Factors Impacting Sense of Belonging at a Hispanic ... - SAGE Journals

Factors Impacting Sense of Belonging at a Hispanic-Serving Institution

Journal of Hispanic Higher Education Volume 6 Number 3 July 2007 237-256 © 2007 Sage Publications 10.1177/1538192707302801 http://jhh.sagepub.com hosted at http://online.sagepub.com

Ricardo Maestas New Mexico Institute of Mining and Technology, Socorro, New Mexico

Gloria S. Vaquera John Carroll University, Cleveland, Ohio

Linda Muñoz Zehr Chandler-Gilbert Community College, Chandler, Arizona

Abstract: This study examines factors that impact students’ sense of belonging at a Hispanic-serving institution. Findings indicate that various variables measuring academic and social integration as well as experiences with and perceptions of diversity have a positive impact on sense of belonging. Implications support the idea that campus diversity may improve sense of belonging and ultimately improve retention of all students. Implications and recommendations are discussed. Resumen: Este estudio examina factores que impactan el sentido de pertenencia en una institución de servicio a hispanos. Los hallazgos indican que algunas variables que miden integración académica y social tanto como las experiencias con y percepción de diversidad tienen un impacto positivo en el sentido de pertenencia. Implicaciones apoyan la idea de que la diversidad en el campo universitario posiblemente mejora el sentido de pertenencia y en última instancia mejora la retención de todos los estudiantes. Se discuten implicaciones y recomendaciones. Keywords: sense of belonging; Hispanic-serving institutions; diversity; academic and social integration

Introduction Fueled by large numbers of foreign-born Hispanics immigrating into this country and the rapid population growth caused by high birth rates, college and university campuses across the country are experiencing an influx in the enrollment of minority students, particularly Hispanics (de los Santos & de los Santos, 2003). As of the 2000 Census, Hispanics now have become the largest minority surpassing African Americans (United States Census, 2000). As this growth in population and enrollments continues, universities are faced with the problem of retaining and graduating minority 237

238

Journal of Hispanic Higher Education

students who traditionally have not faired well in institutions of higher education. The problem is further compounded by shrinking budgets, particularly for statesupported institutions, and legislators demanding more accountability for the fewer dollars provided. Although much of the literature and research has focused on retention specifically, this article focuses on an aspect of retention, i.e. sense of belonging. The authors believe that sense of belonging, or the cohesion a student has with a particular institution, is a critical aspect in retaining all students, and particularly students of color. A new body of research is under way examining sense of belonging (Hurtado & Carter, 1997; Hurtado & Ponjuan, 2005; Hoffman, Richmond, Morrow, & Salomone, 2002; Lee & Davis, 2000; Velazquez, 1999); however, these studies examine populations of students attending predominately White institutions. This current study seeks to add to the literature on sense of belonging in a highly diverse university setting. This work also brings into the discussion the impact of diversity on educational settings and how that diversity may impact sense of belonging for all students, minority and majority.

Institutional Context Because of the interest of the researchers in examining sense of belonging in a diverse setting, this study draws data from one campus, the University of New Mexico (UNM) located in Albuquerque, New Mexico. The state, New Mexico, is important in that it is the first minority-majority state. The University of New Mexico is a Hispanic-serving institution (HSI) and is a major research institution housing the only medical, pharmacy, and law schools in the state. This flagship educational institution has an average main campus undergraduate student enrollment of approximately 18,000 undergraduate students, with 45% of the students being White (non-Hispanic), 35% Hispanic, and 13% Asian American/Pacific Islander, African American, or American Indian students (University of New Mexico, Office of Institutional Research, 2006). Thus, UNM enjoys the status of being a minoritymajority institution with minority students making up the majority of the student population. UNM presently is considered as one of the largest producers of Hispanic graduates both at the undergraduate and graduate levels (“Hispanic Outlook,” 2006). UNM is not only interested in increasing the enrollment of Hispanic and American Indian students, but also in increasing the success of its students, particularly as it relates to persistence and graduation rates, because the university has a large population of Hispanic and other minority students. UNM students have a graduation rate of 32.0% after 5 years and 43.3% after 6 years. This is below the national average of approximately 50% and well below the average for a major research university. Its retention rates vary from 65% to 71% after the 2nd year. The need to retain students is based on the fact that the university spends large amounts

Maestas et al. / Sense of Belonging at a Hispanic-Serving Institution

239

of money recruiting students and if the university loses through attrition, the return on investment is diminished. Additionally, retaining students increases the money to the state, which allocates the funding to the university’s budget, and in turn reduces the need to spend additional funds to recruit more students. Finally, by retaining and graduating more students, the university contributes to the state and national workforce with educated workers, which are more likely to generate higher contributions to the state and federal coffers in the form of taxes. UNM is ideal as a living laboratory for conducting experiments to better understand the factors that predict success in higher education for minority students, but especially Hispanics. The University and the state could serve as a model for those states in the country that have a large or growing population of Hispanics, such as Texas, California, New York, and Florida.

Literature Review Academic and Social Integration Within the field of higher education studies, a topic that has been broadly studied is undergraduate student persistence. Principal in this work is the research of Vincent Tinto (1975, 1988, 1993) whose theory of student departure has been widely tested and continues to guide this area of study. Focusing on institutional structural factors, Tinto’s theory posits that departure decisions are impacted by a variety of factors. As students come into the institution, they do so with a variety of backgrounds, intents, and commitments. On arrival into the institution, two key concepts impact persistence: academic and social integration. If students are not well integrated into the university or college environment, they will likely withdraw. Drawing from this work, a variety of researchers began studying further the idea of integration. In testing Tinto’s theory, these researchers focus on participatory action of students as measures of integration, as well as perceptions of both social and academic experiences (Fox, 1986; Pascarella & Terenzini, 1980a; Pavel & Padilla, 1993; Stoecker, Pascarella, & Wolfe, 1988; Terenzini & Pascarella, 1977). Thus, social integration is measured by asking students if they participated in various kinds of university activities or clubs. Students also are asked to assess the quality of peer and faculty relationships. Academic integration is measured most often by academic performance, participation in academic activities, and an assessment of intellectual growth.

Sense of Belonging Left out of these measures is a student’s subjective feelings of connectedness or cohesion to the institution, or sense of belonging. Hurtado and Carter (1997) argue

240


for an empirically distinct measure of integration. This measure accounts for a psychological dimension of integration, called sense of belonging. In a longitudinal study using data from the National Survey of Hispanic Students, Hurtado and Carter explore factors that are attributed to sense of belonging, a key factor in student persistence. By including such a measure, researchers can examine both the participation in particular activities and what that participation means to the student. Thus, sense of belonging taps into feelings of association with a group or membership. Since noting the importance of sense of belonging in persistence models, other researchers also have tested factors associated with sense of belonging. For Hurtado and Carter (1997), sense of belonging measures a student’s attachment to the campus community as a whole. Other researchers expand the concept to consider feelings of attachment to the various communities or universities contexts (Hoffman, Richmond, Morrow, & Salomone, 2002; Lee & Davis, 2000; Kember & Leung, 2004). Principal distinctions of this concept rest with the two main campus communities, the students and the faculty. Hoffman, Richmond, Morrow, and Salomone (2002) examine the main conceptual dimensions of a sense of belonging instrument that considers student-to-peer and student-to-faculty psychological connections. They find five factors related to sense of belonging: (1) empathetic faculty understanding, (2) perceived peer support, (3) perceived isolation, (4) perceived faculty support and comfort, and (5) perceived classroom comfort. Similarly, Kember and Leung (2004) use a measure of sense of belonging that encompasses attachments to the broader university, department, teaching staff, and classmates. Regardless of how sense of belonging is measured, various studies have found a connection with academic interactions. Hoffman, Richmond, Morrow, and Salomone (2002) found that 1st-year students involved with learning communities indicate a higher sense of belonging than their peers who enroll in general university courses. These students perceive higher levels of faculty support, peer support, and classroom comfort. They also view their faculty as being more empathetic and understanding. The unique closeness that is created in learning communities allows for a merging of both social and academic integration, which increases sense of belonging. Similarly, other research finds that participation in academic support programs and simply engaging with peers in conversations about course matters outside of class also contributes to a stronger sense of belonging (Hurtado & Carter, 1997; Hurtado & Ponjuan, 2005).

Experiences With and Perceptions of Diversity A growing body of literature is beginning to address the central question of the impact of diversity on a college campus. These studies consider a range of benefits from the student’s own assessment of received benefits to faculty assessment of the benefits to student learning (Orfield & Whitla, 2001). Other studies are beginning to document the impact of diversity on various educational outcomes, such as cognitive


241

growth, critical thinking skills, listening and writing ability, and preparing students for graduate school (Astin, 1993a; Chang, 1999; Hurtado, 1992; Pascarella, Edison, Nora, Hagedorn, & Terenzini, 1996). For students of color, the issue of belonging or feeling a part of a campus community is often a challenging one. With the majority of college institutions remaining predominantly White, students of color often feel marginalized and isolated (Bennett & Okinaka, 1990; Jones, Castellanos, & Cole, 2002; Lopez, 2005; Nora & Cabrera, 1996; Smedley, Meyers, & Harrell, 1993). The environment of the college campus has a major impact on the sense of belonging for students of color. Hurtado and Carter (1997) found that a negative campus racial climate can have a negative impact on Hispanic students’ sense of belonging. Furthermore, hostile environments have been shown to cause student departure. In contrast, campus environments that have a more positive attitude toward diversity have been shown to be beneficial for all students. These campuses make diversity a central point in their mission statements and work to create a harmonious campus environment where all students are welcomed. In studying the issue of sense of belonging with Asian American and Mexican American students, Lee and Davis (2000) and Velazquez (1999) consider measures of acculturation within these communities. In both studies, they find that students who had strong cultural orientations or positive perceptions of their cultural identities are more likely to have a higher sense of belonging than those students who have weaker cultural orientations or negative perceptions of their cultural identities. Furthermore, having a bicultural orientation or bicultural experiences helps students adapt to college life. Thus, having experiences with diverse peers prior to enrolling in college aids in the transition into a campus community. The benefits of a diverse college campus where students engage with one another, across racial and ethnic groups, are immense. In a national study of 11,680 undergraduates from 370 colleges and universities, Chang (1999) finds that students who socialize with diverse peers and discuss racial and ethnic issues outside of class with their peers report higher levels of college satisfaction, intellectual and social selfconcept. Similarly, in a study of 25,000 students attending 217 different colleges and universities, Astin (1993b) finds that students who have direct experience with diversity also report higher overall college satisfaction. These students report being more committed to promoting racial understanding and higher levels of cultural awareness. Interestingly, experiences with diversity also have a positive impact on retention and a variety of academic development variables.

Current Study and Conceptual Framework Taken together, these studies indicate that a variety of factors impact sense of belonging. The hypothesized model (see Figure 1) suggests that background characteristics, such as gender, race and ethnicity, parental level of education, the perceived

242


Figure 1 Conceptual Framework

Background • • • • •

High School GPA ACT Father’s education Mother’s education Paying for college expenses • Gender • Race/ethnicity

Academic Integration • Finding academic help when needed • Time spent studying • Academic support programs • Faculty interest in my development • Had classes with peer discussions/interactions Sense of Belonging • • • •

Social Integration Joined intercollegiate athletics Joined sorority or fraternity Held campus leadership Lived in campus housing Experience With and Perceptions of Diversity

• Personal ability with diversity • Socialized with different racial/ethnic group • Positive behaviors toward diversity issues • Supportive of affirmative action

ability to pay for college expenses, and academic background are all important factors in determining sense of belonging. Furthermore, academic and social integration are identified as key components of sense of belonging (Hoffman, Richmond, Morrow, & Salomone, 2002; Hurtado & Carter, 1997; Hurtado & Ponjuan, 2005). Social and academic integration are central to a student’s connection with the main components of campus life, the classroom experience and the social experience. Feeling connected to the institution outside of classes and developing social networks are the keys to creating a sense of belonging. Additionally, making connections with faculty and engaging academically are crucial to both succeeding and feeling like a member of the university community. Lastly, on a highly diverse college campus having experiences with diversity and having positive attitudes regarding diversity issues also will assist a student to feel more connected (Astin, 1993b; Chang, 1999; Lee & Davis, 2000; Velazquez, 1999). The model suggests that background characteristics influence academic integration, social integration, and experiences with and perceptions of diversity, which in turn affect sense of belonging.


243

Method Data for this analysis comes from The Diverse Democracy Project, a longitudinal study of 10 public universities that vary in geographic location, size, and student enrollment demographics. To examine the unique experiences of students at an HSI that is also a research university, only UNM’s data is used for this study. UNM was the only HSI included in the Diverse Democracy Project and the researchers were not granted access to the data from the other nine institutions. The data were collected in two waves with the first survey being administered during freshman orientation of the 2000-2001 academic year and the second during the spring of the sophomore year 2002. The first survey yielded 1,762 student responses. Year 2 proved to be more difficult; only 421 students responded. Because year 2 survey questions are primarily used in this analysis, the sample size for this study is 421. When comparing this sample to the whole freshmen cohort, the sample seems to have a few more women and more White students represented (University of New Mexico, Office of Institutional Research, 2005). The gender breakdown of the sample is 69% female and 31% male, whereas the university population is 57% female and 43% male. In terms of racial representation, the sample is 33% Hispanic students, 9% other minority students (African American, Asian and Pacific Islander, and American Indian), and 58% White students. The freshmen cohort is similar for Hispanics, 37%, and the other minority category, African American, Asian and Pacific Islander and American Indian, combined equals 10%. The White cohort population is 51%.

Statistical Analysis Descriptive statistical analyses are employed to identify patterns in the data. Additionally, correlational analyses are utilized to determine if multicollinearity exists between variables used in the regression equation. Factor analysis using principle axis with varimax rotation is used as a data reduction technique to create various constructs. Table 1 provides a list of the survey items used to create each construct, the factor loading scores, and reliability alpha scores. Ordinary least square regression is used with a nested model design to test the impact of theoretical sets of variables on the dependent variable. For the full data set (n = 421), twenty-seven cases have missing data on one or more variables either used in the factor creation or in the model estimation itself. To avoid losing all 27 of these cases, we employed Hot Deck imputation for the missing data. The Hot Deck method identifies the most similar case to the one with missing data, and then substitutes the value from this most similar case. An assumption of the Hot Deck procedure is that the missing data are either missing completely at random (MCAR) or is missing at random (MAR). For MCAR, this means that the probability that a data value is missing is unrelated to the data value itself or the

244


Table 1 Scales and Survey Items Used in the Analysis (n = 421) Factors and Survey Items Sense of belonging Please indicate the extent to which you agree or disagree with the following statements: I see myself as part of the university community. I feel a sense of belonging to this university. I feel that I am member of the university community. Personal ability with diversity Ability to work cooperatively with diverse people Racial/cultural awareness Openness to having my views challenged Ability to see world from someone else’s perspective Knowledge about the cultural backgrounds of others Ability to discuss and negotiate controversial issues Tolerance of others with different beliefs Positive behaviors toward diversity issues Since coming to the University, how often have you done the following? Participated in classroom discussion Made an effort to educated others about social issues Felt challenged to think more broadly about an issue Participated in student protests Made efforts to get to know individuals from diverse backgrounds Challenged others on racially/sexually derogatory comments Engaged in discussions about racial/ethnic issues in class Supportive of affirmative action goals Indicate the extent of which you agree with each statement. Hiring more faculty of color should be a top priority of this university. Colleges should aggressively recruit more students of color. A high priority should be given to see that students of color receive financial aid for college.

Factor Loading (α) (0.895)

0.842 0.796 0.946 (0.762) 0.431 0.537 0.571 0.660 0.568 0.584 0.572 (0.755) 0.570 0.764 0.501 0.439 0.518 0.490 0.589 (0.812) 0.747 0.827 0.734

values of any other variables; for MAR the probability must be unrelated to the data value itself. In terms of level of significance for determining the impact of independent variables on the dependent variable, traditionally a .05 level is used as the cutoff. Because of the exploratory nature of this study, we use a more liberal cutoff of .10. Using such a cutoff allows us to consider a broader range of factors that may impact sense of belonging.

Variables The construct, sense of belonging, is the dependent variable used in this analysis. It is comprised of three items: (1) I see myself as part of the university community,


245

(2) I feel a sense of belonging to this university, and (3) I feel that I am member of the university community. The alpha reliability for this construct is .895 (see Table 1 for factor loading scores and Table 2 for variables and scales). The model considers various types of independent variables, which include background characteristics, academic integration, social integration, and experiences with and perceptions of diversity (see Table 2 for variable and scales). For background characteristics, high school cumulative grade point average, standardized college entrance test scores, and mother’s and father’s education are included as past studies have found that these characteristics have an impact on persistence (Nora, 1987; Nora, Cabrera, Hagedorn, & Pascarella, 1996; Pascarella & Chapman, 1983; Pascarella & Terenzini, 1980b, 1981). The American College Test (ACT) composite score is used as the college entrance test in this model. Scholastic Assessment Test (SAT) to ACT conversion scores are used for students who provided only SAT scores. The researchers also include paying for college expenses. Students are asked to identify, on a scale where 5 = very easy and 1 = very difficult, how difficult it was to pay for college expenses. This was done because UNM has a higher percentage of first generation students who are poorer than the national average. Other background variables include gender and race/ethnicity. The gender variable is dummy coded as male = 1 and female = 0. The race/ethnicity of each student is also included because it has been shown to impact sense of belonging (Hurtado & Carter, 1997) and persistence. Two dummy variables are created to measure race/ ethnicity. The first is Hispanic and the second dummy variable is other minority (Asian American and Pacific Islander, American Indian, and African American). The reference category is White. Although the Tinto (1993) model considered academic performance and faculty/ staff and student interactions as measures for academic integration, our model considers the following measures: (a) finding academic help when needed, (b) time spent studying, (c) academic support programs, (d) faculty interest in a student’s development, and (e) had classes with peer discussions/interactions. For finding academic help, students were asked to identify how easy or difficult it was to find help. Students were also asked approximately how many hours per week they spent studying and how often they had participated in academic support programs. To measure faculty interest, the students were asked to indicate whether they agreed or disagreed with the following statement: at least one faculty member has taken an interest in my development. Lastly, students were asked to identify how many courses they had been enrolled in where there was an opportunity for class discussions or interactions with other students. Aspects of social integration are measured by accounting for participation in various extracurricular activities for example, where students resided during the 1st year of college, which is consistent with past studies on persistence (Tinto, 1993; Christie & Dinham, 1991). The four variables used are (1) participation in intercollegiate athletics, (2) participation in sororities/fraternities, (3) participation in campus leadership, and (4) living in campus housing.

246


Table 2 Variables and Scales for the Statistical Model (n = 421) Measure

M

SD

Description

Sense of belonging

0.0

0.958

Scale index, three items, 1 = strongly disagree to 4 = strongly agree

Background characteristics High school grade point average (GPA) American College Test (ACT) Father’s education

3.3 22.6 4.6

0.451 3.690 1.205

Mother’s education

4.4

1.050

Paying for college expenses

2.5

0.954

Gender

0.3

0.464

Hispanic

0.3

0.473

Other minority

0.1

0.385

Standard four-point GPA scale Standard ACT composite score Item scored 1 to 6, 1 = some high school, 6 = doctorate or other professional degree Item scored 1 to 6, 1 = some high school, 6 = doctorate or other professional degree Item scored 1 to 5, 1 = very difficult, 5 = very easy Recoded to 1 = male, 0 = female Recoded to 1 = Hispanic, 0 = all else Recoded to 1 = other minority, 0 = all else

3.0

0.773

Time spent studying

3.7

1.297

Academic support programs

1.8

1.045

Faculty interest in my development

2.9

1.024

Academic integration Finding academic help when needed

Had classes with peer discussions/interactions 3.5

.848

Social integration Joined intercollegiate athletics

0.1

.300

Joined sorority or fraternity

0.1

.269

Held campus leadership

0.1

.312

Item scored 1 to 5, 1 = very difficult, 5 = very easy Item (based on hours per week) scored 0 to 6, 0 = 0 hrs, 6 = over 20 hrs Item (participation in…) scored 1 to 5, 1 = never, 5 = very often Item scored 1 to 4, 1 = strongly disagree, 4 = strongly agree (total number of courses) Item scored 0 to 3, 0 = none, 3 = three or more Recoded to 1 = participated in intercollegiate athletics, 0 = all else Recoded to 1 = joined sorority or fraternity, 0 = all else Recoded to 1 = held campus leadership position, 0 = all else


247

0.2

0.407

Recoded to 1 = lived in campus housing (includes dorms, campus apartments, and any campus affiliated organization housing), 0 = all else

Experiences with and perceptions of diversity Personal ability with diversity 0.0

0.878

Socialized with different racial/ethnic group 3.5

1.156

Positive behaviors toward diversity issues

0.0

0.887

Supportive of affirmative action goals

0.0

0.906

Scale index, seven items, 1= a major weakness to 5 = a major strength Item scored 1 to 5, 1 = never, 5 = very often Scale index, seven items, 1 = never to 5 = very often Scale index, three items, 1 = strongly disagree to 4 = strongly agree

Lived in campus housing

In using data gathered through the Diverse Democracy project, the researchers wanted to explore how experiences with and perceptions of diversity would impact sense of belonging; thus, the following four variables are used in this model: (1) personal ability with diversity, (2) socializing with different racial/ethnic groups, (3) positive behaviors toward diversity issues, and (4) being supportive of affirmative action goals. Three of these variables, personal ability with diversity, positive behaviors toward diversity issues, and being supportive of affirmative action goals, were constructs created using factor analysis (see Table 1 for factor loading scores and item descriptions). Students are also asked to identify how frequently they socialize or party with students that are from a different racial/ethnic group than their own.

Results Table 3 provides the results of a nested regression model that compares the impact of background characteristics, academic integration, social integration and experiences with and perceptions of diversity on sense of belonging. In Model I, of the nine variables used to measure background characteristics, only paying for college expenses (b = .147) is significant at the .01 level. Having the belief that paying for college expenses is easy has a positive impact on a student’s sense of belonging. However, background characteristics as a whole seem to have little impact on sense of belonging (R2 = .027). Model II adds academic integration variables to background variables. In this model, paying for college expenses is now only slightly significant, at the .10 level. Of the five academic integration variables included, three are statistically significant: (1) participating in academic support programs (b = .153**), (2) faculty interest in my development (b = .245***), and (3) having classes with peer discussions/ interactions (b = .131*). All three of these variables have a positive impact on sense

248


Table 3 Nested Regression Model Predicting Sense of Belonging With Unstandardized Coefficients and Standard Errors (n = 421) Variables Background High school grade point average American College Test Father’s education Mother’s education Paying for college expenses Gender Hispanic Other minority

I

0.025 (0.119) 0.006 (0.015) 0.024 (0.045) 0.011 (0.050) 0.147** (0.050) −0.092 (0.102) 0.165 (0.109) −0.046 (0.173)

Academic integration Finding academic help when needed Time spent studying Academic support prorams Faculty interest in my development Had classes peer discussions/interactions

II

III

IV

0.058 (0.109) 0.000 (0.014) 0.046 (0.041) 0.013 (0.046) 0.091† (0.048) 0.027 (0.095) 0.109 (0.100) −0.126 (0.159)

0.036 (0.107) 0.006 (0.014) 0.044 (0.040) 0.003 (0.045) 0.082† (0.046) −0.006 (0.093) 0.146 (0.098) −0.107 (0.156)

0.008 (0.104) 0.006 (0.013) 0.046 (0.039) −0.008 (0.044) 0.099* (0.045) −0.016 (0.091) 0.140 (0.095) −0.095 (0.152)

0.095 (0.058) 0.042 (0.035) 0.153** (0.044) 0.245*** (0.046) 0.131* (0.053)

0.100† (0.057) 0.036 (0.034) 0.131** (0.044) 0.243*** (0.045) 0.110* (0.052)

0.090 (0.055) 0.031 (0.033) 0.119** (0.042) 0.208*** (0.045) 0.050 (0.053)

−0.082 (0.143) 0.405* (0.165) 0.400** (0.143) 0.172 (0.109)

−0.127 (0.142) 0.384* (0.162) 0.319* (0.141) 0.209† (0.107)

−2.585*** (0.488) 0.242

0.084 (0.055) 0.094* (0.038) 0.100† (0.060) 0.112* (0.046) −2.437*** (0.506) 0.294

Social integration Intercollegiate athletics Joined sorority or fraternity Held campus leadership Lived in campus housing Diversity issues Personal ability with diversity Socialized with different racial/ethnic group Positive behaviors toward diversity issues Supportive of affirmative-action goals (Constant) R2 †

p < .10. * p < .05. ** p < .01. *** p < .001.

−0.779 (0.480) 0.027

−2.627*** (0.499) 0.194


249

of belonging. Finding academic help when needed and time spent studying are not significant. However, the inclusion of academic integration variables to background characteristics improved the model (R2 = .194). The third model includes social integration variables to the previous variables. In this model, paying for college expenses continues to be slightly significant, at the .10 level. The three academic integration variables found to be significant in Model II are still statistically significant. Additionally, a fourth academic interaction variable, finding academic help when needed, was significant at the .10 level (b = .100†). Of the four new social integration variables, joining a sorority or fraternity (b = .405*) and holding a campus leadership position (b = .400**) are positive and statistically significant. Living on campus and participating in intercollegiate athletics are not significant. With the inclusion of social integration variables, the model now accounts for 24% of the variance explained (R2 = .242). In the final model, variables pertaining to diversity issues are included. With the inclusion of these final four variables, one of background variables, paying for college expenses (b = .099*), continues to be positive and significant. Two of the academic integration variables and three of the social integration variables remain positive and significantly impact sense of belonging: participating in academic support programs (b = .119**), faculty having interest in student’s development (b = .208***), joining a sorority or fraternity (b = .384*), held campus leadership position (b = .319*) and lived in campus housing, (b = .209†). Of the four diversity issues variables only one is not significant: personal ability with diversity. Both socializing with different racial/ethnic group members (b = .094*), and being supportive of affirmative action goals (b = .112*), are statistically significant at the .05 level and have a positive impact on sense of belonging. Demonstrating positive behaviors toward diversity issues (b = .100†), is only slightly significant at the .10 level. We use F tests to compare the models, testing for improvement in R2. With the addition of each set of new variables, the model improvement is statistically significant (0.000 level). Thus, adding the set of variables for integration and diversity improve our ability to predict a student’s sense of belonging. Model IV, which includes all the variable sets, accounts for nearly 30% of the variance explained (R2 = .294).

Discussion and Limitations According to our model, multiple aspects of students’ experiences at UNM impacted their sense of belonging. Among the various background characteristics, only paying for college expenses was significant. Because New Mexico is one of the states with the lowest family income in the country, it appears logical that having the ability to pay for college would increase one’s sense of belonging at the university. Other studies have indicated that for first-generation students or students with greater economic needs, financial aid plays a larger role in persistence (Castellanos & Jones, 2003;

250


Quintana, Vogel, & Ybarra, 1991). The significant finding in this model suggests that a student’s financial stability also impacts their sense of belonging on campus. Of the variables measuring aspects of academic integration, two were significant in the final analysis. Participating in academic support programs and faculty interest in a student’s development increased a student’s sense of belonging. Clearly, finding a supportive academic environment at a large research institution makes for greater affiliation with the institution. Similarly, when students perceive that their faculty take an interest in them, they have a greater sense of belonging. This finding supports past studies that have found faculty and student interactions to have a strong and positive significant influence on a variety of student outcomes from intellectual and social development to higher grades and persistence or retention (Abraham, Lujan, López, & Walker, 2002; Bean, 1985; Endo & Harpel, 1982; Nora, 1987; Nora, Cabrera, Hagedorn, & Pascarella,1996; Pascarella & Chapman, 1983; Pascarella, Duby, Terenzini, & Iverson, 1983; Pascarella & Terenzini, 1981; Stoecker, Pascarella, & Wolfe, 1988; Terenzini, Lorang, & Pascarella, 1981; Terenzini & Pascarella, 1977, 1978). Moreover, Hurtado and Carter (1997) have examined the impact of faculty taking an interest in Hispanic students, defined specifically as students talking to faculty outside the classroom. This experience was shown to be a significant predictor of students’ sense of belonging particularly in the 3rd year of college. The findings were for Hispanic students in predominately White institutions of higher education, whereas this study at UNM confirms that the same principles apply to all students at this HSI. Hoffman, Richmond, Morrow, and Salomone (2002) also find that students’ perceptions of their faculty are important factors impacting sense of belonging. Perceptions of faculty academic support/comfort and perceptions of faculty as being empathetic and understanding contribute directly to students’ affiliation or attachment to the institution. As faculty are one of the most visible representatives of an institution, having less than positive interactions with one’s instructors could hamper a student’s transition into a university setting. In terms of social integration, living in campus housing increased a student’s sense of belonging. Similarly, Christie and Dinham (1991) find that the type of living arrangements that students select had an impact on persistence. Their study of 25 randomly selected first-time, full-time freshmen finds that social integration into the campus community is facilitated by living on campus. Living in the residence halls provides students with more opportunities to gain information about campus activities. Freshmen students who live on campus participate in campus events at almost twice the rate compared to those students who live off campus. Moreover, this study, like ours, also finds that participation in some extracurricular events has a positive impact on sense of belonging. Participation in sororities/fraternities and holding a campus leadership position impact sense of belonging. Extracurricular activities have the positive effect of getting students involved and therefore more readily connected to the campus.


251

Of interest in this study was how various diversity experiences would impact students’ sense of belonging. Displaying positive behaviors toward diversity issues was a created construct that measured a student’s behaviors toward particular aspects of diversity. This variable has a positive impact on sense of belonging. Socializing with different racial/ethnic groups than your own also has a positive impact on sense of belonging. Because of the highly diverse environment at UNM, being able to make personal connections with a range of individuals, who cross racial and ethnic lines, or displaying positive attitudes toward all sorts of diversity issues are important factors in students feeling connected to the university. Being supportive of affirmative-action goals was another created construct that also positively impacted sense of belonging. Within a highly diverse university environment, being able to cope with diversity, socializing with diverse peers, and being supportive of affirmative action contributes to sense of belonging.

Limitations Several limitations apply to this study. Like other studies in the social sciences, only one third of the variance (R2 = .294) is explained, indicating that many other variables exist that cannot be accounted for and; therefore, not included in this study. Another limitation is the sample size, n = 421. Ideally, a larger return on the 2ndyear survey would have yielded a larger sample. Furthermore, the sample used in this study had more women and White students than the actual freshmen cohort and had a lower response rate from African American, Asian and Pacific Islander, and American Indian student populations. Additionally, because this is a single-institution sample, this exploratory study may not be representative across other HSIs. The reader is cautioned not to generalize beyond the institution from which the sample is drawn. Finally, this study is a secondary data analysis. The data were originally collected for the purpose of studying how colleges impact students’ perceptions of diversity and democracy and not to measure their sense of belonging.

Implications for Policy The results of the analysis clearly point to a host of recommendations for administrators. The results also have some important implications for faculty and students. Specifically, state policy makers should consider creating more programs that provide sufficient financial aid to students, and university administrators need to minimize or eliminate students’ concerns about paying for college expenses as this variable was found to be a significant predictor of sense of belonging at the university. Additionally and more importantly, concepts of academic and social integration were found to play a critical role in predicting sense of belonging (Tinto, 1993). Two of the five academic integration and three of the four social integration measures were found to be significant. Each of these factors point to the need for administrators to create

252


environments that will foster students becoming more involved or “integrated” in the university culture and campus life. For example, encouraging the development or use of academic support programs, or faculty taking an interest in the students were two of the four academic integration variables that were found to be significant. Social integration, such as joining a sorority or fraternity, holding a campus leadership position, or living in campus housing, was an important predictor of sense of belonging. Joining a fraternity or sorority is particularly important in that the previous literature is mixed on joining a fraternity or sorority and student outcomes (Astin, 1993a). Administrators could expand the Greek system on campus as a way to increase a student’s connectedness to the campus and hopefully lead to persistence with the caveat that such organizations should become more academically oriented. University administrators should continue to maintain diverse communities at the student level, because experiences with diversity were strong predictors of sense of belonging. Moreover, college administrators, deans, and department chairs should consider developing classes that foster racial and cultural awareness, open discussions to different views and opinions, discuss controversial issues, and increase social self-confidence. A course of this type could be added as a general education or core course requirement for all 1st-year students. The implications for faculty suggest that faculty in the classroom could increase sense of belonging, and quite possibly retention, by taking more of an interest in each of their students. Faculty could be trained to get more involved with students and to insure that they have a list of academic support programs on campus to which they can refer students in trouble. As with department chairs and other administrators, our findings suggest that faculty should be encouraged to create and be rewarded for creating courses that focus on the positive aspects of diversity. As for students, the implications are clear. Students’ difficulty with paying for college was a significant predictor of sense of belonging. Because paying for college expenses was a major issue, students should strive to maximize their financial aid package so that paying for college is not a problem as they start their collegiate studies. The focus should be on scholarships and the less desirable loans. Students should also get integrated into the academic and social climate of the institution as the chances of being connected to the university increase with increased integration. Exposure to diverse groups of students is critical to students’ sense of belonging. Students should seek out students from diverse backgrounds to interact with during their college experiences. Students could also benefit from participating in classroom discussion, educating others about social issues, being challenged to think more broadly about issues, making efforts to get to know individuals from diverse backgrounds, challenging others on racially and sexually derogatory comments, and engaging in discussions about racial/ethnic issues in class. These items made up the construct of positive behaviors toward diversity issues. Because this is a single-institution study and the sample size was smaller than ideal, it will be difficult to generalize the findings of this study to other college campuses.


253

However, there is some useful information in these findings that other campuses and particularly diverse campuses with large Hispanic student enrollments should consider. In the absence of further research to confirm the findings in this study, diverse campuses should consider setting goals that increase the diversity of not only the student body, but also the faculty and to a certain extent the administrators and staff that come in contact with students on a daily basis. Increased diversity leads to positive student outcomes. Second, diverse campuses should develop academic support programs that are easy to access by its students. Third, diverse campuses should develop a mandatory core or freshman course for all 1st-year students that promotes racial and cultural awareness and increases interactions with students from different racial and ethnic groups. These factors all promote an increase in sense of belonging. And lastly, diverse campuses should create an environment where by its students can integrate positively both academically and socially. Social and academic integration leads to an increased sense of belonging and ultimately persistence. The primary goal of a diverse campus would be to ensure that its students are fully integrated into the campus culture and student life and that they connect with the college or university. This could very well lead to increased retention and graduation rates.

Future Research Future research should focus on duplicating this study to confirm the initial results, because this is an exploratory study. We used several new constructs focusing on issues relating to diversity (see Table 1), which need further refinement. Of particular interest is whether these findings hold true at other HSIs. Specifically, future research needs to verify if paying for college expenses positively impacts Hispanic students’ sense of belonging. Moreover, future research should focus on whether academic and social integration of students in other HSIs leads to an increased sense of belonging. Additional lines of inquiry should examine faculty taking an interest in students to determine if in fact this continues to positively influence sense of belonging. More work also is needed to examine the impact of diversity in all kinds of institutions of higher education.

References Abraham, J., Lujan, S., López, E., & Walker, M. (2002). Graduating students’ perceptions of outcomes of college experiences at a predominantly Hispanic university. Journal of Hispanic Higher Education, 7(1), 267-276. Astin, A. W. (1993a). What matters in college? Four critical years revisited. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Astin, A. W. (1993b). Diversity and multiculturalism on the campus: How are students affected? Change, 25(2), 44-49. Bean, J. P. (1985). Interaction effects based on class level in an explanatory model of college student dropout syndrome. American Educational Research Journal 22(1), 35-64.

254


Bennett, C., & Okinaka, A. M. (1990). Factors related to persistence among Asian, Black, Hispanic, and White undergraduates at a predominantly White university: Comparison between first and fourth year cohorts. Urban Review, 22, 33-60. Castellanos, J., & Jones, L. (2003). Latina/o undergraduate experiences in American higher education. In J. Castellanos & L. Jones (Eds.), The majority in the minority: Expanding the representation of latina/o faculty, administrators and students in higher education (pp. 1-14). Sterling, VA: Stylus Publishing, LLC. Chang, M. J. (1999). Does racial diversity matter? The educational impact of a racially diverse undergraduate population. Journal of College Student Development, 4(4), 377-395. Christie, N. G., & Dinham S. M. (1991). Institutional and external influences on social integration in the freshman year. Journal of Higher Education, 62(4), 412-436. De los Santos, A., & de los Santos, G. (2003). Hispanic-serving institutions in the 21st century: Overview, challenges, and opportunities. Journal of Hispanic Higher Education, 2(4), 377-391. Endo, J. J., & Harpel R. L. (1982). The effect of student-faculty interaction on students’ educational outcomes. Research in Higher Education, 16(2), 115-138. Fox, R. N. (1986). Application of conceptual model of college withdrawal to disadvantaged students. American Educational Research Journal, 23, 415-424. Hispanic Outlook Top 100 colleges and universities. (2006, May 8). Hispanic Outlook in Higher Education Magazine, 12. Hoffman, M., Richmond, J., Morrow, J., & Salomone, K. (2002). Investigating sense of belonging in firstyear college students. Journal of College Student Retention, 4(3), 227-56. Hurtado, S. (1992). Campus racial climate: Contexts of conflict. Journal of Higher Education, 63, 539-569. Hurtado, S., & Carter, D. (1997). Effects of college transition and perceptions of the campus racial climate on Latino college students’ sense of belonging. Sociology of Education, 70, 324-345. Hurtado, S., & Ponjuan, L. (2005). Latino educational outcomes and the campus climate. Journal of Hispanic Higher Education, 4(3), 235-251. Jones, L., Castellanos, J., & Cole, D. (2002). Examining the ethnic minority student experience at predominantly White institutions: A case study. Journal of Hispanic Higher Education, 1(1), 19-39. Kember, D., & Leung, D. Y. P. (2004). Relationship between the employment of coping mechanisms and a sense of belonging for part-time students. Educational Psychology, 24(3), 345-357. Lee, R. M., & Davis, C., III. (2000). Cultural orientation, past multicultural experience and a sense of belonging on campus for Asian American college students. Journal of College Student Development, 41(1), 110-115. Lopez, J. D. (2005). Race-related stress and sociocultural orientation among Latino students during their transition into a predominately White, highly selective institution. Journal of Hispanic Higher Education, 10(4), 354-365. Nora, A. (1987). Determinants of retention among Chicano college students: A structural model. Research in Higher Education, 26(1), 31-59. Nora, A., & Cabrera, A. F. (1996). The role of perceptions of prejudice and discrimination on the adjustment of minority students to college. The Journal of Higher Education, 67(2), 119-148. Nora, A., Cabrera, A., Hagedorn, L. S., & Pascarella, E. (1996). Differential impacts of academic and social experiences on college-related behavioral outcomes across different ethnic and gender groups at four-year institutions. Research in Higher Education, 37(4), 427-451. Orfield, G., & Whitla, D. (2001). Diversity and legal education: Student experiences in leading law schools. In Orfield, G., & Kurlaender, M. (Eds.), Diversity Challenged: Evidence on the Impact of Affirmative Action (pp.143-174). Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Publishing Group. Pascarella, E. T., & Chapman, D. W. (1983). Validation of a theoretical model of college withdrawal: interaction effects in a multi-institutional sample. Research in Higher Education, 19(1), 25-48. Pascarella, E. T., Duby, P. B., Terenzini, P.T., & Iverson, B.K. (1983). Student-faculty relations and freshman year intellectual and personal growth in a nonresidential setting. Journal of College Student Personnel, 24(5), 395-402.


255

Pascarella, E. T., Edison, M., Nora, A., Hagedorn, L. S., & Terenzini, P. T. (1996). Influences on students’ openness to diversity and challenge in the first year of college. Journal of Higher Education, 67(2), 174-195. Pascarella, E. T., & Terenzini, P. T. (1980a). Predicting freshmen persistence and voluntary dropout decisions from a theoretical model. Journal of Higher Education, 51(1), 60-75. Pascarella, E. T., & Terenzini, P. T. (1980b). Student-faculty and student-peer relations as mediators of the structural effects of undergraduate residence arrangement. Journal of Educational Research, 73(6), 334-353. Pascarella, E. T., & Terenzini, P. T. (1981). Residence arrangement, student/faculty relationships, and freshman-year educational outcomes. Journal of College Student Personnel, 22, 147-156. Pavel, D. M., & Padilla, R. (1993). American Indian and Alaska Native postsecondary departure: An example of assessing a mainstream model using national longitudinal data. Journal of American Indian Education, 32(2), 1-23. Quintana, S. M., Vogel, M. C., & Ybarra, V. C. (1991). Meta-analysis of Latino students’ adjustment in higher education. Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences, 13(2), 155-168. Smedley, B. D., Myers, H. F., & Harrell, S. P. (1993). Minority-status stresses and the college adjustment of ethnic minority freshmen. The Journal of Higher Education, 64(4), 434-452. Stoecker, J., Pascarella, E. T., & Wolfe, L. M. (1988). Persistence in higher education: A 9-year test of a theoretical model. Journal of College Student Development, 29, 196-209. Terenzini, P. T., Lorang, W., & Pascarella, E. T. (1981). Predicting freshmen persistence and voluntary dropout decision: A replication. Research in Higher Education, 15(2), 109-127. Terenzini, P. T., & Pascarella, E. T. (1977). Voluntary freshmen attrition and patterns of social and academic integration in a university: A test of a conceptual model. Research in Higher Education, 6, 25-43. Terenzini, P. T., & Pascarella, E. T. (1978). The relation of students’ precollege characteristics and freshman year experience to voluntary attrition. Research in Higher Education, 9, 347-366. Tinto, V. (1975). Dropout from higher education: A theoretical synthesis of recent research. Review of Educational Research, 63, 603-617. Tinto, V. (1988). Stages of student departure: reflections on the longitudinal character of student leaving. Journal of Higher Education, 59(4), 438-455. Tinto, V. (1993). Leaving college: Rethinking the causes and cures of student attrition (2nd ed.). Chicago: The University of Chicago Press. United States Census Bureau. (2000). QuickFacts, New Mexico. Retrieved August 9, 2006, from http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/35000.html University of New Mexico, Office of Institutional Research. (2006). University of New Mexico fact book 2005-2006. Albuquerque, NM: Author. Retrieved August 9, 2006, from http://www.unm.edu/~oir/factbook/2005fb.pdf University of New Mexico, Office of Institutional Research. (2005, fall). Freshmen cohort tracking report. Retrieved August 9, 2006, from: http://www.unm.edu/~oir/FCTReports/Fall%202005/Total053.pdf Velasquez, P. (1999, November 19). The relationship between cultural development sense of belonging and persistence among Chicanos in higher ed: An exploratory study. ASHE Annual Meeting Paper. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Association for the Study of Higher Education, San Antonio, TX.

Ricardo Maestas is the vice president for student and university relations and dean of students at the New Mexico Institute of Mining and Technology. His research focus is in the area of student success factors with an emphasis on Latino students. He holds a BA and MA in psychology and Spanish from the University of New Mexico and a PhD in higher education administration from the Center for the Study of Higher and Postsecondary Education at the University of Michigan at Ann Arbor.

256


Gloria S. Vaquera is an assistant professor in the department of sociology at John Carroll University. Her areas of research include sociology of education, race and ethnicity, and Latino studies. Her recent scholarly work examines issues of diversity within diverse higher education contexts. She received a BA from Western Michigan University, and an MA and PhD in Sociology from the University of New Mexico. Linda Muñoz Zehr is an economics instructor at Chandler-Gilbert Community College. Her research interests include labor economics, economics of education, and distance education. She received a BA and MA both from St. Mary’s University and is currently pursuing a PhD in economics at the University of New Mexico.