Diversity in Education
Diversity in Education
  • Overview
  • K-12 Integration, Desegregation, and Segregation Archive
  • K-16 STEM Archive
  • Browse
    • By Method of Analysis
    • By Unit of Analysis
    • By Data Type
    • By Journal Name or Institutional Affiliation
    • By Keyword
    • By Methodology
    • By Region
    • By Research
    • By Scholarship
    • By Sample Type
  • Help
  • Contact Us

Filter

  • Sort by

  • Filtered Search Term

  • Archive

  • Keywords

  • Research Designs

  • Analysis Methods

  • Researchers

2014 - Effects of Student Body Racial and Ethnic Demographics on Community College Student Persistence: A Correlational Inferential Study

Attribution: Abu-Ghazaleh, Nabil S.
Researchers: Nabil S. Abu-Ghazaleh
University Affiliation: California State University, Fullerton; Grossmont College
Email: bernadette.black@gcccd.edu
Research Question:
1) What is the effect of racial and ethnic community college student body composition on student persistence? 2) Does the racial and ethnic composition of a community college's student body have differential effects on the persistence of students from different racial and ethnic groups? 3) What is the effect of racial and ethnic student body composition on student academic and social engagement?
Published: No
Journal Name or Institutional Affiliation: N/A
Journal Entry: N/A
Year: 2014
Findings:
  1. Student body diversity in community colleges was found to promote student persistence.
  2. Student race or ethnicity was also found to affect persistence contingent upon student body racial and ethnic composition.
  3. Asian student persistence did not appear to be affected by the racial and ethnic composition of the colleges they attended. White students experienced a positive effect on persistence at colleges with no predominant population. Hispanic students experienced the greatest negative effect on persistence among all groups when they attended predominantly Hispanic colleges. Black students experienced less negative effects than Hispanics at institutions with predominant populations of Black or Hispanic students than they did when attending colleges with no predominant population.
  4. Student academic preparation and access to financial aid were confirmed as consistent predictors of student persistence.
  5. The larger effects of background characteristics and preparation on persistence recommend a greater emphasis on active engagement with students to increase college effects on student persistence.
  6. Racial and ethnic student body demographics did not affect student engagement patterns as strongly as they affected persistence.
  7. Higher percentages of Black or Hispanic students in college predicted modest increases in engagement while the percentage of Asian students did not predict engagement. Small differences between the ways in which Asian, Black, Hispanic, and White students engaged were also identified.
  8. Students of any racial or ethnic background were found to be less persistent the larger the percentage of Asian, Black, or Hispanic students.
  9. The data show that student body racial and ethnic composition is a stronger predictor of student persistence than individual student racial or ethnic background.
  10. The data indicate not just a difference in the level of persistence between students from the different racial and ethnic groups but also a difference in how they persist. A broad interpretation is that Black and Hispanic Students exhibit a disadvantage in persistence, White students appear to persist only when excluding completion, and Asian students only exhibit an advantage over the other groups when completion is considered, the opposite of White students.
  11. The evidence of effects on student outcomes at predominantly minority community colleges necessitates greater understanding of social normative systems to update theoretical models developed for predominantly White four- year institutions.
Scholarship Types: DissertationKeywords: African AmericanCommunity College StudentsEthnic CompositionLatinoPersistenceRacial CompositionRegions: Los AngelesMethodologies: QuantitativeResearch Designs: SurveyAnalysis Methods: Descriptive StatisitcsSingle Block Linear Regression Sampling Frame:Community College Students
Sampling Types: Random - ProbabilityAnalysis Units: SchoolStudentData Types: Quantitative-Longitudinal
Data Description:
  • This article utilizes Weidman’s (1989) Conceptual Model of Undergraduate Socialization. The theoretical foundation is based on assessing effects of the socializing influences of college environments on the development of students.
  • The author focused on nine urban and suburban community colleges within the Los Angeles Community College District (LACCD) in California in the spring of 2007. The populations in the study were distinctive in that no college had more than 35.7% White students. Enrollment data from twenty-three semesters were examined. Students were included in the sample if they were in degree-seeking status. The smaller colleges were over-sampled.
  • The author assumes that the large number and diversity of students in these nine colleges are able to represent the global population of southwestern American community college students in mixed urban and suburban settings. The populations in the study were distinctive in that no college had more than 35.7% White students.
  • The independent variables were gender, age, race or ethnicity, educational status, educational goal, financial aid status, financial resources, entering preparation, primary language, citizenship and longevity in the United States, parents’ education levels, familial status and obligations, and disability status.
  • The environmental independent variables were divided in the study into two groups. The first group, titled environmental variables, described the college settings and experiences to which students were exposed merely by attending the college. The second group of environmental variables, titled intermediate outcomes, reflected students’ choices and reactions to the college environment to which they had already been exposed.
  • The first group of intermediate outcome variables was satisfaction measures with college services and engagement with college personnel, which come after exposure to the environment. The second group was measures of self-reported student engagement with the institution, which reflect the effects of both exposure to the environment and the students’ degree of satisfaction with their interactions with the college.
  • The dependent variable was persistence. The author used three different models to measure persistence. The first model was based on ordinal measures of term-to-term consistency in attendance; higher unit course-taking; and completion of certificates, degrees, or transfers. The second model was based on ordinal measures or consistency in attendance only. It emphasizes more heavily term-to-term consistency in attendance and higher unit course-taking. The third model used an arithmetic algorithm. Like the second model, the third model emphasizes persistent term-to-term attendance and higher unit counts while attending.
Theoretical Framework:
Relevance:Community College and STEM
Archives: K-16 STEM Abstracts
Skip to toolbar
  • Log In