I was disappointed in the sample size, but not in the answers the respondents gave. They represented each sector of the educational pipeline, even vocational. Note the questions were qualitative and not on a likert scale!
Program 1: Parental advocacy/involvment & education Program 2: Cultural values and communal values Program 3: Access to decision making table Program 4: Professional development dependent on educational attainment Can you guess which one was…….?
Three of the four programs took place over seven months out of the year; one took place over the course of one week.
Note the weight and importance given to academic and social integration.
Berger & Lyon (2005) 1970’s: Building theory; 1980’s theories advanced and demographics continued to shift; 1990’s theories really tested, and minority researchers critiqued them; 2000’s; retention results still low for minorities, because of continued attention to traditional students (Oseguera, 2009, pg. 17)!! Integration has always been reliant on the necessity of the student to assimilate to institutional factors and environment Academic Integration is not present here because all newer models also hold this variable vital to student retention. “ Like the show Survivor…..”
High School proficiencies and college entrance exams don’t’ measure the same things No accountability for transition issues from high school to transfer; not mandated, only recently in California have committees been formed. Hardly enough articulation agreements Poor hoods = poor schools = poor information to students and parents = underqualified/cultured/linqusticially capable teachers = too few counselors! Reliance on standardized tests (like cigarette companies), instead of restructuring inequities in pipeline. CC: Transfer students lack: 1) access to courses that accrue transfer credit 2)financial resources 3) transfer counselors 4) SSS ARE ALSO SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC LIABILITY FOR UNITED STATES!
Current paradigm that is opposite from the current shift away from in loco parentis that a majority of large public urban universities are abiding by. Conversely, Braxton et al. (2004) &quot;advance a serious revision of Tinto's popular interactionalist theory to account for ethnic minority student departure, and they postulate a theory of student departure in commuter colleges and universities,&quot; (pg. 33 )
“ A key intervention strategy is intrusive advising” (pg. 12). The “(SRS) model was a departure from the mainstream advising structure, which included academic advisors who provided support only within the academic area and counselors who provided career and personal counseling,” (pg. 13) and it’s “success has been demonstrated across all student ethnic groups at [a] Hispanic Serving Institution,” (pg. 17). Escobedo (2007) validated Phillips’ (1991) and successfully applies Seidman’s theory in his conduction and 3-year longitudinal study of a retention/intervention program at three southwest campuses (pg. 16).
Note that Institutional/Goal commitments were more related to persistence then social integration was, noting that many more variables are present in minority and diverse students that contribute to retention, unlike previous generations of non-traditional students. In this case (Chicanos at a 4-year college).
45 community colleges 35 High schools Mentoring to provide missing social capital Rigorous instruction in writing and literature: Focuses on ethnic literature to teach critical analysis and college level writing Peer partner who acts as a guide into high school Intensive college preparatory counseling Has counselors, teachers, and faculty from post-secondary institutions seamlessly interacting and working together.
Social Capital = parent advocacy, location of resources in schools, knowing how bureaucracies work, having access to decision making people [note Garcia, 2009] “ SIRPs seek to strengthen student-of-color organizations because of the key role they play in validating particular cultural identities [emphasis added], (Rhoads, 2004, pg. 12).
Note about Teachers Union only shuffling and not hiring new generations of teachers.
Acculturation is like a hug……!
Transcript of "Decisive Minority Retention"
<ul><li>ALEX TEMPLETON </li></ul><ul><li>EDH 798 CAPSTONE </li></ul><ul><li>DR. ACKERMAN </li></ul><ul><li>SPRING 2009 </li></ul>Decisive Minority Retention: Renovating educational theory and pipelines
Problem Statement(s) <ul><li>Traditional student retention theory stems from traditional student demographics, and are becoming less effective for student persistence and retention of populations that continue to diversify. </li></ul><ul><li>Current educational structures and policies of the K-16 educational pipeline are deterrent to effective persistence, and retention theory and practice for minority college students </li></ul>
Hypotheses <ul><li>New and revised models from programs of student persistence and retention are more effective for minority student persistence and retention </li></ul><ul><li>K-16 educational policy and pipeline affect contemporary models and practice of persistence and retention </li></ul><ul><li>New and revised theory and practice focusing on Latina/o retention can be adopted and adapted for most minority student populations. </li></ul>
Survey Questions <ul><li>Purpose, Mission, and Goals </li></ul><ul><li>What is the purpose, mission, or goal of this program, and how does it align with any other program or institution’s purposes missions, or goals? </li></ul><ul><li>What have been the key components that have been ongoing in this program, what components have changed, and why? </li></ul><ul><li>Persistence, Transfer and Retention </li></ul><ul><li>How do you or how does your program DEFINE participant persistence, transfer, and retention between secondary and/or post-secondary education? </li></ul><ul><li>How do you or how does your program QUANTIFY participant persistence, transfer, and retention between secondary and/or post-secondary education? </li></ul><ul><li>Model/Theory </li></ul><ul><li>Can you please explain any theoretical or practical models or schema that you use to design or structure your program? </li></ul><ul><li>Can you please describe in detail the sequence and structure of your leadership program? </li></ul><ul><li>Can you please describe in detail any assessment, benchmarking, or evaluation of outcomes for your program? </li></ul><ul><li>Student development </li></ul><ul><li>What individual or group developmental domains/dimensions does this program address i.e. (academically, cognitively, socially, personally, emotionally, or spiritually?) </li></ul><ul><li>Are there any particular case studies that you could offer that would exemplify your program? </li></ul><ul><li>Further Reference </li></ul><ul><li>Please list any resources, individuals, or references that you would recommend on behalf of your experience with this program and its purposes and functions: (articles, books, journals, articles, databases, reports, archives, etc). </li></ul><ul><li> </li></ul>
Results (cont.) <ul><li>Family and parental leadership. </li></ul><ul><li>Constant engagement or "follow through" was reflected for those programs that took place over the period of ten months or more. </li></ul><ul><li>Parental, teacher, and relative involvement, and peer encouragement. </li></ul><ul><li>Parental involvement within every phase of transition from secondary to post-secondary educational institutions. </li></ul><ul><li>Programs that continuously provide resources to students in lower socioeconomic sectors on higher education prior to post-secondary enrollment. </li></ul><ul><li>Programs that provide resources from the community outside the institution. </li></ul><ul><li>Programs that help students in attaining resources while navigating within the college. </li></ul><ul><li>Program personnel who provide mentoring, counseling, and necessary interventions before and during secondary to post-secondary transition and enrollment. </li></ul><ul><li>There is a strong relationship between education and community involvement, and descriptions of quasi-political aspirations for the Latina/o community, more than are reflected in academe, yet, the literature constantly stresses the need for further research for minority student retention in academe. </li></ul>
Tinto (1975, 1987, 1993) <ul><li>Built over the eras </li></ul><ul><li>Based on studies done with traditional student populations at residential colleges </li></ul><ul><li>Based on sociological concepts of suicide and tribal rites of passage </li></ul><ul><li>Interactionalist = Student’s Responsibility for Assimilation </li></ul>
Pipeline Figure . Chicanas and Chicanos attained low academic outcomes at each point along the educational pipeline in 2000. (Sources: U.S. Census Bureau, National Center for Educational Statistics, and the National Survey on Earned Doctorates.) <ul><li>Fragmented secondary and Post-Secondary educational systems </li></ul><ul><li>Ever-growing populations of diverse students </li></ul><ul><li>Slow evolution of persistence and retention theory and practice at 4-year Institutions </li></ul><ul><li>Catalyst students: Preparation, and immigration </li></ul>
Theorem <ul><li>Reframing Retention (Braxton, Hirschy, and McClendon, 2004) </li></ul><ul><li>Intervention (Seidman, 2005) </li></ul><ul><li>Chicana/o Latina/o Persistence & Retention (Nora 1987, 2004, 2006) </li></ul><ul><li>Social and Cultural Capital/Critical Race Theory (Wells 2008; Yosso 2006) </li></ul><ul><li>Communal Cultural Wealth (Luna 2008; Yosso 2006) </li></ul>
Reframing Retention <ul><li>Reframing Retention (Braxton, Hirschy, and McClendon, 2004) </li></ul><ul><li>" communal potential as the anticipation of membership in a particular community of a college, with the perception that a subgroup of students exists with which the student shares, values, beliefs, and goals" (pg. 33). </li></ul><ul><li>Institutional actors such as faculty, staff, or students make up multiple communities with distinctive cultures that characterize them . "Some of these communities hold a peripheral position in the social structure of the institution, whereas other communities hold a position of dominance as their cultures define the character of the institution" (pg. 33). </li></ul><ul><li>Therefore, any actors who set up barriers, whether structural, social, or psychological, thereby perpetuate this structure of dominance, while knowingly (or unknowingly), positively (or negatively), compelling student's whose culture of origin is distinctly different from the dominant culture (Kuh and Love, 2000), to assimilate in order to experience social integration . "If not, such minority students will not perceive that potential for community exists for them" (pg. 33), and "experience less social integration" because their communal potential and the institution's community culture do not seek congruency… </li></ul>
Intervention <ul><li>Seidman (2005) RET = E ID + (E + In + C) IV . </li></ul><ul><ul><li>RETention = Early IDdentification + (Early + Intensive + Continous) InterVention </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Student Retention Specialist (SRS) model (Phillips, 1991) applied by (Escobedo 2007) </li></ul>
Social and Cultural Capital/Critical Race Theory <ul><li>Refutes cultural deficit </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Genetic </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Social </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Social and Cultural Capital/Critical Race Theory (Wells 2008; Yosso 2006) </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Communal Cultural Wealth (validation) (Luna 2008; Yosso 2006) as applied by Nora Luna (2008). </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Student Initiated Retention Programs (SIRPs) </li></ul>
Policies <ul><li>Oseguera (2009), Yosso & Solórzano (2006), Venezia et al. (2005) and Luna (2008, pg. 23) report: </li></ul><ul><li>Increase abundance and access to academic guidance counselors </li></ul><ul><li>Increase access to academically rigorous enrichment programs and courses (GATE, Honors, AP, Magnet, etc.) </li></ul><ul><li>Decrease tracking Latino students into remedial or vocational courses </li></ul><ul><li>K-12 bilingual/multicultural teachers to challenge cultural deficit models and acknowledge cultural wealth </li></ul><ul><li>Decrease overreliance on high stakes standardized assessments; to allow teachers time to guide students towards higher education </li></ul><ul><li>Support Precollege and bridge programs. </li></ul><ul><li>Distribute, regulate and clarify parent and student knowledge of college information </li></ul><ul><li>Create campus-wide retention committees responsible for monitoring student retention, and holding university administrators accountable for prioritizing retention </li></ul><ul><li>Front load institutional financial aid; provide financial aid literacy programs for students and their families to diminish student doubt and overestimations of financing tuition </li></ul><ul><li>Involve parents as educational partners, and equally distribute information on their rights, academic enrichment, ELL, and college preparatory programs. </li></ul><ul><li>Use learning communities, interactive learning strategies, and mandate and sustain orientation programs. </li></ul><ul><li>Collect data, conduct program evaluations, and seek out institutional grants for successful retention. </li></ul>
Implications <ul><li>Adapt and adopt theory and practice for new generations of students </li></ul><ul><li>Acculturate not assimilate (Tierney, 1992, 2000) </li></ul><ul><li>Address the student not as the reason for fractured educational pipelines, but as a product of them </li></ul><ul><li>Programs are only patchwork </li></ul>