, A., Wilkinson-Flicker, S., & Kristapovich, P. (2014). The Condition of Education 2014 (NCES 2014-083). U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. Washington, DC. Retrieved from http://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch. Knesting, K. (2008). Students at risk for school dropout: Supporting their persistence. Preventing School Failure, 52(4), 3-10. Komosa-Hawkins, K. (2009). Best practices in school-based mentoring programs for adolescents. Child & Youth Services, 31(3/4), 121-137. doi: 10.1080/0145935X .2009.524477 Laird, J., Cataldi, E. F., KewalRamani, A., & Chapman, C. (2008). Dropout and completion rates in the United States: 2006 (NCES 2008-053). National Center for Education Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education. Washington, DC. Retrieved from http://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch/ pubsinfo.asp?pubid=2008053 Lefkowitz, M. M., Eron, L. D., & Walder, L. O. (2013). Growing up to be violent: A longitudinal study of the development of aggression. Elmsford, NY: Pergamon Press Inc. Lerma, A. F. (2012). Si se puede?: Perceived realities of Latina/o dropouts from American high schools (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from Proquest. (Order No. 3518443) Livingstone, S. (1996) On the continuing problems of media effects research. In J. Curran and M. Gurevitch (Eds.), Mass media and society (2nd ed.). London: Edward Arnold. Lodico, M. G., Spaulding, D. T., & Voegtle, K. H. (2010). Methods in educational research: From theory to practice (Vol. 28). New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons. Marshall, W. L., Laws, D. R., & Barbaree, H. E. (1990). Handbook of sexual assault: Issues, theories, and treatment of the offender. New York: Plenum Press. Marzano, R. J. (2004). Building Background Knowledge for Academic Achievement: Research on What Works in Schools. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. Maslow, A. H. (1943). A theory of human motivation. Psychological Review, 50(4), 370. McMillan, J. H., & Schumacher, S. (2014). Research in education: Evidence-based inquiry. Pearson Higher Ed. 105
Mehraj, H. K., Bhat, A. N., & Mehraj, H. R. (2014). Impacts of media on society: A sociological perspective. International Journal of Humanities and Social Science Invention 3(6), 56-64. Meichenbaum, D. (1984). Teaching thinking: A cognitive behavioral perspective. In R. Glaser, S. Chipman, and J. Segal (Eds.) Thinking and Learning Skills: Research and Open Questions 2, 407-426. Hillsdale, NJ: Earlbaum. Meier, E. A. (2010). Video observations of student and facilitator processes in intergroup dialogues (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from http://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/ bitstream/handle/2027.42/78873/emeier_1.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. J. (2015). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation. John Wiley & Sons. Miller, J. M., Barnes, J. C., Miller, H. V. & McKinnon, L. (2012). Exploring the link between mentoring program structure & success rates: Results from a national survey. Southern Criminal Justice Association 2012. American Journal of Criminal Justice 38, 439–456. doi: 10.1007/s12103-012-9188-9 Morgan, A. K., & Drury, V. B. (2003). Legitimising the subjectivity of human reality through qualitative research method. The Qualitative Report, 8(1), 70-80. National High School, C. (2011). National High School Center Early Warning System Tool v2.0: Technical Manual. Retrieved from http://www.earlywarningsystems. org/wp-content/uploads/documents/EWSHSImplementationguide2013.pdf Therriault, S. B., Heppen, J., O’Cummings, M., Fryer, L., & Johnson, A. (2010). Early warning system implementation guide. Retrieved from http://www. better highschools. org/documents/NHSCEWSImplementationGuide. pdf. Neild, R. (2009). Falling off track during the transition to high school: What we know and what can be done. Future of Children, 19(1), 53-76. Newman, B. M., Lohman, B. J., & Newman, P. R. (2007). Peer group membership and a sense of belonging: their relationship to adolescent behavior problems. Adolescence 42(166), 241. Osborne, J. W., & Jones, B. D. (2011). Identification with academics and motivation to achieve in school: how the structure of the self influences academic outcomes. Educational Psychology Review, 23(1), 131-158. doi:10.1007/s10648-011-9151-1 Pajares, F., & Miller, M. D. (1994). Role of self-efficacy and self-concept beliefs in mathematical problem solving: A path analysis. Journal of Educational Psychology, 86(2), 193. 106
Phelps, R. (2005). The potential of reflective journals in studying complexity in action. Southern Cross University. Retrieved from http://epubs.scu.edu.au/cgi/ viewcontent.cgi?article=1016&context=educ_pubs Pintrich, P. R., & De Groot, E. V. (1990). Motivational and self-regulated learning components of classroom academic performance. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82(1), 33. Podsiadlo, J. J., & Philliber, W. W. (2003). The Nativity Mission Center: A successful approach to the education of Latino boys. Journal of Education for Students Placed at Risk, 8(4), 419-28. Prevatt, F., & Kelly, F. D. (2003). Dropping out of school: A review of intervention programs. Journal of School Psychology, 41(5), 377-395. Pubs, E. D. (2012). National center for education statistics. Education Statistics Quarterly, 2(2). Reagan-Porras, L. L. (2013). Dynamic duos: A case review of effective mentoring program evaluations. Journal of Applied Social Science, 7(2), 208-219. Reiner, R. (1997). Media made criminality: The representation of crime in the mass media. Retrieved from http://www.researchgate.net/publication/30528841_Media _made_criminality_The_representation_of_crime_in_the_mass_media Rhodes, J. (2008). Improving youth mentoring interventions through research-based practice. American Journal of Community Psychology, 41(1/2), 35-42. doi: 10.1007/s10464-007-9153-9 Rios, V. M. (2010). Navigating the Thin line between education and incarceration: An action research case study on gang-associated Latino youth. Journal of Education for Students Placed at Risk, 15(1-2), 200-212. Ritchie, J., Lewis, J., Nicholls, C. M., & Ormston, R. (Eds.). (2013). Qualitative research practice: A guide for social science students and researchers. Retrieved from http://www.sxf.uevora.pt/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/Ritchie_2003.pdf Rosenstrock, I. M., Strecher, V. J., & Becker, M. H. (1988). Social learning theory and the health belief model, Health Education Quarterly 15(2), 175-183. Rosenthal, T. L. & Zimmerman, B. J. (1978). Social learning and cognition. New York: Academic Press.
107
Rotermund, S. L. (2010). The Role of Psychological Precursors and Student Engagement in a Process Model of High School Dropout. ProQuest LLC. 789 East Eisenhower Parkway, PO Box 1346, Ann Arbor, MI 48106. Saavedra, E., & Villalta, M. A. (2008). Escala de resiliencia para jóvenes y adultos (SVRES). Santiago de Chile: CEANIM. Sandín Esteban, M. P., & Sánchez Martí, A. (2014). Beyond compulsory schooling: Resilience and academic success of immigrant youth. Social and Behavioral Sciences 132, 19-24. doi: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.04.272 Schunk, D. H. (1989). Social cognitive theory and self-regulated learning. In Selfregulated learning and academic achievement (pp. 83-110). New York: Springer. Schunk, D. H. (1996). Learning theories. New Jersey: Prentice Hall. Schunk, D. H. (2008). Metacognition, self-regulation, and self-regulated learning: Research recommendations. Educational Psychology Review, 20(4), 463-467. Schwartz, S. E. O., Rhodes, J. E., Spencer, R. & Grossman, J. B. (2013) Youth initiated mentoring: Investigating a new approach to working with vulnerable adolescents. society for community research and action 2013. American Journal of Community Psychology 52, 155–169. doi: 10.1007/s10464-013-9585-3 Smith, C., & Stormont, M. A. (2011). Building an effective school-based mentoring program. Intervention in School & Clinic, 47(1), 14-21. doi: 10.1177/105345 1211406544 Straus, S. E., Johnson, M. O., Marquez, C., & Feldman, M. D. (2013). Characteristics of successful and failed mentoring relationships: A qualitative study across two academic health centers. Academic Medicine: Journal of the Association of American Medical Colleges, 88(1), 82. Swanson, C. (2008). Cities in crisis: A special analytic report on high school graduation. Education Policy Center, the Urban Institute. Taylor, A. Z. & Graham, S. (2007). An examination of the relationship between achievement values and perceptions of barriers among low-SES African American and Latino students. Journal of Educational Psychology, 99(1), 52-64. Whiting, G. W. (2009). The scholar identity institute: Guiding darnel and other black males, Gifted Child Today, 32(4), 53-56. Wigfield, A., & Eccles, J. S. (1992). The development of achievement task values: A theoretical analysis. Developmental Review, 12(3), 265-310. 108
Wyatt, S. (2009). The brotherhood: Empowering adolescent African-American males toward excellence. Professional School Counseling, 12(6), 463-470. Zand, D. H., Thomson, N., Cervantes, R., Espiritu, R., Klagholz, D., LaBlanc, L., & Taylor, A. (2009). The mentor–youth alliance: The role of mentoring relationships in promoting youth competence. Journal of Adolescence, 32(1), 117. doi: 10.1016/j.adolescence.2007.12.006 Zimmerman, B. J. (1995). Self-regulation involves more than metacognition: A social cognitive perspective. Educational Psychologist, 30(4), 217-221. Zimmerman, B. J., Bandura, A., & Martinez-Pons, M. (1992). Self-motivation for academic attainment: The role of self-efficacy beliefs and personal goal setting. American Educational Research Journal, 29(3), 663-676. Zimmerman, B. J., & Martinez-Pons, M. (1990). Student differences in self-regulated learning: Relating grade, sex, and giftedness to self-efficacy and strategy use. Journal of Educational Psychology, 82(1), 51.
109
APPENDIX A. INTERVIEW PROTOCOL Pseudonym:
Date:
Introduction: This document is the procedure that will be followed for each interview, which will be audio-recorded. The researcher will ask questions and make general notes on this form. The participants will also be given a copy to review (Lerma, 2012). q Introduction of researcher q Discuss the purpose and importance of the study q Provide verbal informed consent forms and explain measures to maintain confidentiality q Explain the interview procedure (audio recording and taking notes) q Answer any questions, if any, they have q Test audio recording equipment q Use affirmative body language to make the participants feel comfortable q Complete Introductory Questions q Ask 1st Interview Questions or 2nd Interview Questions q Closure Introductory Questions (asked at 1st Interview Only) 1. Current Grade in School 2. Age years 3. Country of birth _______________________________ 4. Years living in the U.S. 5. What language(s) do you speak? 6. When did you enter U.S. public schools? _____(age) _____ (grade) Were you in Pre-K? _____ 7. In which state(s) have you attended U.S. schools? 8. How many schools have you attended, so far? 9. How many years of school did your parents complete? father mother 10.How many brothers and sisters do you have? 11. How many graduated from high school? 12. Were you ever suspended from school? # of times Why? ___________________ 13. Have you ever repeated a grade? If so, which grade(s)? Why? 1st Interview Questions: 14.Describe your school experience so far. 110
15.How is your experience of school the same as or different than what other student’s experience? 16.What can or should schools do to help Latino students graduate from high school? 17.What does it mean to be a student in a public school in the U.S.? 18. How do you feel about school? a. What is your opinion of the classes and the work? b. Do you participate in sports or clubs outside the normal school day? c. How do you feel about school staff such as teachers, principals, and counselors? d. How does the school staff feel about you as a student? e. What does it mean to be a member of The suport group? f. Describe any effect The support group has on your attitude toward school and life. 2nd Interview Questions 1. How would you describe your school experience right now? a. How was your experience of school the same as or different than your experience when we first met? b. What can or should schools do to help Latino students graduate from high school? 2. How do you feel about school today? a. What is your opinion of the classes and the work? b. Do you participate in sports or clubs outside the normal school day? c. How do you feel about school staff like teachers, principals, and counselors? d. How does the school staff feel about you as a student? e. What does it mean to be a member of The support group? f. Describe any effect The support group has on your attitude toward school and life. Conclusion: q Ask if they would like to share anything else q Thank them for their participation q Ask if they have any questions q Make note of any feelings, observations, or reactions to the interview
111
APPENDIX B. JOURNAL PROMPTS Journal Protocol - Weekly Questions Set up as prompts on survey monkey for students to respond to on scheduled day Week 1 1. What is school like for you? Is it easy, difficult, boring, fun, etc. 2. What do you hope to accomplish in school during this semester? 3. Describe The support group. Week 2 1. What is the best part of school for you? 2. What is the worst part of school for you? Week 3 1. What is the best part of school for you? 2. What is the worst part of school for you? 3. Why did you join The support group? Week 4 1. What is the best part of school for you? 2. What is the worst part of school for you? Week 5 1. What is the best part of school for you? 2. What is the worst part of school for you? 3. Describe your experience of The support group, so far. Week 6 1. What is the best part of school for you? 2. What is the worst part of school for you? 3. What have you learned about school through The support group? Week 7 1. What is the best part of school for you? 2. What is the worst part of school for you? 3. Describe how The support group helps or doesn’t help your experience of school. Week 8 1. What is school like for you, now? 112
2. What did you accomplish in school this semester? 3. What did you learn about yourself from participating in The support group?
113
