A Case Study of Miami University’s Efforts to Recruit,Develop, and Retain Latin American Students By Mariah Torres and Daniela Santisteban
Fastest growing demographic in the US While enrollment rates are improving there is still issues to address. Completion rate (13%)
At Miami, 2.8% of study body is Latino But enrollment has only increased from .58% in the past 6 years Highest graduation rate of Latinos among all public universities in the state of Ohio.
Primarily focused on community college and Hispanic Serving Institutions Factors that were most pertinent to Latino college students in each segment included: Recruitment: pre-collegiate preparation, family relationships, and financial support Development: the ability to contribute to the educational institution, social integration, and faculty interaction Retention: social integration and competent or improving academic performance
1) Miami University’s methods to attract students are not culturally attentive to Latinos, creating a smaller Latino enrollment pool than expected.2) The support system provided by Miami University for Latinos does not fulfill their desired emotional, social, and academic satisfaction and development.3) The lack of attention geared toward Latino students by Miami University has led to low retention rates for this minority group.
Interviews Survey• Associate Vice President • 19 responses of Institutional Diversity• Assistant Director of • Predominantly Diversity Affairs and from LAS and Coordinator of Diverse Spanish Student Development departments
Interviews Survey• A junior student • 62 responses• A senior student • All students surveyed• Two transfer students were of Latin American• 2006 alum descent • 15% representation of Latin American community • 72.6% female Percentage of students that identified as Latin American
66.7% of students that identify as LA thought that scholarships were highly motivating Only 16.2% of students that do not identify as LA, thought that scholarships were motivating Faculty also indicated this was the only somewhat motivating factor towards recruiting LA students.
Surprisingly,only about30% of LAstudentsconsideredtheir parents“Involved” intheir collegedecision
Student rated development factorsStudent 1 (Low 2 3 (Average 4 5 (High Degree) Degree) Degree)An adviser and/or mentor 48.3% 19.0% 19.0% 8.6% 5.2%that is accessible and thatcan discuss Latino relatedissues or concernsOrganization(s) targeted 19.0% 20.7% 31.0% 22.4% 6.9%towards meeting Latinossocial needsEvents focused on Latin 15.5% 10.3% 36.2% 31.0% 6.9%American celebrations orcultureA Latin American community 37.9% 34.5% 20.7% 5.2% 1.7%or presenceAcademic resources 41.4% 32.8% 15.5% 6.9% 3.4%specifically for Latinos
58.8% of surveyed faculty said that they had been approached by a Latino 76.5% of faculty surveyed had not been trained to address Latino student needs VP of Institutional Diversity: There is no advisor designed for Latino students
Students more disappointed in lack of diversity rather than lack of Latin American community. Latino targeted opportunities still lacking: there is not hierarchal form of communication to contact Latino students Lack of contact between existing Latino organizations
Satisfaction Rates Students Faculty Satisfied Satisfied 31% 27% NotSatisfied Not 69% Satisfied 73%
Students that thought about transferring80% 73.30%70%60%50%40% 27.60%30%20%10% 0% Actual student consideration consideration thoughts on Faculty
Hypothesis 1: Supported Miami University’s methods to attractstudents are not culturally attentive to Latinos.Hypothesis 2: Supported The support system provided by Miami University for Latinos does not fulfill their desired emotional, social, and academic satisfactionHypothesis 3: Not SupportedThe lack of attention geared towardLatino students by Miami Universityhas led to low retention rates
Additional interviews o Student that has dropped out o Student that commutes Expanding future research beyond the isolated campus of Miami University for comparative studies Conduct longitudinal studies with a sample Latino population