Examining Academic Success in Undergraduate School for Students of Color: The Relative Contributions of Context, Preparation, Personal, Social, and Material Capital

American Educational Research Association Annual Conference: 2004

About GMS

Awards 1,000 new scholarships to entering freshmen

Last dollar scholarship award

Renewable through graduate school in math, science,

engineering, library science, & education

Award period–up to 5 years undergraduate & 4 years

graduate

Eligibility Criteria

African American, American Indian/Alaska Native, Asian

Pacific Islander American, or Hispanic American

Federal Pell Grant eligible

Citizen/legal permanent resident or national of U.S.

3.3 GPA

Demonstrated leadership abilities

Community service

Extracurricular activities

Selection Criteria

GPA & rigorous course of study

Qualitative

Demonstrated leadership potential

Overcoming hardship or unusual circumstances

Motivation; tenacity and initiative

Intellectual curiosity and creative achievement

Demonstrated concern for others & community

Evidence of selection by, or influence on, peers

Goal setting

Persistence and potential for success in degree

completion

Scholar Profile

General Program Data

1st year scholarships awarded: 4,053

Students served 2000 to 2003: 7,050

College graduates to date: 1,733

Dollars invested: $50 million/year

for 20 years

Nominees drawn from: U.S. & U.S.

Territories

Institutions of higher education: 932

institutions

I Know I Can! I Know I Can! Comparing High School Context, Academic Preparation and the College Choice Process Among Gates Millennium Scholarship Recipients and Non-recipients

Walter AllenMarguerite Bonous- Hammarth& Susan Suh

University of California, Los Angeles

I Know I Can! I Know I Can!The High School Contexts, Academic Preparation and the College Choice

Process Among GMS Recipients

Walter R. Allen & Evellyn ElizondoUniversity of California, Los Angeles

American Educational Research AssociationApril 12-16, 2004

San Diego, California

“And you know, don’t be afraid of what other people say to you….If you think you can do it, go ahead and just do it.” (Native American Female)

Research Questions

• What school contexts negatively influence students' academic preparation?

• What school contexts positively influence students' academic preparation?

• What general trends were found in students’ college process and transition?

Negative School Contexts: Biased Distribution of Resources Between AP and Non-AP Students

“You have kinda like the smart kids and the like not so smart kids. And when I was in [high] school, all the kids who were in the good classes [AP], they got the benefits of everything. We got college tours, mentors, tutoring, and like help with our financial aid package. But as far as the other kids, they didn't get any help toward preparing for college, and that's why the majority of them don't even attend college after graduating [high school].” (Asian Female)

“Like if you were average just like, ‘Okay, you can go to college.’ But if you were a superstar they really, really pushed you.” (Black Female)

“I think for like my school like, ’cause I was smart, you know, I was given all the resources. But like somebody that's average, you know, well, whatever they wanna do, military, nothing else, you know? They didn't really get any help.” (Black Male)

“A lot of Hispanics were illegal residents, they weren't getting the same sort of info. And, so that basically kept us down from receiving a lot of help. I wasn't allowed to be in a… we had no AP classes. We had nothing whatsoever. And so basically, everything that I had to do was basically, you know, do it all myself.” (Latino)

Negative School Contexts: Scarce Resources, Limited Scholarship Awareness, and Low Student Expectations

“Where I graduated from, we didn't have any resources and they didn't give us an opportunity for scholarships. They didn't know anything. They didn't know about this GMS thing, and I had to beg them to nominate me so I could go [and apply].” (Asian Female)

“As far as [college] applications and scholarships, looking for scholarships, I had to do a lot of it on my own.” (Black Female)

“Yeah, the counselor was there but, you know...he had two jobs because they couldn’t afford just to pay [him as] a counselor. It's like every staff had more than one role to fill so it made it kind of hard.” (Black Male)

“I talked to her [counselor] about [the GMS scholarship] and she was like, I really would count on it, getting the scholarship, and you know, going to that college…I kinda did a lot of things on my own like, I applied for scholarships. And you know, my dream college, hey, I got in.” (Native American Female)

Positive School Contexts: Centralized College Information & Strong Commitment to Student Success

“They [the high school] had a big Post-Graduate Center available for kids to go whenever. And around the time for college applications they always made the staff available, they always had different colleges coming in to meet with kids. So they did a really good job just influencing you to go and get those resources to go to college." (Latina)

“We had our Career Center which has every single catalogue, university, you know, catalogue in it…And once you go and look, you keep going back. And so that was like the one thing that got me really interested in knowing that is all there for anybody, any resource there.” (Native American Female)

“Any time you needed information, she [counselor] was there. If you wanted to know about a specific college, she'll have a huge folder with your name on it. She did little things that like just made you really, really just say, ‘Hey, I can do this, I can go to college,’ and she's like making this happen for me.” (Black Female)

Origins of College Aspirations: Upward Mobility, Negative Parent Role Models, &

College as a Natural Progression

“I didn’t want to work 16 hours a days, you know, all during the summer…Coming home from the fields with cut fingers, bleeding and stuff. I figured I needed to do something else.” (Latino Male)

“My mother, she really didn‘t go to college or anything like that. So I decided that I wanted to take the initiative to go to college on my own and be successful.” (Black Female)

“I could see how my parents have to work really hard. My dad did construction work…even though he’s working like a lot harder than other people, he don’t make much money.” (Black Male)

“It was never in my brain not to consider college. It was just like, that’s me, I’m going to college.” (Black Female)

“It’s like a natural progression, you don’t even…I didn’t even think about not going to college.” (Black Male)

College Selection: Campus Visits Made All the Difference

“I had to choose between three colleges, and I had to go fly out to all of them first before I made a decision.” (Female)

“They were offering a visitation program so I flew out there to visit the campus. And I just fell in love with it.” (Native American Female)

“I don’t know how they [parents] found the money for me to go and look at the colleges one more time so I could make sure [about] my final decision ’cause they wanted to make sure I would be completely happy with what I decided.” (Latina Female)

Implications

Equal access to college preparation and resources is essential for all students

Institutional commitment to student success matters

Cultural brokers are paramount to college access Campus visits are an essential component in the

college process Greater outreach funding is needed to increase

students’ awareness and exposure of college life

Correlates of Academic Success of Gates Millennium Scholars

William E. Sedlacekwsed@umd.edu

Hung- Bin SheuUniversity of Maryland

Research Questions

Do the selection variables correlate with student success?

What are the academic behaviors of Scholars?

Noncognitive Variables

Scholars selected with noncognitive variables (alpha = .92)

Self- Concept Realistic Self- Appraisal Navigating System/Racism Long- Range Goals Leadership Strong Support Person Community Nontraditional Learning

Noncognitive Variable Results

Self-Concept, Realistic Self-Appraisal, Navigating System, and Community were positively correlated with GPA (.05)

Community was positively predictive of academic engagement (.0001)

Self-Concept was negatively predictive of difficulty keeping up with schoolwork (.01)

Realistic Self-Appraisal positively predicted hours studied per week (.05)

Scholars & Non-Scholars

95% of Scholars indicated that they were very unlikely to drop out of school and were committed to earn a degree at their current institution.

Among African Americans, significantly more Scholars (97%) than Non-Scholars (94%) felt they were unlikely to drop out of school. A similar response was also observed for American Indians (94% for Scholars versus 87% for Non-Scholars).

90% of Scholars expected to complete a master’s degree or above. African American Scholars had higher educational aspirations than African American Non-Scholars. Among female Scholars, African Americans had higher educational aspirations than American Indians and Asian/Pacific Islanders.

Among Scholars, Asian/Pacific Americans tended to spend more time studying per week (27.58 hrs) than American Indians (17.89 hrs). On the other hand, among Asian/Pacific Islanders, Scholars (27.58) spent more time than Non-Scholars (23.22 hrs) studying per week.

Conclusions

Noncognitive variable scores show reliability and validity in predicting success

Scholars show academic behaviors that will correlate with their later success in school High educational aspirations Unlikely to drop out Committed to earning a degree at current school

References

Sedlacek, W. E. (2004). Beyond the big test: Noncognitive assessment in higher education. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Sedlacek, W. E. & Sheu, H. B. (in press). Academic success of Gates Millennium Scholars. Readings on Equal Education.

The Diamond in the Rough: Overcoming the

Lack of Human, Social, and Cultural Capital

Sylvia Hurtado

University of California, Los Angeles

AERA, San Diego, 2004

Access Issue

UCLA CIRP data show that high income students with 1300+ SATs and A+ averages are almost twice as likely as low income students with the same credentials to attend the most selective colleges. Why?

First generation status Poor counseling in high schools Lack of knowledge about the differences between

colleges “Sticker Shock” prevents students from the lowest

income categories from applying to elite colleges

Are There Diamonds in the Rough?

Bright, low income kids who overcompensate for bad schools (extra courses, summer programs, etc.)

Bright, low income kids who don’t know they are qualified to attend the best colleges

Bright, low income kids who demonstrate unusual leadership potential

Identifying These Students

Admissions officer visits to predominantly minority high schools or “non-feeder” high schools, all other search techniques rely on SAT scores

Gates Millennium Scholars program systematically identifies these students through:

Scholarship attracts the “Diamonds in the Rough” Criteria noncognitive and leadership qualities, rather

than SAT (which is income dependent) Connections between high schools and minority-

serving organizations

Transition from “Diamond in the Rough” to Successful College Student

Figure 1

Scholarship Aid

Increased time devoted to:StudyingPeer networksUsing college resourcesSeeking opportunities for engagement

Academic Success

Positioning for employment

Choice of graduate opportunities

Future Research

Examining the long term effects of the Gates Millennium Scholars Program

Comparing the progress of the lowest income students with other students

Comparing Gates Millennium Scholars with other low income students—does scholarship aid have the same impact on other students?

Finding new ways to identify the Diamond in the Rough and assisting him/her to college success

The Nexus Between Finances and Student Involvement in College Persistence

Edward P. St. John

Indiana University

Research Questions

Both involvement and finances have been offered as explanations for differentials in persistence rates

The relationship between the two forces has seldom been examined

The NORC surveys provided an opportunity to consider the questions: How do finances influence involvement by low-

income, high achieving students? Do both finances and involvement influence

persistence?

Methods

This study used the NORC surveys for 2000 freshman students

The analyses considered The impact of financial aid on involvement (social

and academic), controlling for background and financial reasons for choice

The impact of finances and involvement on persistence, controlling for other factors

The analyses used logistic regression models

Findings on Involvement in Cultural Groups

Involvement in cultural groups positively associated with:

Receiving GMS awards Choosing colleges because of low costs Choosing colleges because of scholarships and

grants Choosing colleges because of strong reputations Being African American (compared to Asian

American)

Findings on Involvement in Community Service Activity

Males were less likely to be involved in community service

Involvement in community service activities positively associated with:

Choosing a school because of grant or scholarship Choosing a school because of strong reputation

Support by Faculty (Indicator of Academic Involvement)

Males were less likely to feel supported by faculty

Students in other race/ethnic groups were more likely than Asian Americans to feel supported by one or more faculty

Choosing a college because of a grant or scholarship was positively associated with support by faculty

Choosing a school because it was close to home was negatively associated with this outcome

Involvement in a Faculty Research

Variables positively associated with involvement in faculty research:

Choosing a college because of its reputation Attending a private college (compared to public

four-year) Amount of scholarship

Variables that reduced the odds: African Americans and American Indians

(compared to Asians) Attending a two-year college

Findings on Persistence (Maintained Continuous Enrollment)

Scholarship grant amount positively associated with persistence (as was GMS before considering aid amounts)

Involvement in community groups negatively associated with persistence

Other involvement variables were not significant in persistence

Conclusions

Do both finances and involvement influence persistence?

Finances exerted a more substantial direct influence

How do finances influence involvement by low-income, high-achieving students?

Finances influenced involvement through perceptions (choosing colleges because of scholarships & low costs), scholarship amounts, and GMS (independent of scholarship amounts)

Implications

GMS has a positive influence on involvement in college, as well as on persistence

The decline in the purchasing power of government need-based grants reduce opportunities for involvement as well as for persistence.

Shaping Access and Participation: Exploring the Implications of the Gates Millennium Scholarship

William Trent

University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign

GMS and First College Type (level, control, minority status, and selectivity)

GMS recipients were significantly less likely to attend 2-year institutions than non-recipients (3.6% vs. 7.7%).

GMS recipients were significantly more likely to attend private institutions than non-recipients (43.1% vs. 29.1%).

There is a marginally significant difference in the likelihood of attending an MSI. GMS recipients were slightly less likely to attend an MSI than were non-recipients (17.4% vs. 20.3%, P = 0.051).

On average, GMS recipients attend more selective institutions compared to non-recipients (acceptance rate is: 58.4 vs. 63.1) and this difference is statistically significant.

GMS and Change of College Choice Overall, about 15% of all GMS applicants indicated that

they changed their college choice based on whether or not they received the scholarship.

A significantly higher percentage of African American, Native American and Asian American applicants indicated change of choice compared to Hispanic applicants (15.5%, 17.4%, 19.9%, and 8.2% respectively).

A significantly higher percentage of females indicated change of choice compared to males (16.2%, 12.0%).

A significantly higher percentage of GMS Non-recipients indicated change of choice than recipients (17.9%, 6.0%). The same pattern still holds true after controlling for gender.

Among African American, Native American and Asian American, applicants a significantly higher percentage of GMS Non-recipients indicated change of choice than recipients, but the difference among Hispanic among is not statistically significant.

My GMS assistance was critical to attending

current college

43.7% of GMS recipients strongly agree with the above statement, and 36.3% agree. Overall, 4 in 5 recipients believe agree GMS is critical to attend their current college.

GMS and STEM

GMS recipients are slightly less likely to be in STEM majors (51.0% vs. 55.6%) than non-recipients.

Within each racial group, GMS recipients are slightly less likely to be in STEM, but none of these differences reaches statistical significance.

STEM and Gender

Males are significantly more likely to be in STEM majors than females (63.4% vs. 50.7%)

African American males are significantly more likely to be in STEM majors than females counterparts (64.9% vs. 51.8%)

Native American males are significantly more likely to be in STEM majors than females counterparts (58.3% vs. 44.4%)

Asian American males are significantly more likely to be in STEM majors than females counterparts (69.6% vs. 60.6%)

Hispanic American males are significantly more likely to be in STEM majors than females counterparts (56.6% vs. 40.4%)

STEM and First College/University Type

GMS applicants who enrolled in HBCUs, HSIs, and Tribal institutions are significantly more likely to be in STEM majors than those in TWIs (66.5%, 56.5%, 71.6%, and 52.9% respectively).

GMS applicants who attended public institutions are more likely to be in STEM than those who attend private institutions (58.6%, 44.8%).

GMS applicants who attended MSIs are significantly more likely to be in STEM than those who attended Non-MSIs (57.8%, 53.2%).

GMS applicants who were in 2-year institutions are more likely to be in STEM than those in 4-year institutions (61.8%, 53.8%).

Selected Regression results: Major choice (STEM vs. Non-STEM)

After controlling for other variables, Gates status is not a significant predictor for STEM.

Percentage of African American and Hispanic Enrollment in high school is positively associated with the odds of majoring in STEM.

The odds of majoring in STEM for male is significantly higher than that for female.

The odds of majoring in STEM for African American, Hispanic, and Native American is significantly smaller than that for Asian Americans.

Selected Regression results: First College

Selectivity (Acceptance Rate) All other things being the same (race, gender, parents’

education, high school racial composition, # of AP courses offered by high school, ACT test score), Gates recipients attended more selective colleges than non-recipients (p < 0.10).

Comparing to Asian American, and controlling for all other variables mentioned above, Native Americans attended less selective school. Hispanic and African Americans do not significantly differ from Asian American in the college selectivity index.

High school characteristics such as number of AP course offered and the percentage of African American and Hispanic students in the school are significantly associated with the selectivity of college. Students from schools that offer more AP courses and schools that have higher percentage of African American and Hispanic students attended more selective colleges, after controlling for individual race/ethnicity, gender, parents’ education, test score and even GMS status.

After controlling for all variables mentioned above, whether a respondent is in STEM or not does not help much in predicting the selectivity of the colleges attended.

STEM and Race

There is a significant association between race and major. Asian American are most likely to be in STEM (63.7%), followed by African American (54.9%), Native American (48.9%) and Hispanic American (45.9%).

Conclusions and Implications

GMS recipients are making choices influenced by the receipt of the Scholarship.

The main influence appears to be on college choice both in choosing 4-year colleges and in choosing more selective colleges.

The numbers of applicants choosing STEM fields is somewhat greater among non-recipients. This difference may be cohort specific and may be a function of GMS recipients attending TWIs and major field entry requirements.